1g. Minutes CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL 17)
REGULAR MEETING
NOVEMBER 20, 1989
t' Mayor_ Chmiel called the meeting to order. at 7:30 p.m. The Meeting was opened
with the Pledge to the Flag. _
COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Chmiel, Councilman Boyt, Councilman Workman,
Councilwoman Dimler and Councilman Johnson
STAFF PRESENT: Don Ashworth, Roger Knutson, Gary Warren, Todd Gerhardt, Paul
Krauss, Jim Chaffee and Jo Ann Olsen
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilman Johnson'moved, Councilman Boyt seconded to
approve the agenda with the following additions: Councilman Boyt wanted to
discuss Public Safety Commission Minutes, Councilman Workman wanted to move item
' 4 before item 3 and to discuss the Police Contract, Mayor Chmiel wanted to
discuss Cities Fight Back Against Drug Week, and Cbuncilw zman Dimler wanted to
discuss Chanhassen Tobacco Free Youth Project. All voted in favor of the
agenda as amended and the motion carried.
RECYCLING PRIZE DRAWING: Mayor Chmiel drew the name for the Recycling Prize.
CONSENT AGENDA: Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to
approve the following Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's
recce endations:
fa. Resolution #89-121: Accept Utility and Roadway Improvements in Creek Run.
b. Resolution #89-122: Consider Name Change for 184th Avenue.
c. Resolution #89-123: Authorize Preparation of Plans and.'Specifications for
Construction of City Wells Nos. 5 and 6.
e. Approve Contract for Financial Advisor Services.
f. Resolution #89-124: Resolution Setting Hearing Date for the Sale of Bonds
of 1989.
g. Approval of Accounts.
IIh. City Council Minutes dated November 6, 1989
Planning Commission Minutes dated November 1, 1989 .
Public Safety Commission Minutes dated October 12, 1989
i. Resolution #89-125: Accept Utility and Roadway Improvements in Stratford
Ridge.
j. Resolution #89-126: Approve Change Order No. 1 and Certificate of
Substantial Completion, Chanhassen Clock Tower, Entry Monument and Dinner
Theatre Stage Sign.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
•
I
1
I _
11 City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989 T'
m
11, staff and they maybe could figure out where it would fit in best that we'd be
able to work with making an awareness program work in Chanhassen. This being my
town I'm really excited about it so I'll give this to you,,
I Mayor Cgmiel: Thank you. I appreciate it. We'll put it in a place where -
everyone can see it. One other thing too in talking about the drug situation;
I which also came to mind is we're trying to tie it in with ,a few of .the other
cities in and adjacent to the City of Chanhassen. By doing this we figure we
can get everyone involved in it in making them aware on the things that are
I really -things that can take place and happen. If you-see something happening,
call our police department. Be involved. Don't sidestep it. I feel so strong
about this. I feel that it's something that we really, really have to grab by
the throat and just choke it out. But there are many other things that we have
II going with this as well this particular week. There will also be an evening
presentation of showing what the drugs are. What to look for. What they
consist of. That will be brought in by our Sheriff's Department and the ,
I Southwest -Metro Drug Task Force so there will be a lot of different things
happening during that particular week. Now I'll move on. Is there anyone else'
wishing to make any visitor's presentations?
IIPUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER ORDINANCE AMENDMENT PROHIBITING CIGARETTE SALES VIA
VENDING MACHINES.
II Public Present:
II . Name Address
Dr. Jean Forester University of Minnesota
I Norm Perzinski Chaska Police Department
Nancy Lang American Lung Association of Minnesota
John Carlson 902 Penamint Court, America Cancer Society
Matt Kelso President, Chaska High School Student Council
I Melissa Mensdel : Vice Pres., Chaska High School Student Council
Ted Korzonowsky Prairie House Restaurant
Ti a Briant Coalition for Responsible Vending Sales
1 Russ Pauly Pauly's
Jim Chaffee: Although I wrote the memo, clearly this movement has been started
II by Tam Workman here and he just points to Councilmember Dialer, but Tom Workman
has done a vast majority of the work on this and I would just •let TC1 take it
fram here.
IICbunci]man Workman: How nice. I'll just say a couple words and then we can,
I know this would be a public hearing so we should open it up to the public and
I know we have an awful lot of people that want to make sane comments. I guess
my only hope this evening is that the issue stays in fact on the issue which is
the marriage of cigarettes and vending machines. If we can accomplish that slim
goal, maybe we can get this taken care of but I don't anticipate that happening
'' but I would like to Mir. Mayor hear same comments. I will have same comments
afterwards but I'd hear same comments from the public if I may.
1
II3
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989 i• -
Mayor (trie1: Okay. As I mentioned, this is a public hearing. , As many of,you
know, we're considering an ordinance amendment prohibiting the cigarette sales '
in vending machines basically to eliminate children that are not the age of
being able to smoke. Many of the things I've seen and many of the things I've
read and a lot of things I've beard,, it appears as though Chanhassen is a good
growing spot for kids within the school district -to 'cane here and' acquire "their
cigarettes from vending machines. So with that, anyone wishing to come forward
and let me establish a possible rule. _ 7'd lAke to.try to keep this to maybe 5
minutes per' person. If it might take a`little longer, fine: -We'ii go along
with that. I'd like to hear the proponents for removing these from vending
machines first and those that are in opposition will then have their opportunity
right afterwards. So those of you who would like to came forth, please state
your name and your address or who you're actually representing.
Dr. Jean Forester: My name is Dr. Jean Forester. I'm on the faculty of the
School of Public Health at the University of Minnesota. Councilmembers
and Mr. Mayor. It's a pleasure to be here tonight to be able to talk to you II
about this issue. I especially am excited to hear that you're considering this
ordinance in light of your previous action against drugs in Chanhassen. This is
especially appropriate to be considering the ordinance to ban the sale of
cigarettes through vending machines at the same meeting as you passed your other
ordinance. I'm here to talk to you about cigarette addiction as a childhood
epidemic. More people start smoking at age 13 than at any other age. 60% of
smokers start by the age of 14. 90% begin smoking by the age of 19 so the vast
majority of adult smokers begin when they are truly children. Before they have
the opportunity, in my way of thinking, to make an informed decision on this
issue. Tobacco is also considered a gateway drug in that the research says that II"
young people who smoke are 15 times more likely than non-smokers to graduate to
narcotic drugs. This isn't to say that everybody who smokes or every child who
smokes is going to became addicted to drugs but they have a much higher chance
than non-smokers to became addicted. Now I became involved in this as a public
health issue as a researcher at the .University off. Minnesota. I,did same
research that I'd like to 'just 'sumMarize'for you tonight. We were curious-about
just how accessible cigarettes are to young people so we worked with three 1
camunities in the northern suburbs,' Hastings, Stillwater and White Bear Lake
and we took a variety of children,'age 12 to 15 into all of the tobacco 'license '
holders in those three communities. The results were that they were able to
purchase the cigarettes in about 60% of the time. This means that youngsters as
young as 12 were able to get cigarettes in a large number of the occasions.
This includes 53% of their attempts in over the counter sales but 79% of the
attemps from vending machines. This included all kinds of outlets including
restaurants, gas stations, convenience stores, grocery stores, drug stores,
liquor stores, private clubs and bars. Many people think that children either
can't go into bars, liquor stores or private clubs or don't. In fact, there's
nothing in the State law that says that children cannot go in there. They
simply cannot go into those places for the purposes of buying alcohol. We found
that our young people have no problem getting cigarettes in those places. We've
heard...information from bar owners and people like that that they have young
people coming in there frequently attempting to buy cigarettes from those
places. Especially from vending machines in those places. Another aspect of
our research was to look at the impact of the increase penalty for sale before
and after. July 1 the State penalty for sale of cigarettes to minors increased
from a petty misdemeanor to a gross misdemeanor. That means that the maximum
penalty is now $3,000.00 fine or a year in jail. We had collected our earlier
4
I/
7
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989
I
1 data in April and May and compared that to data we collected in July. Three
weeks after the increased penalty went into effect. *at we found out was that
the penalty did have an impact on over the counter sales. Over the counter
sales decreased from 52% to 38% comparing before and after the penalty. However,
vending machines there was no impact on vending machine sales so the law
' apparently is not able to address the issue of access of kids through vending
machines. Another interesting point that we found from our research is that
there's a big difference in boys and girls in their accessibility to cigarettes
' over the counter. Young boys, for whatever reason, I don't know what it is,
young boys have a much harder time buying cigarettes than young girls do. Young
girls 12 years look like 12 year olds can buy cigarettes over the counter quite
readily. What we found is that young boys, 13 and 14 years old, have a very
' difficult time buying cigarettes over the counter. A pair of 14 year old boys
in April and May of 1989 were able to buy cigarettes only 22% of the time over
the counter. However, they were•able to buy cigarettes 74% of the time from
' vending machines. After the new penalty went into effect, these same young boys
were only able to buy cigarettes 9% of the time that they tried in over the
counter sales. However, they were still able to buy cigarettes 70% of the time
from vending machines so clearly vending machines don't have the ability to
distinguish age of the buyer. They also can't be trained the way people who
sell over the counter can. Thank you.
' Norm Perzinski: Good evening Mayor and Councilmembers. My name is Norm
Perzinski. I'm a police officer with the City of Chaska assigned as a police
school liason officer between the school district and the Chaska Police
Department. National survey data indicates that 57% of high school seniors who
report daily smoking, began when they were 14 years of age. Stopping a sale of
tobacco to minors is an important step in any effort to prevent tobacco use.
' Easy access to tobacco is obviously a prerequisite to maintaining a tobacco
addiction. In fact three quarters of smokers in high school still woke 7 to 9
years later. In January of 1988 the City of Santa Clara, California conducted a
study into looking at reducing the illegal sale of cigarettes and tobacco
products to minors. In that study the city of Santa Clara had 18 minors aged 14
to 16 years of age go into 412 stores, including outlets that had 30 vending
machines. These minors went into these stores and also the outlets with vending
' machines with the intent to purchase cigarettes or illegal tobacco products.
These minors were successful 74% of the time buying in stores over the counter
and successful 100% of the time buying from vending machines. The City of Santa
Clara then conducted a 6 month campaign using community media, merchant
education, contact with CEO's of the chain stores and grass roots work with
community organizations. After the 6 month period of education, they again sent
in the 18 minors to purchase cigarettes in stores and outlets with vending
machines. The study found that the percentage of stores with the legal over the
counter sales of cigarettes to minors was reduced to 39%. However, the 18
minors were still able to obtain cigarettes from vending machines 100% of the
time they attempted to buy from the vending machines. What this study showed
was that a good education campaign can greatly reduce sales in stores but the
inability to reduce vending machine sales suggests that elimination is the only
effective way to stop minors from buying cigarettes through vending machines.
Recently Chaska High School conducted a focus day on smoking. Each student who
went through this focus day filled out an anonymous survey form. The main thing
we asked for from the smokers is where they purchased their cigarettes. Of
course the most resounding answer to this question was none of your business or
mind your own business. I'm not going to tell you because you'll just bust the
r5
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989
owners and I can't get my cigarettes. After this the most answers we heard were I
from stores and vending machines followed by parents, friends or they had an
adult purchase them for them. Since September, or over the summer, the Chaska
Police Department, Carver County Sheriff, I believe the Chanhassen Public Safety
Department, Juvenile Court Services and the court system in Carver County met to
develop a policy for the uniform enforcement of not only the sale of tobacco to
minors but the use of tobacco. What we agreed is law enforcement organizations, 11 that's people under the age of 18 caught using tobacco would be issued a
citation. Would have to go to court and look at paying a $40.00 fine or
performing 8 hours of community work service. Since that time the Chaska Police
Department has issued 25 citations to juveniles. When these citations are
issued primarily by myself, I conducted a very informal, unscientific survey
just merely asking these students where they're obtaining their cigarettes. The
biggest 2 answers were stores and vending machines. , This was about in
September. Last week I issued probably another 5 citations to students caught
smoking asking them again where are you obtaining your cigarettes. The answer I
heard only was vending machines. Not you obtain vending machine cigarettes are
extremely expensive and I asked the students why are you buying them from
vending machines and not stores and they said because we cannot get them from
stores and no one monitors the vending machines. Recently a Chaska resident,
male, juvenile who lives in the city of Chaska, I caught for smoking was issued
a citation. The importance of this was I asked him where are you buying your
cigarettes. He said I go to Chanhassen to buy them from vending machines
because you can't buy than in stores in Chaska. About a month ago the Chief of
Police in Chaska, Greg Skol, contacted every business that had a vending
machine. Bars, restaurants, businesses asking them that instead of passing an
ordinance could we get same voluntary compliance, moving them to an area where
the vending machines could be monitored. Recently again within the week I
issued another citation to a male juvenile asking him where he got his
cigarettes and he said he got them from a business establishment that is both a
bar and a restaurant. Chief of Police had contacted this bar and restaurant a '
month ago. Was told that the machine would be moved. In calling back this
owner, we had found that the machine had not been moved. I want to thank all of
you tonight for giving this opportunity for me to talk and I applaud your
efforts and courage to make this difficult decision on a very controversial
issue. Thank you very- much.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Is there anyone else who would like to talk? '
Nancy Lang: I'll just speak real briefly. I'm Nancy Lang with the A mercian
Lung Association of Minnesota. Obviously my interests here are pretty clear. I
don't have too many statistics. My emphasis really is environmental health and
today I was asked to go and give a talk to a respiratory support group that's
called Huffers and Puffers on the effects of outdoor air pollution on lung
disease patients. I couldn't help thinking as I looked out at these people with
their oxygen tubes and paraphenalia that 30 and 40 years ago they had made some
pretty critical decisions that we're talking about here so it's kind of funny
how things cane full circle. Anyway, my point is to obviously support the
intention of the City of Chanhassen. I realize it is a difficult situation and
to also encourage you to hold firm as the ordinance is written right now in the
model of the White Bear Lake. I think the intent is not to criminalize youth. I
think a move that would say it's illegal for children to purchase cigarettes is
not the way to go in the City of Chanhassen or any other city. I think what's m�
important is that responsible sales of cigarettes is the priority because
6
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989
4
I• children undex the age of 18, we all assume they have same naivete and I think
we have to take that into account but we assume that people who are selling
cigarettes for a profit need to act responsibly. I would also support the idea
that having so much emphasis in the schools on tobacco education and yet having
vending machines available is a real mixed message to kids. It's like saying
well, don't smoke and don't think about tobacco and stay clean and all that kind
of stuff but yet when we give them an easy port of entry for cigarettes, I think
that's one of the more blatant mixed messages that we can pick out in terms of
health education for youth. So with those comments I'll complete my summary.
John Carlson: I'm John Carlson. I'm a resident of Chanhassen at 902 Penamint
Court, a homeowner. I'm also here as a representative of the American Cancer
Society. I'm their Vice President of Development. I too am here to speak in
favor of this proposal. I think it's reasonable. I think it will send a very
good symbol to the parents and to the children of our community and I think it's
a step in the right direction. 2,000 people in Minnesota this year are going to
develop lung cancer. Over 80% of those cases are going to be fatal. If you did
a case study on each one of those 2,000 people you'd find that many of then
began their smoking habits when they were very young. Will this proposal change
that? No. But it will be a step in the right direction because it's going to
make it harder for youth to obtain those cigarettes and I agree with the
representative from the Lung Association that by treating youth as criminals,
that's not the way to address this problem. We need to address this problem
with the adults in our community. The owners of the establishments that have
these vending machines and to make it less accessible for the youth to obtain
them. I found the comments from the representative from the Chaska Police
Department very insightful and I think his testimony in and of itself is I think
presents a really solid case for why the City Council should support and put in
place this type of amendment. Our organization recently, last Thursday at the D
Day celebration in downtown Minneapolis, applauded White Bear Lake's City
Council for what they did and hopefully we'll be able to applaud you tonight as
members of the City Council if you would pass this legislation.
Matt Kelso: Councilmembers, Mr. Mayor, I'm Matt Kelso. I'm the President of
the Student Council at the High School and this is Melissa Mendsel, the Vice
President of the Student Council at the High School. Recently the Executive
Board of the Student Council passed a resolution that Melissa's handing to you.
It states, Whereas, cigarette smoking is a proven health hazard; Whereas, many
students become addicted to cigarette smoking at young ages; Whereas, the
students in our area communities have complete access to each and every
' community; and Whereas, the Chaska School District #112 will legally become
Smoke Free as of January 1, 1990, Therefore, Be It Resolved that the •Chaska
Senior High School Executive Board supports the prohibition of cigarette
dispensing machines and the sale of tobacco to persons under the age of 18 years
in our area communities. As you can see, we the Executive Board, through the
knowledge of the alarming statistics that have been brought up tonight and are
' prevelent in our media today, support your efforts on this issue. Smoking not
only harms our peers who smoke, it harms everyone. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there anyone else? Those who wish to address the issue from
the other aspect?
Ted Korzonowsky: My name is Ted Korzonowsky, proprietor of the Prairie House
Restaurant. We do have a cigarette vending machine in there too. In principle
7
City Council Meeting - November 20, .1989 '" 4
I concur with the proposal that we want to stop some of this cigarette selling
but on the other hand, we as business people have an investment here. Now who's
going to take care of my investment if you outlaw the machine and who's going to
cover my profit that I'm making off that machine? I think your ordinance is
just black and white. I think the other gentleman said, now if we had them in a
an area that's controlled, just like we do over the counter, you can have that
machine by the register someplace where we can control it. It's no different
than going to the drug store and buying over the counter. I don't know why
you're zeroing in on cigarettes. It seers to me there's a real problem with
alcoholism here but I don't see you, you know concentrating on the liquor store
and the bars. Any of these drug stores, not drug stores but gas stations have
vending machines for condoms. You know no one's putting, they're available to -
anybody that wants them and Aids is spreading like crazy. Why are we only
looking at cigarettes? It seems to me you zeroed in on one subject because
White Bear did it and all of a sudden, cigarettes have been a problem here for
years and all of a sudden why are we so excited about it? People have been
dying of lung cancer and what not for years and years. How many people here II
smoke? Quite a few. So you know, the children are going to get the cigarettes.
They can get adults to buy it for then. They can go anywhere they want. If
they want to get them, they're going to get them. Throwing out a few, what do
we got, 10 machines in town here? 15? You can't legislate morality as far as
I'm concerned. Those kids that smoke at that early age, they're going to get
cigarettes one way or the other. You're not going to stop them. Where you've
really got to start is educating at home. The family. Start at the home. It's
the parent's responsibility to educate their children on the proper things in
life and that's-where it really starts. Throwing out machines is a nice jesture
and it looks good in the paper but I don't think you're going to solve the
problem. The ones that came in our restaurant, we've been catching then. Those
children are going to get cigarettes someplace and same with the liquor store. I
notice you have 3 or 4 armed, not armed guards but you have Sargeant at Arms
there because how many children try to buy liquor over there? If they don't get
it there, they go somewhere else. If you give a guy $10.00, he'll go in and
buy it for you. So you're not going to really solve the problem that way. It's
education in the schools and in the homes as fax as I'm concerned but I would
like to see this amended to read that if we've got them someplace where we can
control this. Why discriminate against us. The drug store's got tons of
cigarettes he's selling over the counter and your statistics showed that 70% of
then are still getting them, even over the counter so why don't we take out the
cigarettes altogether? You're not going to really stop them. The only way
you're going to do it is cut all cigarettes out in the town. Period. Which is
drug stores, the whole works. I don't think you're going to control it but I
like to see, like I said before, I've got $1,000.00 investment in2the machine
and I supposed some of the other people do too. I make $70.00-$80.00-$90.00 a
month profit. The City comes, they raise our taxes. They raise this. They
raise the sewer. We're trying to make a few_bucks and all you're doing is
digging into our pocket and I'm sure some of the other people feel the same way
that here's a chance. You know we can make good profit on that machine but let
us control it. Give us an opportunity to try to control it. Maybe give us a
year's time to see what we can do about it rather than just arbitrarily just
throw the thing out. But like I say, I agree that cigarette smoking is bad.
None of my children smoke. I don't smoke. My wife doesn't smoke but we've
educated our kids at home. The cause is good but I think the way we're going at
it is wrong. That's all I've got to say. 0 !
8
T
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989 -
v.
Tam Briant: Mr. Mayor, Cbuncilmembers. My name is Tom Briant. I'm an attorney
I! and I represent the Coalition for Responsible Vending Sales. That is a group of
5 state organizations that all have an interest in vending machine sales. The
coalition certainly doesn't support the sale of cigarettes to minors nor minors
smoking cigarettes. In fact we wholeheartedly oppose such an idea. The
coalition does support a partial restriction of vending machines and I would ask
you to consider two things. First, legislation is currently being drafted that
' will be introduced this winter session to control this issue on a statewide
basis. It will provide a uniform resolution to this problem. When I spoke to
the Hastings City Council 2 weeks ago, much as I'm speaking to you here tonight,
' they tabled the action on their individual ordinance because legislation is
being drafted. The legislation will take precedent over any city actions taken.
If that legislation passes, what will be done here tonight, if it is passed in
any form, will all be a moot question. Second, in terms of the actual partial
restriction that we are supporting. The language basically allows machines to
remain in factories and businesses where minors can not generally gain access.
Locations where liquor is sold and locations that we have supervision over the
' machine. As the restaurant owner said, if there can be an adult employee that
can supervise that machine to make sure minors do not purchase cigarettes from
that machine, then the machine should be allowed to remain. I give you an
' example of the Chanhassen Dinner Theatre. They have a machine out in their
front lobby. That machine should not be there. Rather, the Chanhassen Dinner
Theatre should have the option to move that machine to one of it's two bars.
They've asked for that vending machine to provide a service to their customers.
Now you'd be requiring them to remove that machine and the can no longer provide
that service. We ask that you allow them to remove that machine to the bar
locations where the minors are generally not allowed. Another part of the
legislation and something else that we ask you to consider tonight is a penalty
for minors who buy cigarettes through vending machines. Under State law it's
-illegal to sell cigarettes to minors. It's illegal for minors to use cigarettes
' or smoke them. It is not a crime or unlawful in this state for a minor to buy
cigarettes. I have proposed penalty language to give you tonight and I'll pass
it our shortly. What we ask you to do is consider that thetkinors be
responsible for their own actions and such a penalty we believe would deter
those actions. The penalty basically sets up a fine for a minor of $100.00 for
a first violation and $200.00 for a second violation. That is in conjunction
with State criminal juvenile codes. Also in this week the Chaska Herald had an
editorial. It supports the kind of partial ban that we are considering here and
I'm proposing to you and we suggest that that is a reasonable compromise and
should be seriously considered by this Council. At this time Mr. Mayor and
Councilme1bers, I'd like to pass out the penalty language and the editorial in
the Chaska Herald.
Councilman Boyt: We've got it.
' Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, I already have the Chaska.
Tan Briant: But I don't believe you have the penalty language.
Councilman Boyt: No. We'd be happy to have it.
Tan Briant: One final comment. We've shown you studies and we've provided you
the summaries of the studies that show that more minors purchase cigarettes over
the counter than through vending machines and Dr. Forester presented her studies
9
City Council Meeting - November 20; 1989
I
tonight. I ask you to eliminate the studies from your mind for a minute and
consider this. If you take away a vending machine, you're not going to curb
that minor's desire to spoke. There are other sources. Just as the policeman
said, they're going to get them from parents, friends or over the counter sales.
You need education. You need to teach the minors either not to smoke or to quit
smoking. Removing vending machines is not going to solve the problem. With
that I ask you to seriously consider an amendment to your ordinance or an
alternative ordinance that sets up a partial ban. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you Tam. Is there anyone else? '
Russ Pauly: My name is Russ Pauly. I'm President of Pauly's Bar and Restaurant
in Chanhassen and a couple of points I'd like to touch on. Number one, the
problem I have with any local government regulating something like cigarettes
is, what's the next thing? Is alcohol going to be the next thing that local
goverment regulates? I think they're stepping into an area where they really
don't have any business. White Bear Lake set a precedent and now it seems to be
popular that everybody wants to jump into it but I just don't think the local
government has any business being in there. I really think they have other
concerns that they could attend to and cigarettes isn't one of them. If you
want to go to convenience stores, then geez they better make the clerks all 18
years of age that work in these convenience stores in Chanhassen because you can
go in any one of them and there's very few people working from 4:00 until 9:00
that are 18 and older. I'm sure any kid can walk in there and buy cigarettes.
If you're going to regulate it, you're going to have to regulate it more than
just vending machines. I just don't see where that fits in. '
Mayor Chmiel: Thanks Russ. This is a public hearing. Anyone else wishing to
address the issue? ,
Councilman Johnson moved, Councilman Workman seconded to close the public
hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was
closed.
Councilman Workman: Mr. Mayor, first I'd like to read one quick piece of a
resolution. When I pointed out Ursula Dimler, Ursula has done also same work
for this cause. Chris Burns and the Sailor stated that I requested a resolution
from the Chaska School Board or District #112. In fact it was Ursula Dimler
that did that and I'd like to be acknowledged. The resolution reads, Whereas
School District #112 through policy promotes a tobacco free environment, and
Whereas, selling tobacco products to persons under the age of 18 is prohibited
by law, and Whereas it is very difficult to restrict vending machine sales to '
legal buyers, Therefore Be it Resolved, that the District #112 School Board go
on record as supporting the passage of a Chanhassen City Ordinance which
prohibits the sale of tobacco products through vending machines and Be It
Further Resolved that the District #112 School Board forward a copy of the
Resolution to the Chanhassen City Council and Be It Further Resolved that the
District #112 School Board send a copy of the Resolution to other local
government units that fall totally or partly in District #112 in order to
apprise them of the School Board's support of this ordinance. Adopted November !I
9, 1989. Ironically enough we are talking about school goals or community goals
tonight. We're talking about Drug Awareness. The Minnesota Journal, a
publication of the Citizens League which is read widely I believe in the state
10 r
7
II City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989 - — r
fflop-
0
111 _
of Minnesota, dated tomorrow, ended up on my desk today with an article in it,
Early Start Points to Drug Abuse. From the Minnesota Student Survey Report,
1989, a survey of 90,000 Minnesota students in grades 6, 9 and 12 by the
't Minnesota Department of Education. Substance use almost always starts with
alcohol or tobacco. Excessive attention to illicit drugs such as cocaine may -
send an implicit yet unintended message that alcohol and tobacco are less ..
II dangerous than illicit drugs. It's everywhere. I understand the concerns of
local businesses. I don't intend to take away the right for these businesses to
sell cigarettes. I'm taking that right away from the machines which they have
1 in their establishments. What I'd like to also get out in the open right away
is that approximately 2 years ago my mother died of emphysema basically from
cigarettes. It's a real hell of a way to die I might add. But for the 28 years
that I knew my mom, I was never going to get her to quit. Loving, hating,
Icheating, sneaking, doing whatever you want to do, there's no way you're going
to get people to quit so this is not a testimonial to tell adult smokers or any
_ smokers quit. I'm not interested in it. It doesn't work. It's a waste of myt
I time but we have a lot of pink lunged young 13 and 14 year olds out there that
don't know that. And you're right. If we can't take away, we're not going, to —
take away this problem from these kids. If kids want to go out and poke
' themselves in the ear with a sharp object, they can do it but this is one very
small step. The Vending Coalition basically states that State government will
have legislation passing soon, maybe by April. I think we all understand how
State government operates. I can't wait and that's why I promoted this and I
1 appreciate the help of Council. Alcohol is not in vending machines. There are
no illegal substances in vending machines except cigarettes. That is why we're
going specifically after them. The condom issue, the alcohol issue is another
issue. One which we should get into down at Pauly's later. $70.00 to $90.00
�� profit is something that you would necessarily base your business on and it's my
knowledge that the smoking industry will, once you lose your vending machine,
I will do everything in it's power to set up a cigarette sales center, racks,
signs, whatever you want to make it as easy for you as you want. And I'd like
perhaps a response from the vending coalition on whether or.pot they are in fact
subsidized by the tobacco industry.
IITom Briant: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Workman. The tobacco industry does subsidize
each vendor that has cigarette vending machines. I don't know the exact dollar
II amount of the subsidy but it is an annual subsidy that is paid. I do not know
if the subsidy also goes to over the counter sales but it does go to vending
machine sales.
1 Councilman Workman: I've heard an awful lot of comments about because White
Bear Lake did it. I thank White Bear Lake. I thank the University of
Minnesota. They started a national trend here I think. You can't legislate
II morality. You're right. I'm not sure that this is a morality question. It's
definitely a life and health situation. Education at home, there's no doubt
about it. That's where it starts. I would say that some homes are failing and
1 they could use a little bit of help. Drug stores selling over the counter,
that's where people are selling than over the counter. Again, I'm not after
that aspect of it. It's a vending machine. As far as diluting this ordinance,
think we're opening ourselves up to a large can of worms trying to enforce.
II
Who gets them? Which bars get them? Filly's has teen night. The entire
facility is opened to teens in the bar, music going. No alcohol served but
vending machines available certainly. I bet there's smoke in the joint. I
IIhaven't been down there. They don't allow me in the door. One of my
II11
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989 - -'
professions is the life insurance business. I invite you all to call a life
insurance agent and ask him the difference between what it costs for cigarettes.
Smoking rate versus non-smoking rate. It's the most basic rate that a life
insurance agent asks. When somebody tells me they smoke, 1 go oh, because it's
going to double. Your rates are going to approximately double. Finally, to
give everybody a clear indication about the fact that I'm not after people
trying to stop smoking, I think it would behoove you to do so. Earlier this
year at the completion of the new wing of City Hall, there was a little sentence
in there. Public Safety Director, Jim Chaffee had a little sentence in there
that the new wing would be smoke free. I raised the question here that night
that why isn't all of City Hall smoke free. We have 2 smokers in City Hall, at
least that smoke at City Hall, one of them being City Manager Don Ashworth and
the other is Jean Meuwissen. It caused quite a roar and I could hear the
gutteral sounds of Don Ashworth down the way here when I mentioned it and I
understand living with my mother for 28 years that it's a heck of a thing to
have to give up. When you're about ready to die, you just don't give it up. You
enjoy it and you wait for things to happen. Basically what Don did with this
new wing was stated that Don and Jean would contain their smoking a little bit
better. There were some complaints. That anybody at City Hall that had a
complaint against the cigarette smoking. In other words, if Jean and Don were
getting out of shape, that they could then go in privacy to me and then I could
basically with the Council's permission make all of City Hall smoke free just
like that. Did I ever do that Don?
Don Ashworth: No.
Councilman Workman: Ewen though I had that opportunity. I didn't. I'm not out
to ruin people's lives. Their livelihood or their comforts or their pleasures.
I understand habits. I enjoy Coca Cola. But, this is a gap and a huge gap in a
much tougher ordinance or legislation that the City is passing that I think all
of us as adults can help to pass. Trying to figure out which one of our spots
in Chanhassen should be able to have a machine and which one shouldn't is
something I don't think the City wants to get into and I'd like 1:o personally
thank Dr. Jean Forester from the U of M and her friends Mary Corrigan and
Harry Lando, Matt Kelso and Melissa Mendsel from the High School, Nancy Lang
from the Lung Association, John Carlson from the Cancer Society, Chuck
Gabrielson was going to be here from Group Home in town. Didn't make it. Midge
May from the Chaska School Board was going to make it. Norm Perzinski from
Chaska Police and the rest of the Council for hearing this and I await your
comments.
Councilwoman Dimlex: Thank you Tom for acknowledging my work with„the School
Board. I appreciate that. I did give Ton a hard time when he first proposed
this to me. I played the devil's advocate. I wanted him to get his story
straight. I an not against smoking and as my children will tell you,
occasionally after dinner I smoke a cigarette. Isn't that terrible. Anyway, so
that is not the purpose of this ordinance is to get people to stop smoking. The
purpose of this ordinance is to keep tobacco products out of the hands of our
minors and that in this case means anyone under 18 years of age. I know that
the smokers will still have access to cigarettes in our town from over the
counter sales. It's impossible to enforce our new Minnesota law as long as
cigarettes are available through vending machines. The new law that went into
effect this past summer increased the penalty of selling cigarettes to minors.
It's not a gross misdemeanor punishable by jail for up to 1 year and/or a fine '
12 i
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989
m
�# of up to $3,000.00. This makes the seller responsible and does provide some
deterrance to minors obtaining tobacco products. We can't very well find a
vending machine or put it in jail and it is my experience that vending machines
IF have very little supervision. Mostly they are placed in the entrance of an
establishment for easy access. In one of the reports I read it stated that
friends are the primary providers to minor smokers and I guess my question there
is, how old are these friends and where are they getting their cigarettes? I
find it hard to believe that an 18 year old would be real close friends with a
13 year old. It just doesn't wash with my experience. I could see however an
18 year old maybe being friends with a 16 year old and then giving the
cigarettes to the 16 year old. However, that 18 year old is an adult and is
open to prosecution for even giving the cigarettes to the minor because it's an
illegal activity. I realize that an ordinance will not stop 100% of the sales
to minors but I do believe it will have a significant impact. I was glad that
the Chaska School Board did give us their support and I'm glad that they're
already taking a strong stand against tobacco use by declaring all district
buildings smoke free as of January 1, 1990. However, I don't think this goes
far enough. Declaring it so doesn't necessarily make it so. I think as Jay
pointed out, when Chanhassen is declared drug free, that doesn't mean it is
' right now. We have to work towards that and so we have to take this as a first
step working towards that. Many times when I've driven past the school I have
seen the kids outside of the buildings smoking. I realize that anytime you
restrict things, it makes them more desireable. It's a little bit like the wet
paint sign. Everybody then wants to touch it and see if it really is wet paint.
So restricting it in same instances may make people pay more attention to it but
I do believe that some restrictions are necessary and I kind of have, saying
I1 that not restricting access to cigarettes to our minors is like saying that we
E don't need speed limits. Let's have everyone use their own judgment. Speed
limits don't cause people to quit driving and just like this ordinance won't
' cause smokers to quit smoking but we still have speed limits. It's also been
said that we can't legislate health and morality. I've heard that we can't
morality often but I've never heard that we can't legislate,health. I guess I'm
,questioning why do we have a government department called Health and Human
' Services if we can't legislate health. Just food for thought. On the final
analysis, I see that this ordinance gives same assistance to the enforcement of
our Minnesota Statute. I do believe in helping our businesses make money but I
seriously doubt that anyone's business depends on the cigarette sales from
vending machines. The business can still sell than over the counter and have a
revenue with a minor inconvenience and I hope that this inconvenience, that
they're willing to put up with to help some of our youth stay tobacco free. I
think the pending state legislation, whatever they pass, will not affect our
Chanhassen ordinance if we are more restrictive. We cannot beless restrictive
but we can be more restrictive so at that point we can change our ordinance if
' we find we are less restrictive and we can make it more restrictive then to be
in compliance with the State legislation but we can go ahead right now and pass
our ordinance. That's all I have.
Councilman Johnson: Mr. Mayor, this is a first step, necessary first step. It
doesn't go nearly far enough. If you walk into Brooke's, you look at their
sales counter, it's tobacco everywhere. There's the free give away on the one
side. There's the cigars down below. There's the cigarettes up above. There's
the cigarettes to the right. There's cigarettes, it's completely encircled with
tobacco. Most of this is handily, readily available for the quick of hand youth
' that wants access to this. I think the next step after the vending machines is
13
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989
to make the cigarettes behind the counter the same as the Playboy's and I
the Penthouse that we also are trying to have our kids not rip off. They're
behind the counter, under the counter. What does that say to our youth who go
there everyday after school to pick up their candy? When they go to pay for
their candy, it's all tobacco. That says tobacco's okay. They're getting it
all day in school that tobacco's not okay from Norm and the teachers and
everybody else. Many of than get it at hare. Then they go into the stores in
our town and tobacco is everywhere. I think the next thing I'd like to look
into is making tobacco has to be behind the counter rather than in front of the
counter to where it is not obtainable by the shoplifting method and is not
advertised and put forward. I think it's obvious I'm somewhat in favor of the
ordinance.
Councilman Workman: And they have candy cigarettes on the other rack. '
Councilman Johnson: Oh, don't get my wife started on that one. I think the
candy vendors, I'd like to see all of our people in town, our good merchants,
not sell candy cigarettes. If you look at how the kids do them, you can say oh
it's just candy but my little 4 year old she had candy cigarettes and she was
doing the old cigarette smoking thing with it and that's exactly what Marlboro
and Winston that's on the pack wants when they do that. I'm wondering who owns '
those candy companies that make candy cigarettes.
Mayor Chmiel: Is that it Jay? 1
Councilman Johnson: Yeah.
Councilman Boyt: I think it's always important to take a little time to reflect
when the river seems to be flowing in one direction so strongly. The Public
Safety Commission considered this and recommended that it be amended. I think
it's important that the Council consider those amendments. They're along the
lines of the uncontrolled access that the vending machine, if it's in an area
where the access is controlled, the Public Safety Commission felt that a vending
machine would be appropriate in those areas. I agree with Mr. Workman that
anytime that we amend this we make it more difficult to enforce. Recognize that
if we don't amend it, we're really striking at situations in which we're not
trying to. We're hitting areas that we're really not trying to control. I
think everything I've heard tonight said vending machines are difficult because
they are uncontrolled generally. I think if the merchant can show that the
vending machine is controlled, locked when Filly's has their teen night for
instance would be another way of controlling it. I think another area that,
well the Public Safety Commission also recommended that the Council consider is
•
that when vending machines are in manufacturing areas. Typically manufacturers
cannot hire anyone under the age of 18 because of liability considerations and
it's there simply because the employees would have no other means generally of
acquiring cigarettes. Borrowing from friends I suspect but they have no other
means of purchasing then. I think the statistics verify that vending machines
are not the source of choice for cigarettes. I mean you just have to look at '
the price in a vending machine to realize that no one who had other alternatives
would choose that as their first choice. I think what the Public Safety
Commission discussed and recommended makes sense. I recognize what Mr. Workman
said. I think that another part of this, I guess out of curiousity, how many 111
people has the Judge fined $40.00? >`
1
14
7
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989
RR
Norm Perzinski: The kids can go through a diversion program whereby if they go
a probation officer. Admit that they have been smoking, they can just go
Ito
; ahead and pay a $40.00 fine. In fact what the new policy's going to be, from
what I understand, they're going to send immediate letters out to the kids and
their parents and the kids can just go ahead and mail a check or money to the..
court.
Councilman Boyt: Maybe I should put it differently. Now many $40.00 fines have
you collected?
Norm Perzinski: I'm not in the collection business. We're just in the
enforcement business. You'd have to contact Court Services. One other point I
would like to make, whether restricting or going with full force ordinance is
that a lot of businesses, it will be my experience that you start restricting
this ordinance like you're saying or the Public Safety Commission, it makes it
that much harder to enforce. Whether it's manufacturing, United Mailing, or
another business, there are a lot of people 17 years of age or under that do --
work for companies that will have access to those vending machines.
Councilman Boyt: And I agree that that complicates the issue. I guess I'm a
little startled that a judge would actually fine a teenager $40.00 for smoking
when we can't get them to fine people for speeding. That just happens to be my
11 hot button. I find it ridiculous that the State would actually consider fining
teenagers, or I imagine teenagers $100.00 for using a vending machine. Maybe
they will. It just doesn't fit my experience.
Norm Perzinski: If I could make one point too to kind of clarify. The $40.00
is not a fine. That $40.00 is donated to a charity. I think the American
Cancer Society or American Lung Association. It's not put into the County
hoppers as per se.
Jim Chaffee: It also, I should add, that's not judicial Bi11. It does not go
to the judge right away. That's all handled by Court Services. If the child
does not respond to that ticket, then it goes to the Judge but all that is
handled, the fine is handled adminstratively first.
Councilman Boyt: Well, I think that's going in the wrong direction gentlemen. I
think that the people who have talked about education are right. I think that
to put this on parents is to put a pretty heavy load and my guess is if we went
out and surveyed parents, we'd find that they feel helpless in this situation.
When their children smoke, they generally, my guess would be they smoke without
the parent's permission initially and the parent realizes somewhere along the
' line this is happening and says how do I maintain peace in my family. I'm sure
there are a lot of solutions to that but some of them, I think when the study
said that parents allow their children to buy cigarettes or even buy cigarettes
for them, I don't believe, well I'll put it positively, I think in most cases
t the parents isn't saying I condone smoking. They're saying it's the only way we
can live as a family and get this done. I support the ordinance as I suspect
everyone does here as an attempt to control a problem but I don't think it's
going to work. Sure, we'll remove vending machines but I can show you that we
don't currently enforce the State law about smoking in convenience stores and
other enclosed places. We don't, I don't think, we do a very agressive job at
enforcing the law-about keeping them from selling cigarettes which has been
there forever. Mr. Ashworth suggested some approaches to that a few weeks ago.
15
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989 `
1.
I didn't see the Council leaping to that action. I think what we've got in
vending machines is something that's kind of handy to do but I really don't
think it's going to be all that effective if what we're trying to do is keep 11
teenagers from smoking. Maybe it will help if we do all this other stuff
because that will push people to vending machines and there won't be vending
machines in Chanhassen but if this is all we do, we're wasting our time.
Councilman Workman: Well tune in next week when we tackle another problem Bill.
When you say it won't work, yes it will work. Not one package of cigarettes
will be bought out of a vending machine. That will work. I
Councilman Boyt: I agree. That will probably work.
Councilman Workman: Okay, and it will be effective given the statistics. It '
will be effective. If in fact a vending machine with a product that's illegal
_ to anyone under 18 isn't such a problem if we slide it in the corner. If we
have the bartender kind of keep an eye on it over there. Why don't we let the
local bars put cans of beer in there? It's just another pain for the bartender
to have to dispense those darn cans of beer you know so why don't we just have '"
than, put $2.00 in the machine and a can of beer will pop out. Then he just has
to mix. We're not heading in that direction. We're not going to head in that
direction. It's the most ludicrous thing I've said. Manufacturers, you're
right. Victory Envelope, United Mailing, Instant Webb, those people aren't here
tonight. They're not going to be here tonight because they don't have a vested
interest in having their employees smoke. They're going away from it. They
want that crap out of their manufacturing plants. Do the owners' children have
a special priviledge to purchase cigarettes if we do that though? Does the kid
who helps the family cleaning business clean that plant have a special
priviledge at getting at those cigarettes? Probably. You're right, if we try
to string this whole thing up, we can think about it all night. We're not going
to do a darn thing and I'm not so sure you don't want to not do anything. I
think we've got to do something and you've just admitted that there's a problem
out there. This is one little baby step. Again, I know the dangers of smoking
better than anybody in this roan, or as much as, and yet I understand a person's
right to have that habit. It's like baseball. It's an ingrained national past
time. Wordly past time so I'm not going to slay that dragon. I'm just saying
we're taking a small step towards a small segment of the population who are most
vulnerable to this and trying to restrict it there. Once you open up a little
door, you're going to open up a whole plethra of things that I don't think the
City wants to deal with. I'd like to make a motion as soon you'll let me.
Councilman Boyt: Well Don hasn't spoken yet. If I might just respond Don and
then I'll pass it over to you. I think there's 3 elements to the wandering I
did there. One of than is, we're going to pass something. That's clear. I
think that the ordinance is a little better if it's amended. Third, I hope that
this really is the first step in a more agressive approach by the City. Those
are my three points. I
Mayor ChN el: You're looking at a former smoker. I'm sure there's many of them
sitting out there. I quit smoking 26 years ago and I probably smoked anywhere
between a pack and a half to 2 packs a day. I have a son who just quit smoking
4 weeks ago because I've challenged him. I gave him an incentive. Who spokes 2
packs a day. Quit cold turkey and it's been 4 weeks. I have a daughter who
spokes almost a half pack to a pack a day who quit smoking 4 weeks ago as well.
16 '
IICity Council Meeting - November 20, 1989 '10.
II! I sometimes feel incentives work and hopefully they will and they're going to
learn from it. But I know that the availability of kids buying cigarettes from
I machines are there all the time. I was standing in one of the St. Paul hotels
where there's no controlled access to a machine and it's close enough to the
cash register and this youngster went in there and just bought cigarettes and he
paid $2.50 a pack. Now that's absolutely ridiculous. I also had a father-in-
I law who died from emphysema as well and it's nothing of a pleasure to watch
someone die from that. I don't want to see kids start smoking and I feel that
if we can curtail that amount of availability for those kids by getting the
II access to those machines and getting their cigarettes, I feel that's one step.
Basically it's just one step at a time that we have to do this. I'm not opposed
to anyone smoking. That's everybody's priviledge. I did it. I'm not going to
II say I'm a goody two shoes now and I'm not. If they want to smoke, that's their
perogative. If you want to sell cigarettes, I feel then sell them over the
counter where there is a control so the kids don't have that access. I feel
rather strongly about it. So I guess you can sort of tell where I'm coming
I from. I don't want to take anyone's livelihood away. I think that there is the
availability as Tam mentioned that the cigarette manufacturers would be more
than willing to set up a display to sell cigarettes within each of these
I establishments. If it's so choosing that people want to buy them, that's up to
them. Before my voice goes tonight, I think I'll just sort of stop right there.
I would entertain a motion.
II Councilman Workman: Mr. Mayor, I would like to make a motion for what I would
call the first and final reading of an ordinance amending Chapter 10 of the
Chanhassen City Code by adding provisions regulating the sale of tobacco
II products, specifically banning of cigarette vending machines in the City of
Chanhassen.
IICouncilwoman Dimler: I second that.
Councilman Boyt: I'd like to discuss it for just a moment.,, Our vending machine
person, I didn't catch your name but can you tell me something about the resale
IIof vending machines?
Tam Briant: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Boyt. There is no resale value to a
IIcigarette vending machine. The machine cannot be converted for any other use.
Councilman Boyt: No, I mean the ability just to sell it to someone else who's
I selling cigarettes through it. Is there a market for those? For used cigarette
vending machines?
Tom Briant: Generally no. We have vendors who have literally semi-trailer
I full loads of these used vending machines that they cannot sell either outstate
or instate so there's basically no market.
II Councilman Boyt: I guess we got out too late huh? Well, I think the City
should share the financial burden here. I don't think we should cover future
losses that someone would realize but I do think that the City should be
involved since typically if we were going to make something, if we were going to
I eliminate the possibility of doing something, we would grandfather in everything
that had it and clearly we're not going to do that tonight so I think the City
has an obligation to pay something for these vending machines. If we're
Idedicated to this thing, we ought to put our dollars there.
II17
;City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989 +-�
R
I
Mayor Chniel: Ted, do you own your? Is that your own vending machine that you
have? Did you purchase that yourself as you mentioned for what, $1,000.00? I
Ted Korzonowski: Right.
Councilman Boyt: Well you can see the resale value is pretty low today Ted.
Ted Korzonowski: Be said grandfather. If we had a year to try to do this, if
we couldn't police our own, then I'd be willing to give the thing up. '
Councilman Workman: Bill, I guess I'm not adverse to that. I guess I would
like to discuss that as a separate issue and not make it a part of this
ordinance and this motion. I do understand that liability. I would hate to
leave my position on the Council and say yeah, I bought a cigarette machine so I
would like to look at that at the next meeting or we could discuss that and
figure out what that might be if in fact we have a liability. It's still a
machine that's dispensing illegal products. I'm sure that machine has paid for
itself a couple, few times a month. I'm not sure what our liability is. I'd
like to talk about it. '
Councilman Boyt: I don't follow all of your argument but I do follow the point.
If we could schedule this for the next meeting, I'd certainly consider that
reasonable. They're not dispensing illegal products. People are buying them
that shouldn't be buying then. Certainly the merchants have an investment here
that they made in good faith and the City's taking their ability away to make
money with that and I think we certainly at least ought to look at how we
balance that out. I'd like to offer an amendment in good faith with the Public
Safety Commission just to see what happens to is I guess among other things,
plus I believe in it. That we amend the motion to mean that vending machines
would not be allowed in uncontrolled areas. Is there a second? Well, I did it
in good faith didn't I.
Councilman Johnson: One thing I'd like to say before we vote is, the other way '
is to start leveling $3,000.00 fines against people with vending machines that
have children buying cigarettes out of those vending machines because any
responsible person's making a profit off that machine is ready to pay the fine. 1
Ready to do one year in prison. That's the way I feel about it. If you want a
vending machine, you should be ready to do a $3,000.00 fine and 1 year in jail
because that's the maximum fine and I would be right there in court telling the
judge that's what I think you should get. If a kid comes in here and buys
cigarettes out of your machine while your hostess is away or whatever. 1 think
you're ready to do that. You said you're ready to, you want to sell cigarettes
because you wanted that $70.00 a month so if for any reason this gets turned
over or whatever, I'm sure it's going to pass tonight but I think we may want to
the only thing I would want to do here is give them 30 days or something.
Mayor Chmiel: It won't be effective until the issuance of a new license.
Councilwoman Dimler: Not until January of 1990.
Councilman Workman: Mr. Mayor, I made my motion to be the first and final
reading of this so we may have to modify Council rules.
18 '
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989 _
,t
Mayor C oriel: I think we would have to
Roger Knutson: If you wanted, you could move to waive your rules.
ICouncilman Workman: Can we do that?
Councilman Johnson: There's no hurry if it's not effective until January 1st.
We can put it on the Consent Agenda next week or 2 weeks.
Councilman Workman: Can I make a motion with one on the floor already?
Councilman Johnson: Yeah, you'd have to.
Councilman Boyt: It probably has precedence if you're going to lay aside the
rules.
Councilman Workman: Okay, then I would make a motion to suspend Council rules
to make this a first and final reading.
Councilwanan Dimler: I'll second that.
Councilman Boyt: I don't think it's a good idea. As Jay said, we have time.
By the time Jay, this takes a four-fifths vote.
' Councilman Johnson: Yeah, I know.
Councilman Boyt: And this is the kind of thing that since we do have the time,
why do we want to make this look like we've rushed to judgement? We haven't.
I You've done a lot of work on this thing.
' Councilman Workman: Nothing's going to change next week Bill. Nothing's going
to change this week so there's no reason to bring it up and muddle up the
agenda. The experts are all here this evening, as I thanked than before.
Without them, a lot of this wouldn't have been possible and I think they're like
to see it passed tonight too.
Councilman Boyt: The first reading will pass.
Councilman Workman: First and final. I have a motion.
Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to suspend Council rules
to vote on a first and final reading of the City Code. All %toted in favor
except Councilman Boyt who opposed and the motion carried 4 to 1.
Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to approve the first and
final reading of an ordinance amending Chapter 10 of the Chanhassen City Code by
adding provisions regulating the sale of tobacco products, specifically banning
of cigarette vending machines in the City of Chanhassen. All voted in favor and
the motion carried.
I
19
City council Meeting - November 20, 1989
PUBLIC HEARING: CITY CODE AMENDMENT TO CONSIDER RECYCLING PROGRAM OPTIONS:
A. REQUIRE ALL LICENSED HAULERS IN CHANHASSEN TO PROVIDE CURBSIDE COLLECTION
OF RDCYCLABLES; OR
B. ESTABLISH A DIRECT BILLING SYSTEM FOR ALL CHANHASSEN RESIDENTS TO PROVIDE
WEEKLY OR BI-WEEKLY CURBSIDE RECYCLING.
Public Present:
Name Address
Victor Hallberg 411 Del Rio, Chanhassen
Gary Lano Chaska Sanitation
Keven Tritz Woodlake BFI
Mike Berkowpeck Waste Mangenent, Inc. t'
Uli Sacchet Hidden Circle
II
Jo Ann Olsen: As you know, the City currently has a contract with Waste
Mangenent for collection of curbside recycling. The City has been funding that
program. We can no longer do that through the general funds so we've been
looking at separate options for funding recycling, to continue it. We have a
Recycling Committee now and we have looked at several options and we have
narrowed them down to the two that you just mentioned. After looking at all the
information, the committee has recommended that the haulers collect the
recycleables. The haulers that are licensed in Chanhassen. We do have
committee members here to also give information and we do have some haulers
here.
Mayor Chmiel: I'd like to have the committee members, those who are wishing to ,
address it to came forward at this time.
Victor Hallberg: Victor Hallberg at 411 Del Rio. I serve on the Recycling '
Commission. The key development that occurred recently was a finding from the
Attorney's office that there was little enforceability to collections of
recycling bills because it could not be defined as a utility. As equivalent to
a utility in the size city that we're at, as I understood it. That meant that
the only alternative was to go to shall claims court which would be a costly
procedure. At which point the Commission quickly concluded that asking the
haulers to pick up and bill for the recycleable materials was the only logical
alternative and we unanimously recommended it to you. The other issues have
been covered in a lot of different memos. I don't think we need to cover then
at length.
Mayor Chmiel: Are there any haulers or anyone else wishing to address?
Gary Lano: I'm the owner of Chaska Sanitation, Gary Lano. We service 1
approximately 600 residential homes inside Chanhassen. At this time I really
feel, for a lot of the smaller haulers inside Chanhassen, it's going to be
awfully hard for us to go out and buy new equipment for a recycling program.
Recycling and garbage collection is basically two separate businesses and if the
Council and the Mayor decide to go ahead with this, our company's going to be '
20 I
/
,City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989 m,
0
more than happy to go along with it and I'm basically here to represent the 600
residents I have here in Chanhassen. Thank you.
I I Kevin Tritz: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. My name is Kevin Tritz. I'm
the district manager for Woodlake BFI. I have a number of accounts also in
Chanhassen. I guess I have no problems either way. There is several cities now
in the metro area that have licensing requirements for recycling as part of
doing business in those cities. There's 14 in all in the metro area. There's
23 cities in the metro area right now that have same type of licensing
requirement. I feel that in due time we're going to have to do it all over.
Right now it makes it a little more difficult in Chanhassen in that we're not
faced with the tipping fees like we are in Hennepin County or sane of the other
communities but in due time we're going to see that those tipping fees are going
to basically increase here and we're going to be faced with the same situation
we are in Hennepin, Ramsey and Dakota counties. At that point recycling makes a
lot of sense for us as haulers to do. I guess if we had to do recycling
1 ourselves, we're prepared to do it and I have no problem with that.
Mike Berkopeck: My name is Mike Berkopeck and I'm with Waste Mangenent, the
current recycling collection hauler and we do have some residential accounts
here in the city of Chanhassen for garbage service. I think it would be, myself
and Lynn Morgan from my company have been at many of the recycling committee
meetings so I think where we stand with this thing is pretty clear and quite
' obviously we don't want to lose the work. We have a good contract with the City
and we'd like to keep doing that. We know what we can do and I guess we think
that that would be a good thing to continue to do. We understand that there's
some problems from a billing standpoint and things like that and I think
ultimately it caves down to how you want to, the goal for everybody is to try
and get as much out of the waste treatment as possible and I guess we have same
feelings that the contracted way may be the best way in this case. Other than
' that, I guess I think on more of a technical thing is when this thing happens,
if the ordinance happens, I assume would this be the first reading of the
ordinance also?
Councilman Boyt: Hopefully.
Mike Berkopeck: Okay. If it happens that way, I guess I have some questions
' and concerns about the ordinance that it's not important to get into but I
assume there's a first reading and then there's opportunity for co mment and
change? That's all I need to say. Okay, thank you.
Mayor Q-iniel: Is there any one else?
11 Uli Sacchet: My name is Uli Sacchet. I live at Hidden Circle. As a resident I
like to stress slightly different aspect with this whole effort which I
personally very much appreciate and encourage. It seems to me that there should
be also an effort in stressing why recycling in terms of the residents. It's
basically a discussion here between the city and the haulers who's going to do
it. I don't know if there's enough awareness out there in the community and I'd
like to encourage you from your vantage point to stress the important of
1 recycling for the residents in general because it's relatively modest what's
being attempted here. I just visited my parents in Switzerland a couple of
months ago and they have to bring old medication back to the drug store to have
to put batteries in a recycling thing. They have to put aluminum foil into a
21
\,
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989
ri
different .place. They have about 12 categories of recycling. It was a whole
P �J � MJ
little book to look at. A whole little brochure of how to go about it and
people take it very seriously and why? Well, it's important. Well, why is it
important? It's one way that we can preserve our environment. Healthy and it's
very...way to show we care for the environment. I don't know how much, and
that's just a little aspect of it, how much this awareness is out in the
community and it should be considered as an important element in this whole
set-up. Not just is it the hauler or the city but the people have finally got
to do it or the residents. Of what I've seen in my neighborhood, there weren't
overwhelmingly many participating in that pick-up of recycleables. Just a
little idea. Thank you.
Mayor Ctvtiel: We have been doing this since, I'll let you address it. I
Victor Hallberg: The issue of education is very close to the minds and hearts
of the members of the commission and it's just been the issue is the immediate
issues that we've had to address first and then once we get that, we fully
expect to go into a much more broad educational program and please ask your
mother to send the booklet. If you would translate it for us, we'd be much
obliged. The other thing I wanted to comment on was the small haulers. The
cost of getting up the equipment for recycling. There is options available. We
did hear several weeks ago when we had a lot of haulers at one of our commission
hearings and at that time, there is a natural obviously a conflict of interest
between large haulers that already have geared up for recycling. Ebr than to
subcontract through a smaller hauler to do the recycling but in addition there
are companies out there that only do recycling. One of those representatives
was at that meeting so I think that does provide at least same flexibility for
the snail haulers not to have to gear up and do a subcontract for the
recycleables of their customers so that gives us sale partial solution at least.
Mayor Chmiel: Good. Thanks. This is a public hearing. Is there anyone else '
wishing to address the issue?
Councilman Johnson moved, Councilwoman Dialer seconded to close the public
� P�
hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was
closed. '
Councilman Johnson: I was actually somewhat leaning the other way until we
found out that we couldn't actually make anybody pay us other than take than to
court for if the city made the collections and that kind of swayed my vote on
the committee to go for requiring the haulers. It's also very helpful to having
an independent businessman there who's only business was to provide recycling.
I think he does the city of Mound or whatever. So he would be the type of
person that the small hauler could subcontract to where he wouldn't be helping
out his other competition because this guy doesn't compete in the hauling
business. So there are options for the small haulers where they won't have to
go out and buy a bunch of trucks.
Roger Knutson: Could I make a point of clarification? I hope you all received
by letter of November 16th which explains how I got into it. As far you
treating this as a utility and being able to turn off the water, I think it's
pretty clear. You have a long way to grow before your city is a first class so
you can't do that. But as far as assessing the cost, assuming our recycleable
22 '
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989
is garbage you could assess the cost as I pointed out. That has not been
tested.
1; Mayor Chmiel: Right.
Councilman Johnson: We could have assessed it back against the individual's 1.
' taxes?
Roger Knutson: The property owners. If someone doesn't pay their garbage bill,
if a city garbage collection and you don't pay your garbage bill, the City can
assess that cost against the property just as it can a water bill.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. After looking at all the options, I would go along
' with option number 2 requiring the haulers to recycle it. Especially in light
of the testimony that the haulers would be willing to comply with that. I would
recommend removal of item (c) from Section 2 of the ordinance where it say, not
' to restrict the nur►ber of haulers in our town. I guess I wanted to ask Roger
why we're not a first class. What's the criteria for first class?
Roger Knutson: There's only Minneapolis, St. Paul, Duluth.
' Mayor Chmiel: St. Cloud.
Councilwoman Dimler: Is it population?
Roger Knutson: Yeah, population. I think it's 80,000 to 100,000.
' Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. So we need to grow.
Mayor Chmiel: Maybe it's not St. Cloud if it has to be 100,000.
Councilman Boyt: Bloomington.
Roger Knutson: Axe they 100,000?
Councilman Boyt: They're the largest city in the Minneapolis.
' Councilwoman Dimler: Also, the other one I had was in Section 3, item (d) it
states that the garbage collection would be done on the same day but not
necessarily the recycleables at the same time and I was wondering why that was
' because I thought one of our aims was to reduce truck traffic because it is hard
on our roads so that's 2 different trips for the same hauler.,,
Jo Ann Olsen: Because it will be a different truck. It can't be, recycleables
couldn't be collected along with the garbage trucks so it's two separate trucks.
Councilwoman Dimler: And you couldn't route than together?
' Jo Ann Olsen: Well, they can do that but usually they come in later that day
or...
Councilwoman Dimler: Well anyway, I go back to Option 2 with the removal of
(c) from Section 2.
1
23
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989
Roger Knutson: Just an editorial comment. Living in Minneapolis, it's really
nice if you have everything done the same day because I have a complicated
schedule at home next to my calendar where there's some days this things happen, �{
same days other things happen. You've really got to keep on top of it. It's
easier if it all happens the same day.
Councilman Boyt: First I think, and I'm sure the whole Council would support '
this that the committee certainly deserves and should receive our thanks for
their diligence. I know they met virtually weekly to get this done by January.
The Mayor could probably say it better but. I
Mayor Chmiel: That's alright, go ahead.
Councilman Boyt: I'll open it up by saying that I think that the City should be '
coordinating this. I don't think it should be going through the individual
haulers so maybe a few words for the other side of that. The recycling conmitte
meeting that I attended when both of those options still looked like they were
possibilities was evenly split. Only 4 of the committee members were there.
Now a couple things about that. Why I think it's a better option. Marketing
recycleables is a challenge in itself. I understand we may be coming out of hte
newspaper glut but that's a cyclical sort of thing and has always been and
probably will continue to be for a while. Finding a market for these is going
to be a challenge, especially for somebody who's major business is picking up
garbage, not recycling. I think there's sane real efficiencies. I've got
several problems with the staff report, not least of which is when they quote
the price at $10.00 to $12.00 on a quarterly basis. The last time I looked, the
quarter was 3 months. The most we've ever quoted anybody is $2.00 a household
per month which would be $6.00 a quarter.
Jo Ann Olsen: As explained in those memos, that also included some
adminstrative costs and also included containers. Purchasing containers.
Councilman Boyt: That's with weekly pick-up was $2.00 a household per month.
Now, so there's this issue of who's going to do the marketing if we have the
individual 16 or whatever haulers do it? I agree with Ursula that we definitely
should strike item (c) . What happens to new people who want to enter the
industry if we've said we're committed to only these 16 trying to get at the 4?
Maybe someone will cane in with a better way of doing it. I think another
question that I have and I didn't see it in the staff report, how it would be
answered, but the County is going to be getting money from all of us through the
State and how is the County going to reimburse the city for this is the City
isn't spending anything? I mean all of us individually are spending something
but the City isn't spending it and you can be sure the County isn't going to
send each taxpayer $12.00 back or $30.00 back. They're going to want to focus
it through the City so if you've got some answers to that, or if staff does, I'd
like to know what those are. The City loses the ability to negotiate for the
best bid if we turn it over to the individual haulers. As it is now, we can
negotiate and have been fairly successful at negotiating at pretty good rate for
this. As we just heard, we're not going to be reducing the number of trucks
when we go to individual haulers. We may even be doubling the number of trucks
so I don't agree with the staff report that that's an advantage to the
individual hauler option. I think that the City, this is virtually a utility. ;
Would be if we were a big enough city. A utility should be controlled by the
city. There aren't many things that the City should be doing but basic
24 1
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989 •+p,
10
utilities are one of them and only the size prevents us from considering this a
basic utility. It is in fact a utility type service. There is probably a lot
of directions that the City is going to want to take with this over the years.
We can take than better if we're doing the monitoring and supervision of the
collection by being the people paying for it. My last point is, whatever we do,
whether it be option 1 or option 2, that the city staff should be directed to
' write a letter to our State Representatives asking them to spearhead legislation
to give us the right to consider recycling a utility. If the State's going to
require us to do it, and they certainly have, then they should give us the power
to use it to get the job done right. That's all I've got.
Councilman Johnson: Mr. Mayor, may I respond to one of Bill's there?
' Mayor Q,niel: Yeah, i was going to respond to it too Jay. If you'd like to, go
ahead.
' Councilman Johnson: I think the main one was what are we going to do with the
score money from the County. That's going to be used for education, containers.
' Councilman Boyt: How will we get it?
Councilman Johnson: How will we get it?
Councilman Boyt: Well we're not going to pay for the containers. The
individual haulers are going to be bill their individual people for that, as it
stands as I read the staff report.
Jo Ann Olsen: If we have the billing, the direct billing, we would be.
Councilman Boyt: Well if we had direct billing, certainly we would but I'm
talking about option 2 where the 16 haulers are going to be doing the billing
individual. Is the City going to go ahead and buy the containers?
' Jo Ann Olsen: We were still looking at that option. TO go for the grant
through the Met Council to have 50% of that cost paid.
Councilman Boyt: Okay, that would be one item. And your sense then is that the
County would give us money to provide for the education awareness thing that Uli
has said, and we all agree, is...
' Councilman Johnson: Plus household hazardous waste. Plus white goods. Plus a
lot of other recycleables that these folks will not be able to recycle.
' Mayor Chmiel: All the other things you have going including your leaf recycling
and many other factors too.
Councilman Boyt: Well you know, we're in here, the way this ordinance is
written now, we're going to require the individual haulers to do 16 leaf
pick-ups.
Mayor Qrniel: Yep.
Councilman Boyt: Well, the City and the County is currently doing that.
I
25
City Council Meeting - November 20; 1989
Ill
Jo Ann Olsen: That's mandatory anyway starting January 1, 1990 you cannot take '
leaves or compost grass clippings to a landfill. i
Councilman Boyt: No, but you know that the County already does that in the fall '{
and spring right?
Jo Ann Olsen: No they don't. This year what they did was to let haulers know
where they could drop off leaves and grass clippings. They did not sponsor.
Councilman Boyt: What happened to those bags when we get them? Don't we get
those from the city?
Jo Ann Olsen: We get those from the County.
Councilman Boyt: Doesn't the County come around and pick those up? Who picks
those up?
Jo Ann Olsen: The haulers. At least this year they did.
Councilman Boyt: Well that wasn't true last year. ,
Jo Ann Olsen: Last year we had BFI pick up a portion of the city.
Councilman Boyt: And they carried them all out to the landfill, to the compost 1
and opened the bags and dumped the leaves there?
Jo Ann Olsen: Right.
Councilman Boyt: So this year's going to be different?
Jo Ann Olsen: Yeah, it has to be taken to the compost facilities. They cannot
be mixed with garbage.
Councilman Boyt: Who's picking it up this year? '
Jo Ann Olsen: This year? You mean this fall?
Councilman Boyt: Well, last year the County arranged for the pick-up. 1
Jo Ann Olsen: With BFI. The years before, we did it through our public works
department.
•
Councilman Boyt: So who's doing it this year? -
Jo Ann Olsen: Axe you talking next year?
Councilman Boyt: This year. Right now. 1
Jo Ann Olsen: With the haulers. Carver County contacted all the haulers in
Chanhassen and said, there's a compost facility open that you can take grass
clippings, leaves to and only a few of the haulers provided that service. I
Councilman Boyt: So we didn't provide that this year?
26 I
ICity Council Meeting - November 20, 1989
Jo Ann Olsen: No.
Mayor Clmiel: Put them in your own compost pile.
Councilman Boyt: I could use more leaves by the way.
Mayor Ctmiel: Everyone hear that? TV audience. Can we have your address ••
' Bill?
' Councilman Workman: The reason I didn't have a whole lot of comments is because
this is one of those issues, I don't think we're going to be fighting to make
the first and final reading. Just a lot of really tough decisions and I too
want to say that the recycling committee has a tough job and thanks for making
' it less tough for us. I guess I'm curious as to what will happen if we force
haulers in the city to go into the recycling business. I was talking to Mr:
Lano in the back row. When I think of garbage I think of Gary Lano. I grew up
' with Gary Lano.
Councilman Johnson: You're in rare form tonight.
' Councilman Workman: Probably the best fullback the Hawks have ever had too.
That's, talk about taking a simple little machine out of somebody's business and
my God we're throwing their ledgers out of whack try buying one of those
recycling trucks. I would think, that's a major deal so I like the free market
idea. There's no way that we should allow only 4 haulers but gee, that's maybe
all we'll get. So that issue is confounding me a little bit. But then Bill
makes some good points as far as the City having a little bit of control over
it. Receiving funding, etc. in contracting for that. While we have control
over it, I've seen in the past year that the recycling contract really, and I've
said this before, isn't a contract anyway. The way it goes up and down. Rarely
' down but up and up and up and it's really not a contract at all. What was bid
really didn't matter anyway I don't think. So I don't have any solutions
and I just, I don't even see where the Council's leaning.
Councilman Johnson: I think what's happened to Eden Prairie, they've done this,
the rates actually- didn't go up there. They will eventually and they're in
' Hennepin County so their rates are a lot higher than ours but ours are going to
go up. That's one point I wanted to make earlier that I didn't make is that
when the Carver and Scott County composting facility gets built and all of our
garbage has to go to the Carver/Scott County composting facility, you'll see
' everybody's garbage bills in this County double. Everybody better be ready to
acknowledge that and the recycling is the only way to keep that frcm.tripling.
Right now I think this is one spot where the free enterprise system may work
' better than government trying to run a business. This is where business may do
it more competitively than what we will. I don't think we right now the City
needs to add more staff to run another utility. I would hope that we could do
it through the haulers with our present staff but if we started doing our own,
1 contracting for our own, that would be another quarter of a person or half a
person to add to staff and I don't think that we need to add some personnel to
staff right now. So I'm in favor at this point of going the way the committee
recommends.
Mayor Chmiel: So am I. Jo Ann, maybe you best explain total number of haulers
' that we have presently picking up within the city and eventually when that
27
r
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989
breaks down, be only 4 haulers within the city. The 16 haulers can haul from '
now until eternity.
Jo Ann Olsen: Well currently there's closer to 9 or 10 haulers that do pick-up residential and the way the ordinance is written right now, yes. Whoever's 111'
'
there can continue to haul in Chanhassen. If they choose to leave, then it
would prevent them from calling back in or new people from entering the city
until it's reduced to 4 or below 4. The whole reason that that was added into
that was to try to reduce the number of haulers. The number of trucks entering
the streets although the committee did want that removed. They agreed that it
should be left open. That we should limit it to 4.
Councilwoman Dimler: So you're saying to remove (c) from Section 2?
Jo Ann Olsen: Right. So that option would not really be, one of the pros is
that it would be removing the number of trucks on the city streets so that would
not be doing it anymore.
II
Councilman Johnson: One of the reasonings behind removing that is that it's a ..
recycling committee and not a garbage committee in that if we want to consider
overall garbage in the city, that should be a separate action. We tried to
separate the issues to where we didn't confound the recycling issue with an
overall garbage issue. That was my point. I was one of the people trying to
get rid of that section. I do see at sane time that it would be better, I would
love to have only one garbage truck and one recycling truck cane down my street.
Now I'm sure I have at least 5. It seems like every other person on the street
has a different garbage man. I'd like to see that somehow organized but in the
timeframe we're working with, we want to get the recycling straighten out and
not try to confuse the issues with the rest of it. This is a viable thing to
look at in the future as to making things more efficient in the city. Maybe
look at how the city of Champlin has their garbage collection, utility run. The
haulers got together, formed a company. All the existing haulers in the city
formed a company that became the Champlin Refuse Company or something. I'm not
sure what the name of it is and then they all had their piece of the action. As
the City grew, their business grew. But it did restrict competition and there's
a lot of issues that we didn't want to get involved in this recycling issue so
we said just drop (c) and let's just do recycling right now. If we want to get
involved in those, we'll do those next year.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, as I was all gung ho when we started this recycling, I made
some statements at that particular time about the committee. I said they were
innovative. They took the time and they worked every Tuesday for hours on end.
They took all the time that was needed to really sit down and work out a
solution. I really applaud than because they really did a fantastic job. You
really did. It was sort of neat to be part of it with Jay and I both working
with you on the committee. I too am going to go along with recommendations of
the committee and that being that we require all licensed haulers in Chanhassen
to provide the curbside collection on those recycleables. All I've got to say
is, good show. Ear the rest of them as well. Any other further discussion?
Councilman Boyt: Yes. I didn't see it in the staff report but in one of the
reports to the committee that 4 of the existing haulers said they wouldn't be
able to do this. Is that still true?
28
r
1 City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989 "" r
Mayor Chmiel: No, I think all of than indicated that evening that we were there
that they're all...
•
Jo Ann Olsen: There was one hauler who said he would have a difficult time
doing it but actually he didn't say that it would prevent him. He actually
didn't say that he'd stop working in Chanhassen. I don't know where you saw
' that there were 4.
Councilman Boyt: I don't know either. So, what you're telling me is that these
9 to 10 active haulers can all do this if we ask than to do it independently?
Jo Ann Olsen: They've been well informed. We've been having them involved the
whole time to get their input. None of them have said that we would leave
Chanhassen. They were all given the packet tonight. I can't say that for a
fact none would leave but I haven't heard that as an objection.
' Councilman Boyt: And the rest of the Council's assured me that County funding
is going to be there which ever way we go there.
' Jo Ann Olsen: Can I answer that a little bit?
Mayor Chmiel: If we know that they're even going to get the money.
Jo Ann Olsen: I did talk with Mike Lien about that, explaining that if we did
have the direct billing we would be able to show how much money we're spending
and if we do have the haulers because I brought up the same point that you
' brought up. Because we're already having a difficult time receiving funds.
They said that we would still, what they're doing is looking at how much it
would cost if they would have to provide the 1 per month pick-up because that's
what they have to do at the very least starting in October. They still, even if
we had the direct billing, they're not guaranteeing money. We're not in any
worse position to receive money or any better position to receive money. I
don't think that that should be a deciding factor.
' Councilman Boyt: Alright. So it doesn't make any difference?
' Jo Ann Olsen: It doesn't make a difference.
Councilman Boyt: And the sense is, or the sense of staff is this negotiation
issue. How do we deal with that? Axe we going to do anything to help these
people find sources? I know that eventually Hennepin County's going to do that.
Is Carver County going to do that? How are we going to help these
independents?
Mayor Chmiel: For the market is what you're saying?
Councilman Boyt: If one thing will force them out of the garbage business
altogether, it's when mountains of newspapers pile up and they can't find a
place to put then.
' Mayor Chmiel: Waldorf has just expanded their facility to require, double the
amount that they have taken previously which means it would be very unlikely
that there's going to be another glut of paper.
1
' 29
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989 z
• we from 25% participation to 60% participation, '
Councilman Boyt: Well when go par pa Pa
it will be, the newspaper will be absolutely amazing.
Mayor CIvdel: True. Carver County is also sitting there, from their standpoint II)
of being able to shred that and use that for animals in barns and so on as they
do the straw. So there's another back-up for that paper. TO bale it as such.
Councilman Boyt: Your sense is, this isn't an issue? '
Mayor Civtiel: No, I don't think so right now. '
Councilman Boyt: I gather then that it would be the Council's commitment to
devote same staff time to solving this problem if it becomes a problem?
Mayor Ch'tiel: I think so.
Councilman Boyt: Then my last issue, as you solve these dilemmas it's of course
easier to vote for the plan that the study group recommends, is I'd like to see
something drafted so at least we have the ability to treat this as a utility if
we choose to in the future. Would the Council support the staff encouraging
that action?
Councilwoman Dimmer: Do I understand this correctly, we'd have to be 100,000?
Councilman Boyt: Well right now but if Kelso and Schmitz would introduce a
state statute that would allow cities of our size to do this.
Mayor Chaiel: What benefit would it be for the City Bill? ,
Councilman Boyt: Well because then we would have, should we choose, like
Minneapolis, St. Paul, Bloomington, to collect garbage as a municipality, we'd
have the ability to do that. Right now we don't. Well, we do but it's much
more awkward.
Councilman Workman: But if people don't pay for their sewer and water bills, we
can't even turn off their water.
Councilman Boyt: Well we go through once a year where we, what do we call '
that?
Roger Knutson: We certify the delinquent water bills to the County. I think ,
it's twice a year now Don is saying. - ••
Councilwoman Dimler: Do they get assessed? '
Roger Knutson: Yeah.
Councilman Boyt: It goes against their property taxes. '
Roger Knutson: And if you don't pay that, you lose your property.
Don Ashworth: But if I hear Roger correctly, that hasn't really been litigated
as to whether or not picking up recycleables could be treated as garbage and
•
30
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989
d,
therefore I therefore legally put as a delinquent collection along with property taxes.
Correct?
1' Councilman Johnson: But you can do it for garbage?
Roger Knutson: For garbage you can, yes.
' Councilman Johnson: Our city can't.
Roger Knutson: Yes. Your city can.
' Councilman Johnson: And first class cities can do it for recycleables as a
utility?
Roger Knutson: They're two different things we're talking about. What
Minneapolis can do is it can say, we treat collecting recycleables the same way
as a utility and all our utilities under the statute can be treated as one and
' one of your utilities is water. So the city of Minneapolis, when you don't pay
your garbage bill or your recycling bill, they can pick up the phone and say,
unless you pay your bill by a week from tomorrow, we're turning off your water.
' That gets people's attention and they usually pay it. •
Mayor Chmiel: I think if we look at it from the standpoint of wanting to get
back into that business, then we can make an ordinance change in that as well.
Councilman Boyt: Well it has nothing to do with an ordinance. It's a State
Statute and if they don't give us the authority to do that, we can't.
Mayor C iel: You don't have the authority.
Councilman Boyt: Now we don't. What I'm asking is for support to seek that
authority.
Councilman Johnson: I would support any legislation of that nature and I'd like
to say that if we can keep this thing moving, I'd just say I'd like to move
approval of the haulers doing it with item 2(c) removed and that the Council
support any legislative action to allow a city of our size to have recycling as
a utility.
Councilman Workman: And I second it.
Councilwoman Dimler: I think I'd rather wait to see what the legislature is
going to came forth and propose and then deal with that at that time.
' Councilman Boyt: What we're trying to do is shake that legislation. Send a
signal to them that this is a tool that we could use.
Councilwoman Dimler: I don't know if we as a Council want to do that now. I
think as an individual if we call them and tell them the direction we wanted to
go.
Councilman Johnson: Why not? Why can't we have the same rights as Minneapolis ;
and Bloomington? Sure we're a little smaller but we're just as good. We're
' better.
31
City Council Meeting - November 20; 1989
Mayor Chniel: We're probably better.
Councilwoman Dimler: I said that earlier. We're first class.
Mayor Chmiel: I'm not sure where it's really going. I just don't like seeing
us making some kind of a motion as such.
Councilwoman Dimler: Just the third part of it. I like your other two parts.
Mayor Chndel: Yeah, I like that too but it just doesn't set well with me right I
now because I don't know...
Councilwoman Dimler: We don't know what direction they're going to take. '
Mayor Chniel: And would we be satisfied with it?
Councilman Johnson: Specifically it's just as a start if any legislation that
would give us the same rights for making recycling a utility within this city.
Councilwoman Dimler: But that's not the direction we may want to go in the '
future. I'm just saying, if and when we want to go in that direction, we'll
still have that avenue available.
Councilman Johnson: Some other town might want to and I'd like to support that
town. It doesn't say we have to make it a utility. Nobody can tell us we have
to make recycling a utility. Well, they could. Actually the legislation could '
say that all towns must have recycling as a utility. That could be something
that would go. I wouldn't support that.
Mayor Chniel: I guess I don't want to make it any more cumbersome than it is '
right now either.
Councilman Johnson: Well we'll simplify it like I said. Item (c) simplifies '
it. If it's going to be complicated with my third part there, I'll drop that
if my second will drop that.
Councilman Workman: Yes.
Councilman Johnson: Then we'll have to do it individually. ,
Councilwaman Dimler: Okay, so the motion is?
Councilman Johnson: The motion will be then to accept the committee's ,
recommendation including the dropping of item 2(c) .
Roger Knutson: That's the first reading? '
Councilman Johnson: As a first reading.
Councilman Johnson moved, Councilman Workman seconded to approve requiring all '
licensed haulers in the City of Chanhassen to provide curbside collection of a�
recycleables and deleting item 2(c) from Chapter 16 of the City Code concerning
solid waste. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
32 ,
' City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989
I=
Councilman Johnson: Now somebody said they had some comments. Generally second
readings came up on a consent agenda. Make sure the staff gets those comments
right away so that if there's something significant, there will be changes to
it, then they'll be something other than a consent agenda, we'll have to talk
aobut it.
Victor Hallberg: Just one final comment. We are going to meet on a week from
tomorrow night, the Recycling Commission so we'd certainly welcome some
' additional input if you want to come and give us same input on the ordinance
itself, we can address it at that time. If anything significant comes up, we'll
channel it back this way. The second thing is that I'm personally interested in
this idea of the State mandate so I will make a call to Councilman Schmitz and
see what I can dig out of there and channel that information through the
commission because I think it should not be a stone left unturned at this point.
' Councilman Johnson: I think most of us will be in Atlanta at the National
League of Cities Conference next week.
' AWARD OF BIDS: 1989 SEWER REHABILITATION PROGRAM.
Gary Warren: The bids were opened Friday. This is the bid tabulation.
Schurcon, Inc. $117,544.00
0 & P Contracting, Inc. $122,291.00
S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. $131,160.00
F.F. Jedlicki, Inc. $132,027.00
J.P. Norex, Inc. $138,106.66
G.L. Contracting, Inc. $159,497.46
Engineer's Estimate $124,984.00
We were very fortunate. I think we had a very good bidding climate. The
' engineer's estimate actually had misquoted, I had said in the staff report at
$118,000.00. Actually we had an addition just before the bid documents went out
which put it at $125,000.00 and as you see in the material that I just handed
' out, the low bidder is Schurcon. I believe they're located in Maplewood.
$117,544.00. If you throw out G.L. Contracting who was out of the ballpark
there, the rest of then are grouped within an 18% range and we feel very
' comfortable with the bid and also with the subcontractor list that they're
showing.
Mayor Chmiel: Schurcon Incorporated. Have you had any, have we had any
' dealings with then previously?
Gary Warren: We haven't had any personal dealings with them. Talked with John
Horn today. He has talked to their President and Vice President and apparently
they're a more recent corporation here in the last few years but the individuals
have extensive background in construction. They would be responsible for the
sewer repair and rebuilding portion as you would see on the subcontractors list.
' Visu Sewer and Solidification, whichever way they go there, I'm very experienced
with both those firms ham the testing and sealing standpoint and they're very
qualified. Similarly REO Construction.
' 33
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989 - =711
Mayor Chmi.el: Other cities have used them?
Gary Warren: That's correct.
Resolution #89-128: Councilman Johnson moved, Councilwoman Dialer seconded to
award the bid for the 1989 Sewer Rehabilitation Program to Schurcon, Inc. in the
amount of $117,544.00. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
REVIEW PUBLIC WORKS AUXILIARY STORAGE BUILDING DESIGN CONCEPT AND AWARD OF BIDS ,
FOR FOUNDATION CONSTRUCTION.
Gary Warren: I guess Mr. Mayor, based on our discussion at the last meeting,
staff went back to try to better define the cost estimate that we had for the
building as it was proposed. As you'll recall, the original criteria that we've
tried to stick with here is that we're going to replace the building with a '
comparable sized facility that we were releasing on 82nd Street and that's
pretty much where the 54 x 88 footprint has came from and that's exactly to
within 50 feet almost of what we lost at 82nd Street. Maybe to start it off
here, it is 2 separate items and I think we want to deal with the concepts first
recognizing that we haven't prepared design plans or anything obviously so these
are cost estimates that we're dealing with. But we did have a contractor,
Zastrow-Nasset Construction from Shorewood was willing to give us a cost
estimate and I just received this today and I'll hand this out.
Councilman Workman: Gary, I thought we were going to have our staff possibly
look at putting out footings in. What happened to that idea?
Gary Warren: Our staff would be the excavation work. I
Councilman Workman: Oh, just the excavation?
Gary Warren: Yeah, we aren't licensed masons. Basically what you're seeing in
that estimate there, there's a $5,000.00 contingency item on the bottom so
basically the best estimate from the contractor on the building as EOS put
together would be about $115,000.00 building. Jack Anderson is here tonight.
Jack's estimate was roughly $141,000.00 if I remember our earlier number on it
so a lot is going to depend on the bidding climate. I do have same overheads.
You do have in your packet here the concept of the building. There's nothing
fancy there I guess. Just to give you an idea of what we're putting forward.
When we look at the cost estimate, if you want to point at areas that, if-you
want to call them frills I guess. I don't think that's an appropriate word but
there's maybe $10,000.00 worth of building facilities that could be modified or
pulled out at this time. If we don't go with the cracked block face for example
which is the face of the other buildings on the site there, maybe we're talking
about $6,000.00 to $8,000.00 worth of cost there. If we don't insulate the
building, I don't know exactly if we have a cost for that Jack. We'd have to
pull off the cap moldings basically on the walls if we ever did decide to heat
it and I think that's a minor expense to keep our options open.
Jack Anderson: I did look at...but when you start looking at that but when you
start taking out the insulation out, the building won't meet energy...so if
somebody down the road is going to heat it, you'll have to try to fill those.
34
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989
Roof insulation, we're taking out about $6,500.00. Approximately. Again, that
would have to go in also at a later date if you wanted to heat it so it'd
probably be an expense to have the insulation and block and...energy calculation
numbers and it's a little bit better than what it has to be but not enough that
you should pull any of these items out. Again, that's the feeling...
' Gary Warren: So I guess we've had numbers from $141,000.00 to the current
number here, $120,000.00. The bidding climate is going to be the real test I
guess as far as that's concerned. Referencing Tom's comment, the Public Works
' would indeed do the excavation on the footings and the actual masonry work, the
concrete block work would be part of the contract which would be the second item
here that we'll be looking at in a minute so we are trying to save money I guess
' where we can. There's no floor slab proposed for this building. There's no
plumbing proposed for the building except for outside roof scuppers. We have
set the building elevation at such a grade so that if it were to be hooked into
the sanitary sewer, it can be done. That's not in this element. So I guess
' we're looking for your direction recognizing that it's kind of, estimates are
estimates I guess but...
' Mayor Qmiel: Can I ask a question on the mechanical and electrical allowance?
Gary Warren: Certainly.
Mayor Chmiel: $11,500.00.
Jack Anderson: Do you want to know the breakdown roughly? Well, we've got
' exhaust and intake fans and approximately $3,500.00 in electrical lighting and
power. $3,000.00 of...which may or may not have to happen. It would be
$3,500.00 and then we've got... I think $11,000.00 we figured $10,000.00 and I
' think they have $11,500.00...they've bumped that up a little bit.
Mayor Cmiel: Are there contingencies on each one of the costs all the way
through here?
' Jack Anderson: I'm sorry, the $11,500.00 on the estimate from Zastrow-Nasset
includes overhead profit in it. Our $10,000.00, that's included after.
' Gary Warren: That's 20%.
' Jack Anderson: So you're looking at two different estimates in the way they
were put together.
Gary Warren: Our estimate would have been $12,000.00 with the contingencies or
with the general conditions and overhead on it.
Jack Anderson: Would have been about $12,000.00, yes. The 400 foot service
...that we can get NSP to put a transformer back there, that will reduce that
cost a lot. Bring it down quite a bit. But as the building stands now, we'd
have to go quite a distance for that.
' Mayor Chmiel: Any discussion or questions?
Councilman Workman: Is this simply a review which doesn't require us to take
' any action here?
35
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989
q
I
Gary Warren: We're looking for same direction so that plans and specs could be
prepared from this point forward I guess with that input. If it's a cost II
criteria or any other criteria that you want us to shoot for I guess. Whatever
you can give us.
Mayor Chmiel: Total estimated of Phase 1 and Phase 2 of $120,000.00 I still
think that's darn high. I really do.
Gary Warren: So you believe the bids would actually reflect the lower cost for
what we're asking?
Councilman Boyt: What did we sell it for?
Mayor Chmiel: A hundred.
Councilman Boyt: I'd say it's a bargain. Get a brand new building for
$21,000.00 if it care in at this.
Mayor Chmiel: I had same work done on this by a couple civils and this is high.
From the prices I was told.
Councilman Boyt: The bids should certainly verify that. I'm just saying that
even at this it's a deal. We've moved it so we're more centrally oriented. '
Mayor Chmiel: Right, I agree with that.
Councilman Boyt: All those things we talked about when we sold the property. '
Mayor Chmiel: Yep. Time saving and everything else.
Councilman Boyt: And I hope you're right. I hope it comes in at $100,000.00 or
something.
Councilman Johnson: Did your civils have the design standards required in our
business part about the brick and all that other stuff that runs the price up on
this?
Councilman Boyt: Well, I'd move approval.
Councilwoman Dimler: Approval of what? '
Councilman Boyt: Well we've got approval of the design concept and request bids
for the foundation construction. '
Gary Warren: I've got the bid here. That would be separate so we just right
now are dealing with basically the concept.
Councilman Boyt: I move approval of the building design concept.
Councilman Johnson: Second.
a 1
36 '
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989 --
Councilman Boyt moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to approve the building
design concept for the Public Works Auxiliary Storage building. All voted in
favor and the motion carried.
Gary Warren: The second element, I have another handout and I hope we'll
' eventually get away from these Friday openings before Council meetings but, we
solicited quotes for the foundation work from DayCo and other local firms.
Partly reflecting the busy construction...we got one quote. Even our local
DayCo didn't choose to big on the project. They just didn't have time to get to
' it. But fortunately the bid which is shown on the back of that thing is a low
bid of $13,055.00 is below our estimate for the foundation work as well as
you'll see in the Zastrow quote there. They were quoting about $15,000.00 plus
' for the work. Wachholz Masonry is a reputable firm from Waconia. They gave us
same quotes on our earlier facility and we had bid an alternate just in case it
was over $15,000.00 but I believe that it's a responsible bid. We'd like to
' have more than one but in this case, recognizing the dollar amount and it's
within the two check points that we have, I feel comfortable in recav ending
award to Wachholz Masonry.
Councilman Johnson: So moved.
Councilman Boyt: What about waiting? I'll second it but what about waiting
until the bid climate is more favorable? We know in all likelihood it will be
this winter.
' Jack Anderson: It appears that we do have a good bid here for one thing. We're
talking about a fairly small portion of the job. If we went through this
process...it worked out kind of nice for spring because then when all the rest
of the building is ready to go, they don't have to wait for the frost to cane
out of the ground. What you might gain with a better climate for this small
portion of the job by waiting, you're going to lose by having them have to wait
in the spring for the frost to come out of the ground.
Councilman Boyt: So you think the bids for the rest of the building will be
better?
Jack Anderson: I think ultimately it will be better knowing it's the first job
out there. We're going to probably get, I think last time on the public works
addition we had like 20 bidders. The first thing in the spring they can come
' right out and it's ready.
Gary Warren: It's a clean job plus they're able to order steel during the
' winter months when typically that's not as busy and they've got a lot more
control over the project site and their destiny's.
Councilman Johnson: When everybody else gets their frost out of the ground and
gets the masonry in, we'll be ahead of that. That makes a little sense there.
As I watched than build houses in the winter behind me a few years back, I don't
like to see us putting in masonry in the winter.
' Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, I agree. Any further discussion? Tom? Ursula?
Councilman Workman: Are we approving this bid then?
37
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989
i
Gary Warren.• That's right.
Councilwoman Dimler: I don't like having just one choice but if that's all I
we've got.
Gary Warren: I think we all would like more but I think we're comfortable.
Jack Anderson: We called everybody who was on it before. There were about 8
bidders and we got 4 of them didn't want to bid it. They were so busy and...we
thought we were going to get 4 bids.
Councilman Johnson: Everybody's trying to get something in the ground right
now. 1
Gary Warren: It's a little bit different than say our north side parking lot
project where we had a lot to gain and as we did we gained $60,000.00 I believe
the number was in that case. Here I think we have...
Councilwoman Dimler: $2,000.00 or so?
Gary Warren: Yeah, if that. I really think from our estimates that it's
reasonable plus I think we have more to gain on the ultimate bid of the building
that would compensate for anything, for fluff if there even is that. I
Resolution 489-129: Councilman Johnson moved, Councilman Boyt seconded to award
the bid for the foundation work on the Public Works Auxiliary Storage Building
to Wachholz Mansonry, Inc. in the amount of $13,055.00. All voted in favor and
the motion carried.
MARKET SQUARE LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF MARKET BOULEVARD) AND WEST 78TH
STREET: I
A. PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL.
B. VACATION OF A PORTION OF WEST 78TH STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY.
Councilman Boyt: I move approval. Does anybody have problems with this?
Councilman Workman: What about the bus?
Councilman Boyt: That's taken care of. I
Jo Ann Olsen: We've got a condition in there that we will work with them to
design, to have them pull off.
Gary Warren: I did track down the M'iC standards for bus acceleration,
deceleration lanes and it is about 520 feet of length to accommodate a 10 foot
inversion.
Councilman Workman: Would they rather have half of that or none at all?
I
38 1
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989
h R
Gary Warren: They don't like them at all from my understanding just because
have to fight to get back into traffic and such which is a hazard. That's
another safety.
Mayor Qrtiel: One question I have is regarding the sidewalk which would be
located on West 78th Street will not be within the right-of-way but will be
accamtodated by a sidewalk and trail easement. Why do we need both?
Jo Ann Olsen: It's just a trail easement.
' Mayor C vdel: One or the other?
Councilman Johnson: It should be or.
Councilman Boyt: It's the same piece of property.
Mayor It should have said then, by a sidewalk or trail easement?
Jo Ann Olsen: Sure.
Roger Knutson: Sidewalk/trail easement.
Councilman Boyt moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to approve Preliminary Plat
for Market Square as shown on the plat dated "October 31, 1989" with the
following conditions:
1. Outlot A shall not be developed until it is replatted.
2. The final plat shall reflect the utility and drainage easements for existing
' and proposed city sewer and water lines over the site.
3. The preliminary plat shall be amended to provide the following:
a. Show the 40 foot wide right-of-way along the south half of West 78th
Street.
1 b. A 30 foot wide drainage and utility easement shall be dedicated over the
south 30 feet of the east 360 feet of Lot 1, Block 1.
' c. A 10 foot wide utility and drainage easement shall be dedicated around
the perimeter of the plat.
d. The preliminary plat shall be amended to show additional right-of-way
on Market Boulevard to accommodate the city sidewalk and a bus turn-off
as approved by the City and Southwest Metro Transit Adminstrator.
1 e. A trail easement shall be provided accommodating the trail/sidewalk
along West 78th Street.
f. Cross access/parking and utility easements over all parcels in favor of
all parcels.
1
39
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989
I
4. The landscaping plan shall be revised to accommodate additional right-of-way
and the bus shelter on Market Boulevard.
i�
5. Final plat subject to all conditions of PUD approval.
All voted in favor and the motion carried. • ,
Resolution #89-130: Councilman Boyt moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to
approve the Vacation #89-8 to vacate a portion of West 78th Street and maintain
a 40 foot right-of-way along the southerly half of West 78th Street for the
Market Square plat with the following conditions:
1. A trail easement shall be ovided accommodating the trail and sidewalk
Pr n9
along West 78th Street.
t y
2. Final plat approval for Market Square.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
ERSBO ADDITION, EAST OF POWERS BOULEVARD JUST SOUTH OF LAKE LUCY ROAD:
A. PRELIMINARY PLAT TO SUBDIVIDE 5.06 ACRES INTO 7 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS.
B. WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT REQUEST TO DEVELOP WITHIN 200 FEET OF A CLASS A
WETLAND. 1
Paul Krauss: The applicant's requesting to subdivide a 5 acre parcel into 7
lots. One lot with 92,000 square feet which is the large home site located on
the right side of that illustration would contain an existing home and the
remaining 6 lots would be available for new construction. Last,.year the City
approved a subdivision of this parcel into 5 lots for the same applicant. The
plat was filed and is listed on the plat map. However, the improvements were
never installed. The applicant has stated that he's unable to proceed with the
development of that plat primarily due to development costs and the need to
distribute it over 5 lots rather than, or excuse me 4 new lots instead of 6 and
of course it must be noted that the current plat does yield 2 additional lots
over the original proposal. Staff generally supports the proposal. We worked
with the developer to revise the plans which resulted only minor modifications
were required. Access and a related variance were really the only significant
issues surrounding this plat. The original plat utilized a 50 foot wide.-
right-of-way along the west side of the property to provide access and then
brought in a cul-de-sac off of that. The result of that was that the existing
house site over there had frontage on a future street and did not require a
variance. We took a look at that road design and came up with same significant
problems with it. The property located just to the west of the Ersbo Addition
contains a large protected wetland. The location of the wetland is such that
construction in that road would probably cause some filling into it and it's a
Class A wetland. We also looked at the extension of the road that was
illustrated further to the east to pick up these lots over here. We saw some
problems with that as well in that there's a home located on this lot which
would be only 15 feet from the street. If in fact a road was built in this
manner, you would have a bunch of double frontage home sites and the backyards I
would back onto a major street which is not an optimal design. There was a
40 1
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989 A^ r
`, further problem with the road extension on the west side of the property in that
we couldn't figure out who it would serve. It can only have hanesites on one
side and it wasn't clear where it would go as it continued further to the south.
Consequently, we went with the, well we support the applicant's current design.
We took a look at overall access into the surrounding area. What we think might
happen in the long term is that right now the MUSA line is the property line of
' the Ersbo Addition. It runs down there. At such time as the MUSA line is moved
out to the west, and if this property is developed, we think it's possible to
bring a road down from Lake Lucy coming back up...Ersbo Addition and coming back
out to Powers Blvd. and that's probably the better way to serve that area in the
future. One of the problems that results from the plat that's being proposed.
Councilman Boyt: Before you move that, I've got some questions about that one.
' Your proposed road, is it running across a wetland there? What is that light
colored area? Is that trees?
' Paul Krauss: There's a drainage. The wetland itself is right up in here.
There's a ditch that outlets the wetland out to the south. It's not the wetland
property. It's a drainage feature that you have to cross.
Councilman Workman: That's Lake Lucy?
Mayor Chmiel: No, Lake Lucy Road.
Paul Krauss: Lake Lucy Road is...
Councilman Workman: But what's the wetland in there? That's the pond?
Paul Krauss: This is the wetlands.
Gary Warren: I believe that outlets to the north. The inlet is what it would
be crossing.
Councilman Boyt: What's the terrain like in there? Is that really, I mean Gary
is that a realistic place to put a road? It looks like they going up and down
some steep grades there.
' Paul Krauss: Actually these are our new aerial topos.
Gary Warren: When we had looked at the original plat when Ersbo came in, that's
' where we came up with the concept of trying to service him off of Lake Lucy Road
and we didn't extensively look at this because we didn't have/the topo
available. There's no question that you've got some up and down there. I
haven't detailed study the magnitude of what kind of earth work would have to be
done but there would be sane involved.
Councilman Boyt: Okay. Well those are my questions about that.
Paul Krauss: What we have resulting though from the plat that's being proposed
is that there is a variance for Lot 2 in that it's entire frontage is I believe
the, is it 30 feet along Lake Lucy. It's basically a neck lot. Staff supports
the proposal. We think it makes some sense due to area topography and from an
environmental standpoint in that we think it will in the long term provide
' better protection for the wetland. We also think that it makes more sense in
' 41
,City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989 r _ - `_!
the long run for overall access. Therefore we are recommending approval of that
variance. We also go back to something that we've discussed several times
previously is that there's an anomoly in the ordinance in that the subdivision code allows these types of lots to exist while the RSF district does not. We've It
currently scheduled a review by the Planning Commission of an ordinance
amendment to propose a way to address that. The Planning Commission reviewed
the proposal at their last meeting and recommended approval of it. One of their '
concerns however, and it's a valid one, was a desire to reduce the number of
curb cuts on Lake Lucy Road. One of the things that they had proposed looking
at was methods of taking the private driveway and bringing it into the
cul-de-sac so it would enter onto the cul-de-sac rather than on Lake Lucy. We
took a look at that and it's impossible to do but it's quite difficult. The
grades are such that you have 12 foot drops coming in off that existing he and
since we really didn't think it was all that effective an idea, the Planning
Commission recommended approval of it in the way in which you see it tonight.
We also would like to add a condition that we discussed at the Planning
Commission and that is that the street name be changed to Arlington Court South.
We had a long discussion with the Fire Marshall in terms of what's the most
easily identifiable street if you're on an emergency services run and came up
with the answer that it would be best if there was one Arlington in the city and
it was both sides of the same intersection and that way they know where to go.
They have a localized area for their service calls. Someday we may have 300 or
400 cul-de-sacs in this city. If everyone of them has a different name, it's
going to be a nightmare to navigate around. With that we are recommending
approval of the subdivision with the variance. There's also a wetland
alteration permit and that one's a little quirky too in that the reason for
having the wetland alteration permit is that the activity that will take place
on this plat is within 200 foot of the Class A wetland. In point of fact,
nothing will be done into the wetland besides outletting a drainage pipe from
this project and this particular plat has less of an impact on the wetland than
the original plat did. We are, Jo Ann and I are taking a look at the wetlands
ordinance in total and will probably be bringing something to you in the next
few months on that but we are recommending approval of the wetland alteration
permit for this project as proposed. '
Mayor Ch oriel: Is Mr. Ersbo here?
Raman Roos: Good evening. I just took my cigarettes and put them in the '
bathroom. After this evening I don't think I might ever smoke again. I do have
Richard Ersbo here this evening and he and I will address any questions you
might have. We have as of the previous meeting with the Planning Commission,
made the changes that Planning Commission and staff recommended. . ale have
changed the name of the cul-de-sac. We've changed the sewer size of course up
to an 8 inch pretty much as the Planning Commission wanted. E3ded up with a
fire hydrant inside the cul-de-sac and of course a potential loop for the
watermain going between lots 2 and 3 and I guess staff's report is pretty
comprehensive. The Planning Commission's review you have before you so we're
here to answer any questions you might have on this particular site.
Councilman Johnson: And for the record who are you?
Roman Roos: Is this for the public record? My name is Roman Roos with Roane
Corporation.
42 ,
/
1 City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989
m
Councilman Johnson: My only discussion is, I liked it. Staff's done a good job
working with the applicant and we've improved a plat here. I think putting a
,! driveway through that little subdivision would be more of a problem than having
it loop around the edge of it. I lived with a driveway behind me going back to
Kerber's farm for about 4 years before he ended up having to sell out for tax
reasons I guess and it really wasn't much of a problem. I think cutting through
to the cul-de-sac with a driveway would be far more of a problem. Having a
driveway between 2 people's lawns. There's not that many cars. The name of the
street I think should be exactly the same as what it is on the other side. If
it's Arlington Court, I like we just call it Arlington Court because they'll
have. Why South? It's not on the south side of town. Is the other one
Arlington Court North? If the other one's Arlington Court North, we could call
this one South. Just Arlington Court. It will have different street numbers.
You'll have lower street numbers to the south than they have to the north or
vice versa.
Councilwoman Dimler: What did you call it? Did you name it already?
Raman Roos: No, we're in the process. We're going to change it to...
Mayor Chmiel: It will be south of Lake Lucy Road is basically what they're
saying.
Councilwoman Dialer: I guess are we approving the 15 conditions and I had the
other 2 down there and that was exactly what it was to call Eagle Circle
Arlington Court South I had but it doesn't matter to me. But I wonder, does
condition 17 have to be the fire hydrant located at the end of the cul-de-sac
with a 10 foot clear radius around the hydrant. Does that have to be specified?
Paul Krauss: We got it down to 7 conditions.
Councilwoman Dimler: Oh, where are you?
Paul Krauss: It was intially quite a bit longer but the plan was amended before
you got to see it so it's on page 8 and 9 of the staff report.
Councilman Workman: That was the Planning Commission right?
Councilman Johnson: Five conditions for wetland alteration permit and 7 for the
plat.
Councilman Workman: The Planning Commission didn't make any changes-then?
' Ragan Roos: No.
Gary Warren: TO answer that question another way, plans and specs review would
also look at that.
Mayor C oriel: Any other discussion? Bill, you've got something?
Councilman Boyt: Sure. Tam, you've got something?
Councilman Workman: I was just going to ask Paul, I'm not clear as far as what
we're going to be doing. He said that the cul-de-sac will affect the wetland?
I43
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989 =`
v
Paul Krauss: No. The cul-de-sac won't directly. The alteration permit is
because it's going to be grading activity within 200 feet of it. We'll make
sure that there's erosion control but the only physical thing that's going to
happen in the wetland is that there's a storm...outlet into a corner of the
wetland.
Councilman Workman: I thought you said it was going to fill some of it?
Paul Krauss: No. The original plan had a potential for doing that.
Roman Roos: Tom, that's a blacktop road running along that western front of the
property. We'll be putting a Type III erosion control barrier all the way along
the inside edge of that road if you will which would totally preclude anything I
going into the wetland area. But the holding pond he's talking about on the
drainage plan that I think you have a reduced size there, there is a holding
pond that's going to pick up the retainage surface water runoff of this site II
along Lake Lucy Road and of course run underneath a culvert underneath Lake
Lucy, the cul-de-sac coming in and then along across to the holding pond. Then
from the holding pond, then into the wetland areas so it's a settlement,
basically a settlement pond.
Gary Warren: If the alternate road concept here that Paul has volunteered would
came to pass sometime in the future, it might be appropriate since the real
interest even in the first submittals here was to try to minimize the curbcuts
on Lake Lucy Road. It might be appropriate to have a condition that if that
road does materialize, that the current home be required to connect to that road
and that this connection to Lake Lucy Road then would be abandoned. I think
it'd be a more direct access to that property anyway.
Mayor Cimiel: Do you have any concerns about that? '
Raman Roos: Again, Dick I'll refer that to you. We do have, it's a blacktop
paved driveway at this point in time on that easement on the west hand side.
Dick, what about that?
Dick Ersbo: I'm Dick ESrsbo. I'm the owner. The blacktop road going down the
side is going to be a private road and number 2 block, where my house is, it's
not going to be touched. It'd not going to be developed. I'm only interested
in the front to get developed. I'm only interested in getting a little tax
relief and I'm tired of being a caretaker. Right now this is the third time
this was going to be approved. It's been approved twice before and we've got it
the best right now and the way we got that thing set up with the cul-de-sac,
facing these homes. The way it was before, the back of the homes would be
facing Lucy Lake Road which would be terrible driving down Lucy Lake. This way
it's going to look nice.
Councilman Johnson: Dick, the question is, you see the green line going from '
Powers down around your house and back over to Lake Lucy. That's a potential
future road.
Gary Warren: We're not going to...with this at all. I'm just saying if that
doesn't, the driveway and this house sweeps around and actually is on the south
side of the house isn't it? So I'm just saying, if indeed this materializes, I
44
/
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989
IIand who knows. That's going to take some doing too but the interest in doing a
road of this nature and our initial review of the plat and we're trying to get
the access in here was to eliminate this.
Dick Ersbo: That has nothing to do with me. It's not even going to be on oux
property.
Raman Roos: ...if that green line becomes a road in the future, they'd like to
consider the possibility of that blacktop driveway being wiped out.
Dick Ersbo: Heck, I'll give them the blacktop driveway if you want to maintain
it.
Councilman Johnson: We don't want the blacktop driveway.
Dick Ersbo: I'll give it to you. I can see where Lucy Lake is up in the red
there and, that's no problem I don't think. As far as I'm concerned it isn't.
Roman Roos: Gary, probably the biggest concern would be the elevation change.
Dick Ersbo: What you've got to understand is where my house is and where those
lots are in front there, you've got what is it? About a 25 feet raising that's
almost impossible with those other 2 council guys, well the Planning Camiission.
' The ones before was talking about putting another round cul-de-sac in there.
Well, you'd be better off putting a ski jump in there. This is the only
practical way that this will work and it's better looking. I'm not a
professional developer and a lot of these things I'm learning from just by doing
things like this.
Councilman Johnson: What we're saying is some time in the future, years from
now. Who knows when. It could be next month. Who knows. Somebody's going to
want to develop some other property and this green line may become a road
running right next to your property.
Dick Ersbo: Heck, as far as I'm concerned, it's okay. They can take it.
Councilman Johnson: Okay, what we want to do is make a condition because the
less amount of roads that go onto Lake Lucy, the safer Lake Lucy is. So what
we'd like to do is make a condition that if that road is built, that you would
connect your driveway onto this new green road versus going out your private
' drive to Lake Lucy.
Dick Ersbo: That'd be fine but if you go over and look at where that blacktop
' road is, you'll see that you've got a big problem there and it's not going to be
feasible.
Councilman Johnson: You mean where that green line is?
Dick Ersbo: Because of the hill there.
Councilman Johnson: It may not ever be feasible.
Dick Ersbo: Well, if you want to think long enough. Get about a thousand
trucks out there to take that dirt away.
45
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989
Gary Warren: It will all depend on what the road grade is. There may be enough
challenge to...
Dick Ersbo: I've got no objections later on but right now I'm not going t
9 objections g g n9 0
develop that back part there.
Councilman Johnson: Do you own that too?
Dick Ersbo: Yes. I own that.
Councilman Johnson: To the south?
Dick Ersbo: I own the home there. That's where I live. 1
Councilman Johnson: No, further south.
Dick Ersbo: No, I don't own that. That's Kerbers.
Mayor Chmiel: Larry owns that to the south. ,
Gary Warren: He owns to the south along Powers Blvd. but I don't think...
Paul Krauss: Actually I think it's Ortenblat. '
Councilman Johnson: I don't think he's in any great hurry to develop that
property to tell you the truth. I don't see a problem there. I think that has
answered my question.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any other further discussion? ,
Councilman Boyt: Yes. How wide is the blacktop now?
Dick Ersbo: It's got to be about 18 foot wide roughly. I
Councilman Boyt: It's my understanding that 3 houses can access off a private
drive?
Paul Krauss: The subdivision code I believe says 4.
Councilman Boyt: Four? Do we need any additional right-of-way if 4, are we '
going to be satisfied with 4 houses accessing off an 18 foot piece,of asphalt?
If they came in with 3 more houses that they were going to use for whatever
reason?
Gary Warren: If he'd further subdivide Block 2?
Councilman Boyt: Yes. I know it's never going to happen and all this sort of '
thing but if it did, conceiveably 4 houses could access off this private drive.
Gary Warren: I think there's a 30 foot right-of-way.
Paul Krauss: Could we approach that a little differently though? Right now the
ordinance does say, there's that anomaly and it does require a variance to get
46 I
City Council Meeting L. November 20, 1989 - `'
any of these. We're going to bring you a comprehensive change in the Code that
looks at the entire issue of how to access lots such as this. I don't know what
the number will be on how many we would propose you allow but there certainly
would be road design standards that would be required if these things were
allowed to occur. For example, if you have more than one house on a private -
driveway, it should be paved to a width of 18 feet so you can get a fire truck..
down it. Built to a 7 ton design. Those are the kind of things we'll be
bringing up in this ordinance proposal.
Councilman Boyt: Okay, well that's good but we don't have it so my question is,
is 18 feet wide enough? I know it is for your current needs and I'm not
proposing that you go out and pave it to 24 feet tomorrow. I'm simply saying
that for the City's, from the City's standpoint, are we protected? Are we going
to be able to have a sufficient road here if for some reason it would have 4
houses on the end of it or do we need same easement that we don't now have?
Gary Warren: As you're well aware, our standard right-of-way is 50 in the urban
' area with curb and gutter. If you would allow this to subdivide, and I think —
the land would be in question whether it would even allow that with the
topography there but if you would give than a rural section. I mean a rural
standard is 60 foot right-of-way with a 24 foot paved surface. I would say that
it would be pretty reasonable. That he's very close. I think within the 30
foot right-of-way you could do a private drive that would access the property
reasonably.
Councilman Boyt: I'm just thinking of the situation we have off Frontier Trail
there where Brad put in those houses. Now I have a question for staff. When
you discussed flag lots, one of the questions that I have about flag lots is
where are your setbacks? Where do you measure them from? That's not clear in
Ithe ordinance right now. We don't have flag lots now so we don't need it.
Paul Krauss: That's another thing that we would have to address.
ICouncilman Boyt: I think when you're looking at that, figure the answer out to
that one. Do we have, I haven't seen this or I haven't gone out and walked this
particular piece of property but generally aren't there trees in this area?
IRaman Roos: Actually there's two comments. You can see the topo here and the
lines get narrow and it's a pretty severe grade. Okay? This basically is
coming to a hilltop in this area. This grade comes around and...so that
addresses your first question. The probability of subdividing this downstream
is...but we do have a 30 foot access which I think we can meet'.
Councilman Boyt: That's covered. Let's talk trees.
Roman Roos: Okay, as you walk up this tree line, this is a fairly open area
with no trees on it. As you get about halfway up this hill, you'll start seeing
the treeline coming at it. That was addressed at the Planning Commission and
one of the criteria was that we would take staff out there to try to create a no
build type line on that hillside so I think that's the way we brought it in.
But there's no trees down here whatsoever. It's just on the hillside.
Councilman Boyt: Right which is where you're putting your cul-de-sac and
several houses.
I47
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989 l' = ' `r ,
0
Paul Krauss: Councilman Boyt, we did look at that and there's no question there
are scree trees that are going to be lost as a result of this. However, the '!
grading requirements of this plat are pretty similar to the grading requirements
of the approved plat. That hill is being cut back to about the same point as it
was on the original proposal.
Councilman Boyt: Since the original proposal came in I think we've developed a
little bit better sense of what we want to do with trees. I referenced here to
just 2 weeks ago when we went through this and some of the things you had in
there you don't have here. I'm just a little curious why we don't have then. I
think that one of the things, certainly when you do this review with staff, that
all the trees that are going to be saved have to be staked off at the drip line
prior to grading.
Roman Roos: Bill, I understand your concern with trees and I surely am one as
you know from my last one...so I can relate to the cause for trees. When you '
take a site of this nature with the topography we've got on that site and make
it useable and marketable, which is what development is all about, either for
the private individual or for the developer, there is a point where you have to
draw a line where same trees have to go.
Councilman Boyt: Right. I understand that.
Raman Roos: This hillside is extremely and we're willing to work with staff but
there's got to be same reasonable, we're cutting part of that hill away
naturally as you can see on the grading plan that you've got a copy of Bill so
we do have to shift that line somewhat.
Councilman Boyt: Well I'm not saying you can't cut any trees down Roman. What
I'm saying is when you decide what trees you're going to save, let's be sure
they're saved. The other thing that I liked and we put in this development a
few weeks ago was a situation about tree replacement. When you remove trees I
believe that was 10 inches. You were going to look at replacing. I think we
should have comparable sorts of language in all our proposals. That's city
ordinance. I'm talking about when you remove trees Raman that you should be
replacing then. Now you don't have to replace them caliper inch for caliper
inch. Not only would that be impossible, it would be extremely expensive but I
think you have to replace them not with a comparable size tree but with trees
that amount to a comparable caliper inches when you divide them out. I think I
would like to encourage staff when they do this tree review to be particularly
careful to note trees that are 20 inches or greater in diameter. = :
Dick Ersbo: No more trees will be cut down than is necessary. ,
Councilman Boyt: I appreciate that but if I had a dollar for every time I've
heard it, I wouldn't have to do this. '
Roman Roos: On the...which is the entrance if you will, we will do same tree...
so I know your point and like I said, I've been on both sides of the table. I
know what you're saying. Again, to make this marketable, we're going to be
doing sane landscaping on it Bill and we'll work with staff as best we can but . i
we axe going to have to take same trees. I don't know if there will be anything a1
of that size... '
48 1
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989
0,
I
Councilman Boyt: I'm not telling you, I don't think the Council even if I
wanted to, tell you you can't cut trees. Yes, you can cut down trees. I'm
saying that these trees represent investment in the whole community. You own
them but the community benefits from them.
' Dick Ersbo: Cutting the trees down will cut down the beauty of this property.
I don't want to cut these trees down unless it's a necessity.
Councilman Boyt: I would propose two conditions be added to the list. One of
them I think you agree with completely and that's staking off the trees at the
drip line that are to be saved. The second one, I don't know what the council
feels about this but I think anything over 10 inches should be replaced by other
trees. Not meaning they have to be equal caliper inch. The total caliper
inches need to add up to that same thing. That's what we put in there 2 weeks
' ago I believe with that one. The earlier proposal and I think it should be in
this one. What's the sense of the Council on those?
Councilman Johnson: I'd say 6 inches maybe rather than 10.
Mayor Chmiel: Where will those trees get put once they get cut? Who's
determination where they go?
' Councilman Boyt: I think the developer can determine where they go and I'm sure
the developer will put them where they'll be most advantageous to the
homeowners.
Paul Krauss: The front 4 lots will have no vegetation on them at all. In fact
they are attempting to build a little bit of a berm between the lot and Lake
' Lucy so some of the trees could certainly go up in that area.
Raman Roos: I think our next step will be to work up an overall landscape...
' Bill I read you loud and clear.
Councilman Boyt: I think the DNR Forester will come out and tell you which
trees won't make it and suggest all kinds of things like that. Usually we put
in the DNR forester should work with you in developing a plan.
Mayor Chmiel: Any other further discussion?
' Councilman Johnson: I'll move with Bill's two additions.
Councilman Workman: Second.
Councilman Johnson: And the third addition from staff on the access for the
future road and what are you waving for?
Paul Krauss: Street name.
' Councilman Johnson: Street name to Arlington Court.
Councilman Workman: South?
49
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989
R'
Councilman Johnson: I don't care. v ,
Whj have it different than the one on the
other side of the street?
Mi
Councilman Hoyt: Why don't we let the fire marshall decide.
Councilman Johnson: Yeah. If the fire marshall wants to call it south. I
think anything south of TH 5 is south.
Councilman Workman: I wanted to ask Raman why he wanted Eagle. 1
Councilman Johnson: Because he likes the crackers.
Mayor Chmiel: Because he doesn't want to be with turkeys like us. '
Councilman Workman: He's got an eagle fettish.
Raman Roos: Could I make just a comment on your motion? Or your amendment to '
the motion? Is that in order Mr. Mayor?
Mayor Chmiel: If you can understand what our motion is, you can respond to '
that.
Roman Roos: In regards to the proposed green road in the future. We have spent
quite a lot on that blacktop road coming in right now and of course I would
think, I understand what staff is trying to do in terms of curb cuts on
Lake Lucy but at the same token, if you notice the length of that driveway,
there's a tremendous expense at this point in time and for him to have to negate
that road or recut a new road down if it is indeed possible which we don't know
at this point in time, I would say he would at lesat look at that possibility
but at the same token there is a major cost factor involved so I don't know Jay
if we can make that a condition of your motion. At least that's my feeling at
this point in time. Now perhaps when something happens with the:Ortenblat
situation, maybe at that point in time but I would hate very much to have that
be a condition of the motion at this point.
Councilman Johnson: To tell you the truth, it's kind of a useless condition in
that your plat will be completely built and all the houses will probably be on
it prior to that road even being around but what we're establishing is the
intent so that in the future if that road canes in there, and it's a reasonable
thing to connect to, that the future Council will have something to say. Okay,
we gave you something, you're giving us something. We give you a variance so
that you can have that road now without having to go through your new •
subdivision and ruining your new subdivision. We're giving you something. What
we're saying is that we want something in return and that something in return is
if in the future that road goes through, we will make Lake Lucy a little bit
safer for the drivers of this town and he'll get a better access out to Powers.
Roman Roos: I understand what you're saying Jay but again there's a tremendous
amount of economics in it and I think we would definitely do that kind of thing
if indeed it happened in the future but I would think there would have to be
same kind of economic consideration because we have spent a lot of money to date
on that road.
50 1
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989
Y
Councilman Johnson: The economic consideration would came from sate future,
future Council.
Raman Roos: I understand but as long as that's part of it.
Councilman Johnson: Well yeah. There's always the reasonableness has to be w
brought into it. What we're saying is that this is the plan at this time. If
in the future it's going to cost you $100,000.00 to do it, obviously they're not
going to make you do it. No reasonable Council would and I would assume this
' town's only going to elect reasonable Councils.
Gary Warren: Maintenance cost savings could equal the cost of a new road over
several years too. That's a long driveway.
Roman Roos: But again, I just wanted to make that comment to your motion. I
understand what you're saying Jay.
Councilman Johnson moved, Councilman Boyt seconded to approve Subdivision #87-36
as presented on the plat stamped "Received October 11, 1989" with a variance to
allow a 30 foot lot width on Lot 1, Block 2, subject to the following
conditions:
1. Provide final detailed plans of the streets and utility improvements.
2. Lots 1 and 6, Block 1 are to gain access solely by driveway to Eagle Circle.
Access to Lake Lucy Road is prohibited. A notice of this limitation should
' be placed in shared title of both lots.
3. Provide final erosion control plans acceptable to staff. Type III erosion
i control will be required along the western perimeter of the site adjacent to
the wetland. Prior to the initiation of grading, staff• will walk the site
with the developer to mark out trees designated for preservation. Staff
will modify the plans as required to improve tree preservation efforts.
Drainage swales are to be provided around each of the homes. The berm
located in the Lake Lucy Road right-of-way is to be relocated onto Lot 1,
Block 1.
4. Provide final drainage plans for approval by City Staff. Watershed District
approval is required.
' S. Easements to be provided:
' a. Right-of-way for Eagle Circle.
b. Request the City Council vacate right-of-way for existing streets and
easements approved under the original plat.
c. Utility easements are required for the proposed watermain and sanitary
sewer pipes on Lot 6, Block 1; Lot 1, Block 2; and based upon final
engineering design may be required over an adjacent parcel to the west.
d. Drainage and utility easements are required over the pond and storm
sewer pipes on Lot 6, Block 1; Lot 1, Block 2; and based upon final
51
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989
engineering design may be required over an adjacent parcel to the west.
e. Standard utility easements around the perimeter of each lot. '!
6. Enter into a development contract with the City.
7. Compliance with the conditions of Wetland Alteration Permit #88-7.
8. Change the street name to Arlington Court. '
9. At such time as a new public street is provided to the south of Lake Lucy
Road, the private driveway currently serving the existing home shall be
removed and the driveway shall access to the south off the new public
street.
- 10. Stake off the trees to be saved at the dripline. t '
11. All trees 10" or more in caliper need to be replaced.
All voted in favor and the motion carried. '
Councilman Johnson: I will move the wetland alteration permit. '
Councilman Boyt: I will second that. I think we should add a skimmer. They
talked about a skimmer. They pulled the skimmer out.
Councilman Johnson: Why don't we have a skimmer? I missed the skimmer.
Roman Roos: We've got a sedimentation pond. A skimmer's cost is not that great
but that's really the purpose for a sedimentation pond before it outlets into
the Watershed. .
Councilman Boyt: And that's what the skimmer does isn't it? It ensures that
the sedimentation pond is doing it's job.
Roman Roos: Not necessarily. If the skimmer's used on a main outflow into an '
watershed type situation, all we did was put a sedimentation pond in it's place.
It was a reco mmendation of Planning Ca►misssion if I recall Paul, but again
knowing what they do and how they function and I guess engineering, Gary can
address that issue. That skimmer's really not going to perform any real •
function as it sets as we've got it laid out on a drainage situation. Gary?
Gary Warren: I don't know all the details of a skimmer. I would suggest that
when plans and specs came back, we will definitely be looking at along with the
Watershed District to have the appropriate, whether it's a skimmer or not. Tb
have the appropriate facility put in.
Councilman Boyt: The City has put that in several of it's holding ponds.
Gary Warren: And I've been on record, I don't like the wood skimmers because
they're going to be, not too far in the distance we're going to have a lot of
repairs and maintenance on them but I'd say, the plans and specs phase would be
appropriate to work out that detail.
52 ,
l
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989
1
Councilman Johnson: Which Watershed District has this?
't
Gary Warren: Their boundaries, we just got, this actually flows, that wetland
flows up ultimately to Christmas Lake so that's Minnehaha Creek but the boundary
from what Mr. Quanbeck has told me, doesn't necessarily follow. My gut reaction
is that it's Minnehaha but it could be in Riley-Purgatory.
Councilman Johnson: So I have some review of the skimmer.
Gary Warren: You may have some influence.
Councilman Johnson moved, Councilman Hoyt seconded to approve Wetland Alteration
Permit Request #88-7 as presented on the plat stamped Received October 11,
1989", subject to the following conditions:
' 1. Acquisition of a drainage easement from the adjacent property owner.
2. Approval of a permit from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources.
3. Creation of a storm water retention pond in the northwest corner of Lot 6,
Block 1.
4. Installation of Type III erosion control between the development and the
Class A wetland.
5. Canpliance with conditions of the Preliminary Plat #87-36.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
CONSIDER PLUMBING PERMIT FEE REVISION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF A PIPING FEE.
Councilman Johnson: Can I ask a question? Why aren't we doing this with our
normal fee review that we do every January?
Don Ashworth: This is a new fee schedule. Jim is present. Do you want to go
through it Jim?
' Councilman Johnson: It seems that that would be a logical time to implement a
new fee when we review all our fees. Maybe not.
Jim Chaffee: I didn't quite hear your question or what the answer was. This is
a new fee that we're asking be implemented.- One is a new fee and another is a
revision of the plumbing fee. We've not revised the plumbing fee structure for
quite a while. Our plumbing inspector took a look at this several months ago.
Asked if they could cage up with a schedule that would be conducive more to what
they do and also more in like with what the other cities in our surrounding
areas are doing. They have done that and after considerable amount of research,
they have revised the plumbing permit fee schedule to reflect more of what we do
and they've also asked that we implement a gas piping fee schedule which we've
never had in the City of Chanhassen. We didn't even look at this until we
Ustarted doing our mechanical inspections ourselves. I think it's a needed area.
53
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989 °' ` s !
They've asked the Council to approve it so they can get on with their business.
In doing this, they have indicated that they would spread the tax burden
amongst, well to take the tax burden away from the citizens of Chanhassen and
put it on the developers so all the citizens are not burdened with this tax
issue. So everybody's not paying for the select few people who use our
services. It's just like any other user fee.
Councilman Johnson: Sounds good to me.
Councilman Boyt: Okay, I'll ask a question. How much did your fees collected, ,
if you know off hand, exceed your expenses last year for the building
department?
Jim Chaffee: In 1988?
Councilman Boyt: Sure.
Jim Chaffee: I'm guessing around $149,000.00-$150,000.00. State that question
again Bill?
Councilman Hoyt: How much did your fee income exceed expenses in 1988? '
Jim Chaffee: Just for code enforcement I would guess about $300,000.00.
Councilman Boyt: Okay. This is too good an opportunity to pass up. This is
crazy. I'll say it one more time. The building department is subsidizing the
City and we've got to cut that out. To come back now and for the building
department to say well we need more money, they're not spending what they're
bringing in now. They're not spending, well if you've got $300,000.00 more that
you're bringing in than you're expending, now to came back and say, well if we
don't charge this, the taxpayers are going to be underwriting it is a joke. The
building inspection department is underwriting the city. So that's one problem.
I wish we could resolve it. We ought to resolve it but there's another problem
that I think is just as big and that is that people routinely in my estimation
wire their house, plumb their house, build their decks and they don't came in
and get a permit. Then there may be the question of when they do came in and
get the permit, maybe we don't do the inspection. I'm not sure about that one
but I know that a good many of than do it without getting the permit. We have
to address that and I don't mean by going in and inspecting door to door but we
have to figure out a way to let people know that this service is available to
than and the advantages of using it and we've got to make it cheap enough so
they will use it because they'll see the advantages outweighing the cost.'
There's no question we should, in my mind, that we should be doing the
inspections that you're recommending that we do. Ma two questions are, one. We
sure as heck don't need to charge more permit fees because we're bringing in
more than we're spending now. Two, we've got to get people to use them. New
homeowners or new home builders undoubtedly use it but what about the citizen
who's putting in a new piece of wiring to wire a flourescent lamp or plumbing
something or building a deck so I don't think we're really addressing the
problems that we've got with this particular thing. I can't vote to support it
when we're bringing in more money than we're spending.
!!
Councilman Workman: I'm not sure Bill I understand the second part of that.
54
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989 - "
M
� { Councilman Boyt: Bringing in more money than we're spending?
Councilman Workman: No. That's the first part. The second part being the
people who are plumbing their own thing, wiring their own thing.
Councilman Johnson: Different issue.
Councilman Boyt: Well it's really not addressed by this but it touches on it
and I'm just saying that somehow we're not matching up with those folks. I
think they're not coming in to get permits. I don't know.
Councilman Johnson: Sane do. Sane don't.
' Councilman Boyt: And they should. It's a safety issue. So how do we get them
to do that? How do we get then to know they have to do that? That's a separate
issue.
' Councilman Workman: I guess I've never met a fee I like and so the issue of the
building department subsidizing the city I think might be appropriate now. I
don't know about later.
' Councilman Boyt: When's later?
Councilman Workman: I mean it's going to rise and it's going to fall so later
it's not going to be subsidizing.
Councilman Boyt: Right, so then what do we do for money? What would you do if
It suddenly, for same reason there was a stop in new home construction? We would
lose $300,000.00 that we're now funding the City with. It would be gone. To me
that sounds like when you're running your basic city services out of money that
1 canes in on a fee structure, we're at risk.
Councilman Workman: Yeah, and I understand that. I'm just'saying right now we
have a glut of it and when we don't have a glut of it, we're not going to have
this $300,000.00 but does that still, I still see that as maybe being a little
bit separate from this also.
Councilman Boyt: Well you're saying add to it.
Councilman Workman: What. I'm saying is and what the Public Safety Department is
saying, the building official is saying, right now we're all being charged for
when somebody has this done and it's unlike everything else Wre having people
do. We're charging them a fee but for these things, we're all paying for it.
So regardless of how much money we're taking in, and I understand that as being
an issue. I think the real issue is, should these people be paying for this
themselves when they have it done or shouldn't they. I think separate of your
issue of the fact that the City is basing all this on should I be paying and
subsidizing when somebody has plumbing, gas piping or a fireplace done.
Councilman Boyt: But you're not.
' Councilman Workman: Well as it states here I am.
1
55
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989 -" r 1
Councilman Boyt: But they're wrong. They're wrong because they're bringing in 1
$300,000.00 that they're not even spending. So when they go out and do these
inspections, maybe they're taking it out of that $300,000.00 but they're sure as
heck not taking it out of anything we pay.
Councilman Workman: But you're talking now. I'm talking what about in the
future. ,
Councilman Boyt: I'm talking about now. I'm talking about last year. I'm
talking about the year before that. How fax back do you want to go?
Councilman Johnson: He wants to go the other way.
Councilman Workman: I want to go forward. 1
Councilman Johnson: 2 years from now when the housing's way down.
Councilman Boyt: If that should happen to us, the way we run the budget on this I
item today, are you going to choose to not plow the streets or not have a police
contract or what are you going to give up because you're not going to have the
money because these guys are underwriting you and now they're coming back and
they're saying well other communities are charging for this, we should charge
it. I agree with that part of what you said. We should unless you run a
$300,000.00 surplus and then how do you justify it? We're not adding to staff
to do this are we? There you go. They've already covered themselves and
they're running a $300,000.00 surplus and they're saying give us more. I can't
buy it.
Councilman Johnson: We should run the finances of our city pure. Not like the
rest of the world =but a little more pure and be purely legal and...pay for what
services those folks get. We shouldn't have this surplus. Which would mean
increased taxes to the rest of us in comparison to Eden Prairie,and everybody
else who also is in the same boat we're in. It's probably universal throughout
almost any city as an income maker in the inspections department. '
Mayor Chmiel: Jim, what's our average cost for an inspection of a residential
and commercial businesses?
Jim Chaffee: I don't know if I can answer that just right off hand.
Councilman Workman: It's like this community unity center that's being proposed.
Same parts of the community center make money and pay for the otheNs. Some
don't so we're not ever going to wash that out you know. I'm not going to stand
here and defend the fee, that's for sure. That's not what I'm defending. '
Councilman Boyt: What are you defending?
Councilman Workman: I defending the logic of what we have and should we choose '
to ignore this half because of this pile of money that we're sliding around City
Hall and I'm looking to the future to say well we have the money now but we
aren't going to have it later. Can we then cane back and say because we'll all
be on the Council in 10 years or whatever. Then we'll be able to say, see we
told you but now we're going to have to start getting and pulling these fees out
of everywhere else.
56 1
' City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989 -" ~ +-
m
Councilman Boyt: Well when it's a fee for service situation given that you need
some sort of surplus there so you can absorb...for slow down periods but
' generally if the need for the service declines, then you cut back. That's a
variable cost so you cut back in your inspection staff. What we're doing now is
if there's a decline, we cut back in hard city service and the stuff that we all
' think our tax dollars are paying for.
Councilman Johnson: Or we increase taxes.
Councilman Boyt: Or we increase taxes.
Don Ashworth: I don't know if I would really agree with that Bill. From the
t standpoint that over the last 2-3 years surpluses that have been built up, I've
advised the Council do not spend these dollars on reoccuring operational
expenditures because you don't know if you're going to get then again. So some
' of the areas that we've spent those dollars on are the addition to City Hall. I
mean that's $550,000.00 just in the physical plan not including any type of
desks and anything else. That's really not in Jim's number. We fund the
equipment purchases out of a separate fund. That's not in those numbers. I
' would say if there is a down point, you're not going to have those surpluses
that we've built up over the years but I don't know that I'd be willing to state
that we're going to have to give up hard services for that. I don't know that
' I'm in a position to totally agree or totally disagree but I mean I question the
total logic there. I'd like to respond to that part of the question. I'd like
to research that issue a little bit further.
' Councilman Boyt: You've looked at this issue for 3 years. There's nothing new
about this issue and you're telling me you still don't know?
' Don Ashworth: I don't think that the numbers that I had presented to you a year
ago were that far off as far as being a great moneymaker. I thought that we
had continued to close that gap as far as the difference between the amount of
' money taken in from revenue and the expenditures associated with the inspection
department.
' Councilman Boyt: I agree that you've worked to close the gap. I agree with you
there. I'm just saying there's still a gap and how do we justify charging
people more when we're taking in more money than they're spending. That's my
point. I mean you guys can vote anyway that you see it.
Mayor Chniel: Good. Jim, in determining these fees that you-did come up with.
Is this out of the UBC?
' Jim Chaffee: Portions are out of the tBC but the plumbing portion is based on
surrounding communities. What we've traditionally had and the percentage
' inflation factor for the past several years that this has been revised.
Mayor Chmiel: In comparison with the other communities, where are we at with
what we have existing? What you're proposing, is this where we're the two
' differences are?
Jim Chaffee: Right. Where we are at right now is the lowest. What we are
1 proposing is in the middle range, slightly on the low end of the middle range.
' 57
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989 ""
1
Mayor Chmiel: How many communities did you review to come up with the
conclusion?
Jim Chaffee: That I'm not sure.
Mayor Chmiel: Eden Prairie is mentioned in there. I'm wondering if there are
anymore besides Eden Prairie like Bloomington or Burnsville.
Jim Chaffee: I think they looked at, I'm guessing but I think they looked at
growing camunities like Eagan, Inver Grove Heights, Lakeville.
Mayor Chmiel: On the gas segment of this. Has Minnegasco done any of those
inspections when they come in to connect or when they bring in that meter. Do
they do any kind of inspections at all?
Jim Chaffee: Not for Code, no. We do that. '
Councilwoman Dimler: I have one question Jim. I don't know if these figures
are good or bad but do you have any evidence...development? '
Jim Chaffee: No, we haven't seen that. We went through this when we raised the
building permit fees about 2 1/2-3 years ago. Didn't scare off anybody.
Councilman Boyt: I'm sure they'll pay it.
Jim Chaffee: What we did then is we just increased the fees to match the UBC at
that time. So what they were getting as a bargain, now what they were paying
for throughout the entire state.
Councilman Johnson: This won't slow down our growth. '
Mayor Chmiel: No. The only thing I was thinking was how long does it take an
inspector to do that inspection and what does it cost that we pay that inspector
for that?
Jim Chaffee: Those figures I don't have right before me but I think I can get
those. There's like 2 or 3 times you have to go back for a plumbing inspection.
Heating inspection you have to go back twice. We have all those.
Mayor Chmiel: Are all those additional trips taken into consideration as well? '
•
Jim Chaffee: Right. When I get those figures, we would take those trips into
consideration as far as our cost goes. As far as manpower. '
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any other questions?
Councilman Workman: I guess I see it as fitting in line with everything else '
that we're doing. Not proud of that fact but the issue of where we stand with
our fees, fees for services and our reliance on them for our budget, I guess I
would like to see if they've been done in the past 3 years. Maybe it's time I
saw same of it but I don't...
Mayor Chmiel: Is that it?
58 ,
r � �
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989 R
Councilman Workman: Yeah. I just don't know how, I mean I'm not sure that I
quite follow Bill's logic. I see the things in there and why but to charge for
some services and not for others, maybe we need to charge for this and lower the
cost of all the
others if we want to bring that surplus down or something but .,
' we're taking a certain segment of the building out and we're not charging a fee
for it.
Councilman Johnson: There's some inspections that I know we're spending more
' money on. Say what I paid for my building permit and they've came out twice
already to do inspections and they have one more yet to do if I ever get back to
getting the dry wall finished. For these little fix it up your own self home
jobs, what you pay for a building inspection is far less than what the City puts
into it but for a new home, it may go the other way.
Mayor Qr►iel: So what you're saying is it egializes maybe one to the other?
Councilman Johnson: A little. I think we are at this point in our town doing
some subsidizing. I believe that every other town in the Twin Cities and the
state of Minnesota is probably doing exactly the sane thing. I don't want to be
actually the first one to be completely pure with our budget the way it is right
now.
Councilman Boyt: If I could make one more attempt at explaining the logic. I
agree with you that there should be a fee for inspections. That we certainly
should be inspecting these two areas. What we're really doing is taxing new
' homeowners and I think we need to be very careful when we do that. How do we
justify increasing a tax when we are making a substantial income over
expenditure surplus? I mean if you want to take it out of same other area and
' call it plumbing and gas piping fees, that's fine by me. I'm just saying that
how can we justify to new home owners we just increased the cost of moving than
to Chanhassen and we're already making, cut it in half. $150,000.00 over what
it costs us to do this.
' Mayor Qr►iel: But you're talking Bill about a $103.00 difference in that new
home price that you're talking.
' Councilman Boyt: Well, whether it's $10.00 or $300.00, we've got a surplus and
we're not adding to staff. Add somebody to staff. Justify your need for...
' Mayor Ctmiel: No, we don't need to do that.
Councilman Boyt: Another way of looking at this is that we're demanding these
' inspections out of our existing staff. Well anyway, my plan would be to vote
against this. I think we have to send a signal to the City that more is too
much.
Mayor Chmiel: Alright. Do you want to discuss this more?
' Councilman Johnson: I don't.
Councilman Workman: I'd move approval.
Councilman Johnson: I'll second that.
' 59
City Council Meeting - Novetber 20, 1989 `"1
Resolution #89-131: Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to
approve the revised plumbing permit fee schedule as indicated by staff and
approve the gas piping permit to include the associated fees as indicated by
staff. All voted in favor except Councilman Boyt who opposed and the motion
carried with a vote of 4 to 1.
COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS:
Mayor Chmiel: Bill, get your Public Safety Minutes.
Councilman Boyt: Okay, this is quick. Jim already is working out an answer to
this but the Public Safety Commission asked me to come to the Council and seek
Council direction on whether or not you want to continue to have the Minutes
typed. It's expensive and there was some question as to whether there might not
be better alternatives that would be less expensive so that's why I brought it
here.
Councilman Johnson: But you're doing that with building permit money though. '
Mayor C mie1: I would make a motion that we continue with the verbatim Minutes,
or that's my feeling.
Councilman Whitman: How did that discussion came up?
Mayor Cmiel: I was at that meeting too. It was, depending upon how it was
discussed back and forth.
Councilman Workman: I mean it was brought up as an agenda item? '
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah.
Councilman Workman: But a group?
Councilman Boyt: I might have brought it up. I don't remember honestly.
Councilman Workman: And what was the, they voted on it?
Councilman Boyt: Dick Wing said, I want you to go to the City Council and find
out what they want, as I recall. I don't have the Minutes yet.
Councilman Workman: I might add that HRA on Thursday approved verbatim Minutes.
Mayor Chmiel: Right and I think we should have them.
Councilman Workman: They felt that there's a lot more legalies and commitments
in words that they're saying and they thought that maybe they ought to have them
because things are getting left out.
Mayor Chmiel: If you don't have full verbatim Minutes, you don't get the full
picture of what the discussion was. It's their interpretation of whoever is
pulling those Minutes together.
60 1
7
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989
Councilman Johnson: I do not want to see Dick Wing's Minutes.
Councilman Boyt: An alternative would be, certainly there are some items the
' Public Safety Commission discusses that are going to end up on your agenda and
you want that but one alternative was that the Minutes would be taped. The
tapes would be kept. If there was a public hearing or if there was an item that
' appeared to be controversial, that those portions of the Minutes would be typed
up. The rest of the Minutes would simply be summarized.
Mayor Chmiel: You're still not getting the full picture of what was done at
that particular meeting.
Councilman Boyt: $4,000.00 to do that.
Jim Chaffee: That's where Bill and I disagree.
' Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, there was a lot of figures being tossed back and forth on
those total dollars.
' Councilman Boyt: Ask Don.
Don Ashworth: For verbatim Minutes. The figures from finance show $3,500.00 to
$5,000.00 is my recollection.
Mayor Chmiel: I don't believe that.
Councilman Boyt: That's what's in the budget. $4,500.00.
Councilman Workman: I don't remember the last time I saw a Public Safety
Minutes.
' Mayor Chmiel: How long does it take to type up the Safety Minutes? 20 hours.
Okay. And that's normally once a month right?
Councilman Boyt: The last ones were also the shortest of the year so far.
1 (Everyone was talking amongst themselves at this point.)
Mayor Chmiel: We just did a real quick calculation here and you come up with
anywhere between $2,500.00 and $3,000.00 but I think they're worth something in
itself. You still get the full scoop of what's happening at that particular
meeting as far as the information is contained in it. If they were just to pull
the half out of the Minutes as they do in same of then, you lose some of the
thought that's there.
Councilman Boyt: You do. I agree. You do.
Mayor Chmiel: And you don't know what's happening so in my opinion, at least as
I see it, I would just as soon see the verbatim Minutes contained within.
Councilwoman Dimler: What about the issue that they come out only once a month
and a lot of times Council's already dealt with the issue before the Mintues
come out?
r
61
11
City Council Meeting L November 20; 1989 ''`
Jim Chaffee: I guess that's because I'm so quick. We did get them real quick
this time. We're going to try and get them a lot quicker so it's before the 1
Council as the issue. 11
Councilman Boyt: Zeal quick. That's October 12th. That's over a month.
Jim Chaffee: No, no. We've got what, last week's Minutes already. '
Councilman Boyt: We don't have them.
Jim Chaffee: No. I haven't sent them out yet. I just got them Friday and just
say them today but Tan saw them. He had them tonight because he had them for
the cigarette issue. The smoking issue. '
Councilwoman Dimler: So you're saying that you would have them but you're not
going to give them out but you'll work on the next Council meeting in the
packet. '
Jim Chaffee: Well ideally what we'd like to do is as an issue canes before
Council, we'd like to have the Public Safety comments with that issue. Just
like the Planning Commission or Park and Iaec Commission item would cane. That's
ideally how we'd like to do it and I think we can get that and do it. We may
have to hold back one more Council meeting than I normally like to get it before
the Council but I think it can be done.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, but you're not planning to have any to our homes or?
Jim Chaffee: No, you'll get them in the normal Council packet as it carves out
as I get them.
Councilman Boyt: Well it hasn't happened yet. That's why I'm smiling. '
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, any other discussion?
Councilman Workman: moat is again, the Public Safety's overall, they split
right?
Jim Chaffee: Yeah. If you want to table this for a second I can go upstairs
and I can tell you exactly what it is.
Councilman Boyt: Do you have the Minutes? '
Jim Chaffee: I took them back upstairs Bill.
Councilman Workman: I gave those Minutes back to you didn't I?
Jim Chaffee: Yeah. I took them upstairs again. I
Councilman Workman: No, I think they're split. I don't think it changed any
really.
Councilman Johnson: I almost like that option that something hat isn't t Doming ,.
before us could be summarized and whatever is going to be caning forth that
we'll be acting upon be typed up. Could save some money. A lot of the issues f
62 1
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989 R
R
they may, but see what they may not act on this time they may act on next time.
Mayor Chmiel: Of course sane of the things they're discussing too, to give you
a little better perception on same of the things that you're talking about and
even give you sage other insights on other things that they're talking about.
' Councilman Johnson: Unfortunately I'm so involved in so many committees and •
everything, I don't have time to read every commission's verbatim minutes. It's
just impossible.
' Mayor Chmiel: It doesn't take too long.
' Councilman Johnson: Well I can't read than as I drive to work.
Mayor Chmiel: Oh yes you can. When you sit on TH 5 like I did this morning.
' Councilman Johnson: I take TH 101. You can't read and drive on TH 101.
Councilman Boyt: So what's the wish of the Council?
Mayor Chmiel: I will make a motion to keep the verbatim Minutes with Public
Safety. Is there a second?
' Councilman Boyt: Well I'll make a motion that we go to a modified Minutes
situation with items appearing before the Council typed up and in the
appropriate Council packet and tapes kept of all meetings for referral should
' the need arise.
Councilman Workman: I guess I would just say that...
' Councilman Boyt: Well, is there a second to that?
Mayor Chmiel: It's discussion. You don't have to ask for it? Wait for it.
Councilman Johnson: I'll second it so we can get sane discussion on it.
1 Councilman Workman: I'm just unsettled because Public Safety is so unsettled
about it.
' Councilman Johnson: They're looking for same direction. Let's give than same.
Councilman Workman: I don't know. They haven't been real valuable to me
because of the timeliness and a lot of cash. I don't know. I would be in favor
' of going all the way around to less minutes. I know that isn't going to happen
real soon but that's why I'm unsettled I guess.
Councilwoman Dimler: I voted against the measure in the first place and I guess
just for consistency sake I will stay with that position. I don't have time to
read than either. I don't find then that helpful and when there is an issue, we
' can go back to the tapes and check with Jim.
Councilman Johnson: I like the modified version.
63
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989
Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah. And I do think the expense is significant if that's
actually what it is.
It
Councilman Hoyt moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to accept modified Minutes
from the Public Safety Commission with items appearing before the Council typed M
verbatim and in the appropriate Council packet and tapes kept of all meetings
for referral should the need arise. All voted in favor except Mayor Ctmiel who
opposed and the motion carried with a vote of 4 to 1.
Mayor Chnuel. Okay, let's s move onto the next one.
Ursula?
Councilwoman Dimler: About Chanhassen Tobacco Free Youth Project. Seeing that '
we just passed the ordinance of cigarette and vending machines. One of the
_recommendations was to have the community involved in a tobacco free youth
project. This would be any member of the community that would want to be 4 II
involved. It would be mainly to educate, which is what we talked about. We
need to get out there and educate and these community members would go out and
they would talk to our business people and tell them, make than aware of the
law. A lot of the►► aren't even aware of the law about the new changes and that
they are liable if they do sell to minors. Also they could get stickers that
say, put than in their store and say we check ID's which might scare the youth
to try to go and get over the counter. There's just all kinds of ideas that the
public could get involved in in helping to enforce the law and helping to
educate the adults. How we can all better deal with it. I talked to Margie
Karjalahti and she said that she would be willing to head up that project. I'm
just bringing it up for discussion. I think it's a good direction for us to go.
Councilman Workman: Police Contract. I guess I'm bringing this up because I
think the City needs to set a direction because I think we've gotten off our
direction. This goes back to the approval of the contract whence we had an
amendment to the contract for us to research the idea of getting other entities
to bid and take care of our police contract for us. A neighboring community has
taken it upon themselves, and I'm not quite sure of the details but were asked
by a person from the City of Chanhassen to research the idea of doing this for
our city. I think to the detriment of all of us. I thought we had an implicit
understanding that it wouldn't be done and it's being done. I think the Public
Safety Director backs me on this. We have in place basically a committee with
Jim and Al Wallin and I'm not sure who else to look at the situation of our
police situation. I guess I would like that to work itself through 'and wait for
those results before we, as a City Council, look to take bids and offerings from
neighboring communities. I'm perplexing you Jay.
Councilman Johnson: I'm perplexed, yes. We're taking bids?
Councilman Workman: A neighboring city has prepared a document, ever so briefly
and quickly to basically bid or take, it's telling us what's wrong and what
we're doing wrong and everything else and I think that's something...
Councilman Johnson: An unsolicited proposal?
,,
64 1
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989
Mayor Chmiel: I don't know. I'm in the process of doing some checking on that
Tcm. I'll let you know.
I Councilman Johnson: What we heard a while back was that nobody was interested
in doing this.
' Mayor Chmiel: And that's what I'm saying but I'd like to send direction to
Chaffee and Company that we're in the middle of a study but we're not taking
bids from neighboring communities yet.
' Councilman Johnson: You know we get this, this is a good bargaining chip. If
somebody sends in, we've been saying we have no bargaining chips. What have we
got to bargain with? We've got one provider providing one service and he's the
' only provider that can possibly provide that service. That's what the people
keep saying. Now we might have a bargaining chip. Not that we want to use the
chip but we might have a chip when we go to bargain on our contract. We've
never bargained on the contract. It would be kind of a new concept. You know
it's take what you can get contract.
Councilman Workman: Well Jay, what I'm saying is
Councilman Johnson: It surprises me that anybody's bidding without our fee out.
Councilman Workman: That's right and so, the community is in another county and
you know what that might create.
Jim Chaffee: Al Wallin and I have seen a copy of the study. They're not going
to provide services for us. They're not even going to recommend it. What I was
looking for is direction from the council so I could officially write to them
and say, we don't want this. Please don't even pursue it.
Councilman Workman: Because it was my understanding that to were going to be
happy with the contract and we've got a contract and when that time comes again,
sometime then we can look at it but I think for harmony sake, we ought to let a
sleeping dog lie and that's what I was hoping we were going to do. That hasn't
occurred.
' Mayor Chmiel: Let's get it on the agenda.
t Councilman Boyt: Every time we bring this up it just creates more unrest.
There is I think for the last 2 months at least, if not longer, I've been trying
to work through Public Safety and get that effort stopped. i-Wasn't•'involved in
getting it started. I don't have the slightest idea how it came to be but I
' think, Tam I agree with you that we're working on something here with the
Council in an effort to get this issue resolved. We know that it can be
extremely controversial.
Councilman Johnson: I like the committee.
Councilman Boyt: I was surprised when it came up in the Public Safety
' Commission at the last meeting and frankly disappointed that it did. I'm
disappointed that we're talking about it right now. I don't think that we need
to treat this as a serious matter. We have in front of us an opportunity to
' work with the County and we should be pursuing it.
65
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989 r _
R
Councilman Workman: I guess I would just like to, if we can, I'd just like to
direct staff at this point, basically I would call it outside interference
almost. That we weren't looking for them at this time and we're getting one and
I think it's going to cause the problems. I think we are working along.
Councilman Johnson: That little extra knowledge is going to cause a problem? '
Councilman Workman: Yeah, I think so.
Jim Chaffee: Sheriff Wallin thinks it will Jay. It's not that we're not going
to get the report. We will get the report and we will use it in our committee
to further our study efforts. What Sheriff Wallin and myself are afraid of
right now is that if it gets out to the public and the deputies are made aware
of it, there's going to be a decrease in moral. There's going to be some upset
deputies and it's not needed at this point. And the problem that I'm faced with
right now is that I'm still under the guidelines from the Council to pursue • ,
alternative police services. There was no change in that. That's what I'm
directed to do. Now if the Council decides otherwise and tells me no, I'm not
directed to pursue alternative police services, then I would feel comfortable
writing to Chief Young saying the Council has directed me not to pursue
alternative services. Please don't submit this report and I'd feel comfortable
doing that. That's where we're coming from.
Councilman Johnson: I move we suspend our rules on Council presentations and we '
move on this tonight and we direct them not to pursue this.
Councilman Workman: Second. I
Mayor Chmiel: I would fully agree.
Councilman Johnson: Keep that study committee moving on how we're going to make t
this transition in the future.
Councilman Johnson moved, Councilman Workman seconded to suspend Council rules
on Council Presentations and direct staff to not pursue alternative police
services at this time. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Mayor Chmiel: I already discussed previously when I indicated about Drug
Awareness Week so I won't have to pursue that. •
•
Jim Chaffee: Ursula's set up a, or is going to be setting up a program where
we'll have, and I think she's host of the talk show cable, and she'd ask that
representatives from the Sheriff's Department and Public Safety Department and
the Southwest Metro Drug Task Force join her on this on her cable show to
discuss Cities Fight Back Against Drugs Week. '
Mayor Chmiel: Good. All the awareness we can make people of, that's the way to
go.
Councilman Johnson: You have a cable show?
1
66
7
City Council Meeting - November 201, 1989 - " ,e-
Councilwoman Dimler: Yes, I have a cable show.
' Mayor Chmiel: We have a celebrity.
Councilwoman Workman: In Bloomington.
Councilwoman Dimler: Well we can show it on regional. We can pick it up.
Mayor Chmiel: Have we had any response from any of the other cities regarding
the letters that we sent them?
Jim Chaffee: Yes we have. Mayor Roe ke called me today from s
p today an Cha ka. He
indicated that he probably wouldn't be able to get as many red ribbons as we had
' asked for and kind of said they would do their own thing in Chaska. That he was
working through his Police thief, Greg Skol to do something. He is going to
call me next week to let me know whether he'll be at the ribbon cutting ceremony
in front of the grade school. I have not heard back from Victoria or Greenwood,
Excelsior, or Shorewood. Scott did pit out an invitations to them since they're
also involved in the Southwest Metro Drug Task Force.
I Mayor Chmiel: Do we have a great big large ribbon that we could affix to the
school?
' Jim Chaffee: It's up in my office right now.
Mayor Chmiel: Great. Wonderful.
' Councilman Johnson: Roepke was going to get you ribbons?
' Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. I had discussions with him. He and I have been talking
about this and being that he works for 3M and 3M has those ribbons, I thought
maybe we could get a good deal and he could buy it for a reasonable price. Mhch
more reasonable than what we would have had to pay.
' Councilman Johnson: I think if you went through 3M's PR people you'd probably
be better off.
Mayor Chmiel: Well, I thought of that too but they've been giving so many away,
they didn't have many left to give away.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATION: REAPPOINTMENT OF TRUNK HIGHWAY 212 CITIZENS
ADVISORY CCJMMITTEE.
' Gary Warren: An update of the staff report Mr. Mayor. Mr. Hamilton has
indicated via the City Attorney that he also would be interested in continuing
to serve on the Citizen's Advisory Committee so basically all four of the
' existing members have expressed a willingness at the Council's pleasure to
continue to serve in that role.
'
Mayor Chmiel: I would like to make sure that the people who are on that
particular committee attend those meetings. I don't know, do we get an
attendance or anything on that?
11 67
City Council Meeting - November 20, 1989 _ r,
Gary Warren: Quite honestly they've been relatively inactive for the last year
and a half or a year. They kind of get called on and that's why we want them to
update their interest here because of the EIS hearings coming up so they will
probably get more involved as we go along but there's no attendance that I'm
aware of.
Councilman Johnson: Is Chaska's old members going to be the same too do we
know?
Gary Warren: I don't know Jay what their status is.
Mayor ( vtiel: Now 4 people is what we've had. Is 4 people sufficient?
Gary Warren: From my perspective, it's probably more than enough. ,
Councilman Johnson: These axe all ex members of the Council.
Mayor Chmiel: Do we need a motion on that? I
Gary Warren: I think it'd be appropriate for the Council to reappoint.
Councilman Johnson moved, Councilman Abrtanan seconded to reappoint Tam Hamilton,
John Neveaux, Clark Horn and Al Klingelhutz to the Trunk Highway 212 Citizens
Advisory Cammittee. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
The City Council set December 11, 1989 for a budget hearing at 7:30 p.m.. 1
Councilman Johnson moved, Councilman Workman seconded to adjourn the meeting.
All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjqurned at 11:30
p.m..
Submitted by Don Ashworth
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
1
1
68
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION IFPS r
REGULAR MEETING
NOVEMBER 15, 1989 " � '
Chairman Conrad called the meeting to order at 7: 35 p.m. .
MEMBERS PRESENT: Steve Emmings, Annette Ellson, Ladd Conrad, Brian Batzli
and Jim Wildermuth
MEMBERS ABSENT: Tim Erhart •
STAFF PRESENT: Paul Krauss, Director of Planning, Todd Gerhardt, Asst.
City Manager and Sharmin Al-Jaff, Planning Intern
PUBLIC HEARING:
' WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A BOARDWALK ALONG THE
EDGE OF A CLASS A WETLAND ON PROPERTY ZONED RSF AND LOCATED AT 7280 KURVERS
POINT ROAD, WOODDALE BUILDERS.
Public Present:
Don Begin - Wooddale Builders
Sharmin Al-Jaff presented the staff report. Chairman Conrad called the
public hearing to order .
Conrad: Is the applicant here?
Don Begin: Yes.
Conrad: Okay, any comments?
Don Begin: No. She explained it. . . The berm is pretty much of a natural
berm there. . .through the natural berm. . .
Batzli moved, Wildermuth seconded to close the public hearing. All voted
' in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
Conrad: Just a quick question on filling next to a lake. Thet just is
real intriguing. What governs filling next to the lake? Who's governing
that? Basically we don' t allow construction within 75 feet of a lake. It
seems real interesting that we can allow filling going in right up to the
lake.
Krauss: It is being handled on the wetland alteration permit and it is
regulated by us in that manner. The area that's being filled, Chairman
Conrad, is an area that' s above the wetland and lake elevation now. It is
' high ground. All they're doing is adding enough dirt onto the high ground
to make it firm enough to use. We didn' t see any impacts on the
surrounding area because it's basically lawn area now. It's in sod.
There's no wetland vegetation. There will be no fill into the lake or into
the wetland so we were comfortable regulating it under the wetland
11
' r
Planning Commission Meeting =-
November 15, 1989 - Page 2
1 alteration permit.
Conrad : And the DNR or Fish and Wildlife or the Corps of Engineers, they
have no, they don' t have any regulations on filling right up to the edge of
a lake?
Krauss : We showed this to the Fish and Wildlife and they didn' t have a
1 concern with it.
Conrad : I'm real surprised. It just, and I don' t know. The wetland , I 'm
I not concerned about the wetland ordinance. I 'm just real surprised that
people can change or add to elevation right up to the lake even though we
have regulations that say you can' t build within 75 feet. That' s just real
surprising Paul .
IKrauss : DNR regulations start at the ordinary high water and this is all
above that. We can put in some extra calls to confirm that but I believe
1 all those agencies have been contacted on this.
Conrad: In 10 years I 've never seen anybody fill right up to the edge of a
I lake and I 've been around. First time. Not that I know that it' s wrong.
I 've just never seen anybody do it. We've always kept construction and
construction is different because we' re building stuff but that' s been
monitored by other things. That's a surprising feature. Well anyway, I
I don' t believe the wetland permit process has much to do with that fill
there but I sure thought something else would. We' ll go around. Jim,
comments .
IWildermuth: What' s the distance between the retaining wall and the
wetland? Is that within 75 feet?
Al-Jaff: It ' s over 100 feet . No, I 'm sorry. It is approximately 100
feet.
IKrauss : The retaining wall itself to the Class A wetland?
Conrad: Yeah.
Krauss : Is probably within the 75 feet. Jo Ann and I had a discussion on
that tonight and in the past retaining walls have not been considered
structures in that regard. In fact they' re, in talking to Fish and
I Wildlife and DNR, it' s deemed as somewhat beneficial.' If you had a graded
slope, you would have a gradual slope going down in there, there would be a
tendency to sod everything down beyond the wetland elevation. With the
I retaining wall , you have a distinct break and we've put a stipulation in
there that the area below the wall be kept natural. But your point's well
taken. We do have a lot of problems frankly with the wetland ordinance and
how it handles these kinds of items. Jo Ann and I are probably going to be
putting out a position paper on the wetlands ordinance sometime in February
citing what the pros and cons are with it in it's entirity and looking to
propose some changes to it. This would be one of them.
11
Planning Commission Meeting
November 15, 1989 - Page 3
I
Wildermuth: What happens when the next lot to the west of that is
developed? Is that individual going to come in for an application to fill
too I would imagine?
Krauss: As I recall , the next lot to the west has a more distinct wetland II
as you go, or to the south. As you head in that direction the wetland
spreads out. I mean you don' t have that known situation down by the lake
that we have on this lot. It would probably be handled differently. This II
one as well , you have a way of crossing to that area of high ground without
intruding at all into any wetland area. You could not do that on the
adjoining lot. That' s not to say we wouldn' t recommend approval of it if
we saw it if it was done well but it would have different issues.
Wildermuth: I guess I really don' t have any problem with a retaining wall
and I don't have any problem with a boardwalk. It's adding fill next to
the lake that just somehow doesn' t seem in keeping with our wetland and
shoreland requirements.
Krauss: We looked at the fill , if I could speak to that a little bit. The I
fill is not really creating a substantially different situation out there.
It' s not very deep.
Wildermuth: Yeah, it ' s not very deep. 8 inches is not. . .
Krauss: The reason for it is just to provide, I mean the soil right now is I
rather squishy. It' s high but in a normally wet year it may be difficult
to get any kind of use on it even though it is high and above the ordinary
high water . The fill is being proposed is merely designed to firm it up.
It's not really going to raise it up significantly.
Wildermuth: The ordinary high water mark is 896?
Krauss: Yes sir . I
Wildermuth: It looks like the difference in elevation, at least in one . I
area of that where in the dark shaded area it says 896. 2 and the ordinary
high water mark is 896.4 or is it 896.6?
Emmings: It' s 896.6 on mine. '
Wildermuth: It's .2 of a foot difference. Wow. How are you going to get
down there to put fill in there? Go across the ice? Because to the east I
is that retention pond right?
Don Begin: Right.
Batzli : And to the west is the wetland.
Wildermuth: Yeah, and to the west is a wetland. Unless you can get a
• Bobcat down the berm. That' s going to be pretty slow going .
Don Begin's comment couldn' t be heard on the tape.
I
Planning Commission Meeting :-
November 15, 1989 - Page 4
I
Wildermuth: That is a beautiful area down there. I hate to see it
altered. Although there has been some alteration with the building of that
retention pond .
Conrad: Well , they can do what they can do. I 'm just really surprised and
that's what intriguing is I 've never seen anybody being able to fill right
up to the lake.
IWildermuth: To the ordinary high water mark.
IConrad: That's real strange. Anyway, Brian?
Batzli : I guess I see that differently than setbacks from the house. I
- think you're trying to accomplish a lot of different things with thati In
' part you' re trying to maintain vistas and I think a lot of other things. ,
Yeah, I found that interesting. My question also was going to be,,, how-are
you going to do this with wetland in one direction and retention pond in
the other .
Wildermuth: Well there is a berm there. He could probably drive a Bobcat
I down there or as this gentleman suggested, going in when the wetland' s
frozen but that is going to create a haulage path down through there.
That' s probably going to have to have some correction done in the spring.
' Batzli : Well with that in mind I guess I would recommend that we add a
condition and I don' t know really what to say about it yet other than, if
you do go down the berm or they somehow alter the whole area, that they
I will put it back in it' s original condition. Almost like it' s some sort of
performance bond . That might be, I assume they' ll need some sort, do they
need to get any type of permit before they do this? Do they need to submit
grading plans or do anything like that? Or once we give this approval , are
Ithey. . .
Krauss : Once we give this approval , they would be authorized to do it.
INow if you want a condition about a performance bond, we could do that.
Batzli : I don' t know. Does that make sense?
IKrauss: I think it does. You know you've got 2 issues there. On the one
hand if it goes through the wetland, you want that restored . On the other
hand, if they use the berm which is protecting a city owned retention pond,
1 we'd want to make sure that that wasn' t destroyed either .
Wildermuth: I liked the preclusion where there' s no sodding allowed
between the retaining wall and the wetland. I think that' s a good
stipulation.
IBatzli : I don' t know. Maybe that can just be handled, I think we should
say something about that. My only other question was, this proposed fill
area. If I'm looking at the scale on this correctly, I don' t really have a
good ruler but in the description they talk about it being 30 feet between
I the knoll area and the ordinary high water mark. It appears to me that
it's closer to 80 on this map. The portion that's shaded in. I 'm curious
1
Planning Commission Meeting
November 15, 1989 - Page 5
about that. If you take one of the numbers that they have off of this
house, I assume those are feet.
Emmings: There's a 40 foot drop at the top there too. . .
Batzli : Well that's much more than 30 feet this proposed fill area. I
would prefer not to approve it according to the plans if the plans show 80
feet, approximately, and in the application we' re talking about
approximately a 30 foot area that' s going to be filled. Maybe the
applicant could actually shed some light on that.
Don Begin: I think probably they had. . .and I 've walked it and I work with I
a good deal of builders, not as a superintendent but in other capacities
and I think what' s happened possibly is that they've shaded this whole
thing but the actual fill won' t go to what you'd call right to the water .
I think the fill area to stabilize that useable area what they called out
30 feet. The feet from the knoll area out. As far as the way I read this,
that there. . .that berm is about 30 feet. . . .scale although it is surveyed . I
Batzli : That's what troubled me. The fact that it was a survey and so
this appeared that they were going to be filling 2 1/2 times what.
Krauss: I don't know what the anomoly's being caused by but I know when 11
you' re standing out there on that knoll , it does not appear as though it' s
80 feet back from the shoreline. It' s considerably closer . '
Don Begin: No. It' s pretty close.
Batzli : I guess then I 'd just like to have staff check into that before.
Ellson: I don't have anything to add. . .
Emmings : Can you tell me what these lines represent here?
Al-Jaff: That's an easement. An utility. '
Krauss: There' s a sanitary sewer line I believe that runs through there.
Emmings: Okay. Right through the wetland. '
Krauss: It' s the lowest point.
Emmings: And there must be sewer in place there now right?
•
Conrad: Yeah.
Emmings: I once asked about putting sand on my beach and I was told I had
to call the DNR. My beach is at king of an angle up from the lake, up from
the high water mark. I was told that I wouldn' t have any trouble getting
an approval but I did have to call and check. Can you tell me why and the
beach, it' s pretty long right now but in other years it' s kind of short but
can you tell me why I 'd need to get something from the DNR for something as I
innocuous as that and why they wouldn' t have to go to the DNR when they' re
I
IIPlanning Commission Meeting
November 15, 1989 - Page 6
I
talking about a filling?
IKrauss : As I understand it, the difference would be that beach sand is
typically placed above and below the ordinary high water .
Batzli : They also probably don' t know where the ordinary high water is so
they're doing it as a safety check to make sure that when you' re applying
the sand , I doubt someone' s out there taking a survey to determine where
the ordinary high water is.
Emmings : Nobody and I guess it' s the kind of thing, they said you could
I call up and they'd say go ahead but you've got to call otherwise they' ll
come and visit you.
Batzli : I ' ve come to understand though. That' s an interesting point
because for instance on Lake Minnetonka you can' t rip rap, you can' t do
anything on the shoreline without getting a permit to do it and I don' t
know who' s controlling that. Whether it's the LMCD or who it is but you
Ican' t touch anything near the shoreland .
Emmings: Well , this seems like a reasonable thing to do to me. I guess
' I 'd be very concerned, when they talk about how you' re going to get there,
I think that the condition that Brian wants to have is an important one
because I don' t know if we' re going to be satisfied with saying if they
disturb the wetland, they've got to repair it. I don' t think they should
' be allowed to disturb it in the first place so they' re going to have to do
it when it' s frozen if they're going that way and I assume that won' t do
any harm but I don' t even know that for a fact. But other than, it seems
I like a reasonable thing to do to me if it will provide them with use of
that area down by the lake. I don' t have anything else .
I Conrad: Okay. Thanks Steve. I have no problem with the retaining wall .
The boardwalk. I do question the fill simply because I have never seen us
allow that before so specifically in what' s before us tonight, I think the
fill process has to be defined in this permit. How do they do it? Do we
' accept them driving over the wetland? I don' t believe we accept that but I
think we do have to identify the process by which they can fill that. I do
think we have to identify how they stabilize that so it doesn't wash into
Ithe lake. I think that' s a glaring deficiency in this. You just don' t
fill and assume that it's not going to run into the lake, with. the next rain
that occurs. We need a way to decide that. We require every builder in
Chanhassen to put up the barriers around their building site so that it
doesn' t flow someplace else yet here we're right next to the lake and we
haven't required that. That's why this whole thing of filling next to the
lake seems kind of strange. Nobody has said put up a barrier and I can' t
believe that. That's just really a unique condition that nobody has a
regulation that says you can do that. We' re talking about dirt. We're not
talking about sand here. So anyway, the stabilization process. How we
take dirt and make it grass or whatever it is that the developer 's doing , I
think we have to have some kind of review of that. Restoration to the
original condition. If we don' t allow disturbance of the protected areas,
' then we don' t need to worry about that and then I buy Brian' s comment on
the map that says 80 feet or close to it versus the application which says
Planning Commission Meeting
November 15, 1989 - Page 7
I
30 and I think we just need better definition on what we' re really talking
about. So specifically, whoever makes the motion, I think there's some
things that staff can check out and maybe, I don' t know if they' re in the
part of the motion or not but specifically to make sure that there aren' t
any regulations regarding this that we' ve missed and the fill process that II
I particular care about and stablizing the fill after it's in there. I
think those are some important things that I do care about in the motion.
Emmings: When you mention that, just to pick up on your point, if we want I
them to go in there in the wintertime to do the fill to protect the wetland
when it's frozen, that means they're not going to be able to stabilize that
with any type of cover. •
Conrad : That' s right. And then that will wash down.
Emmings: Before a spring rain so that's why I think it's particularly I
important.
Don Begin: Mr . Conrad, I believe under the recommendations on number 1
here you did recommend erosion control.
Krauss : That was specifically to the wetland. . . I
Don Begin: Could we use erosion control along the lake there to keep this
fill from. . . I
Conrad: I think you've got to do something like that but here we are.
Yeah, you've got to do something like that but I don't know what it is that •
you've got to do. Maybe that' s the right way to do it.
Don Begin: Possibly. . .along there or something to kedp the whole thing
stable. I
Conrad: Literally you' ve got to make it, we have force on this particular
lake, we have forced developers and cities and what have you. We've had
all sorts of problems of filling in Lotus . Incredible number of things
we've forced people to do so we just have to make sure that when this gets
filled in that there' s some way that prevents the rain water from washing
it in. I
Don Begin: I 'm sure we can work that out.
Conrad: I 'm sure you can. I have no doubt that you can. Anything else?
Is there a motion?
Wildermuth: I' ll take a stab at it. I propose the Planning Commission I
recommends approval of Wetland Alteration Permit #89-10 as shown on the
site plan dated October 20th with the following conditions 1 thru 5 as they
stand but with changes to item 1. Instead of the sentence ending with II
improvements made on the site it would read, and between the ordinary high
water mark and the altered or filled area. I think that would take care
of the erosion control between the shoreline and the filled area . Then for I
item 6. I would add performance bond must be posted with the City to
IPlanning Commission Meeting
November 15, 1989 - Page 8
1
guarantee that any overland haulage path to the fill area be restored to
Iit's present condition.
Conrad : Say that again Jim.
IWildermuth: Performance bond must be posted with the City to guarantee
that any overland haulage path to the fill area must be restored to it' s
present or pre-existing condition.
I
Conrad: In terms of your first amendment to number 1.
Wildermuth: The first amendment' s going to add erosion control .
Conrad: Erosion control. It didn' t specifically deal with stabilizing the
Isoil afterwards.
Wildermuth: That' s true.
IConrad : Do you want to address that?
Wildermuth: How do you do that though?
Conrad : I think staff can just say, if it' s your choice to do that is just
to say that staff will word it so that the soil is stabilized. You don' t
' have to word the ordinance.
Wildermuth: Okay. Well , I'd like to add something there to 1 then that
the fill would be stabilized after placement.
IConrad : Is that taking care of the concerns?
•
Emmings: I 'm just sitting here thinking there's a performance bond that
says that they have to put anything back that they disturb or they have to
restore it but do we even want to allow them to go through the wetland?
I Wildermuth: I think they' re going to have to. Either that or go across
the ice.
I Emmings: But they could go through it at a time. I don' t know, from some
of the talk I 've heard, I don't know if we want to rely pn restoration to
put the wetland back. I think they should have to go through, if they' re
' going of use a path that's through the wetland, it seems to me it should be
at a time when they' ll do minimal damage to the wetland such as when it' s
frozen. That's probably the only time. The only thing that makes me say
that is. . .
Wildermuth: I don' t think you can go through the wetland without filling
it unless it's frozen.
Batzli : What would happen if we made the filling and the path through
there, they have to get staff's approval to do that so as to cause minimum
amount of damage to whatever because we don' t know what the best way or the
I
Planning Commission Meeting
November 15, 1989 - Page 9
I
best time to do that would be but I think they should be able to work with
staff. '
Ellson: To work with them to get whatever plan they have okayed?
Emmings: Yeah, I like that. One thing that makes me hesitant to even '
bring it up is obviously they put the sewer right through there and I
wonder what the city did in terms of. . .
Wildermuth: Well they tore it up pretty good.
Emmings: In terms of doing damage and restoring it. Probably nothing but II
nevertheless, yeah I think that's a good suggestion Brian.
Krauss: If I may, before you act on that, it just occurred to me that II possibly one way to ensure that this is all done in a timely manner , is to
add a stipulation requiring that they get a grading permit approved by
staff before starting the work. Then we actually have a permit that we' re I
going to release to them and before releasing it we can make sure that the
conditions are met and it gives us a mechanism to then go back out and
check up that it was done right.
Batzli : That sounds great. I
Wildermuth: Okay, I 'd like to make that item 7 . That a grading permit be
obtained.
Krauss : Specify though if you would approved by staff so it doesn' t have
to go back to the City Council . '
Wildermuth: Approved by staff prior to beginning work.
Batzli : Can we so add in that number 7 that the crossing over or the I
filling will be done with minimal impact to the wetland areas?
Wildermuth: Sure, why not. '
Batzli: Okay. Then I ' ll accept that.
1
Wildermuth moved, Batzli seconded that the Planning Commission recommend
approval of Wetland Alteration Permit #89-10 as shown on the Site Plan
dated October 20, 1989 with the following conditions:
1. Erosion control shall be installed between the proposed grading and the •
Class A wetland and between the Ordinary High Water Mark and the
altered or filled area prior to any improvements made on the site.
Also, the fill area shall be stabilized after it's placement.
2. The applicant should be made aware if the city or utility company needs II
to use the utility and drainage easement. The city or utility company
shall not be responsible for any damages to the boardwalk or
restoration costs.
1
IIPlanning Commission Meeting
November 15, 1989 - Page 10
1
' 3. The area between the boardwalk and the wetland shall be maintained in
I it' s natural state.
4. The area between the retaining walls and the wetland shall be
maintained in its natural state with no sod.
5. The boardwalk north of the Class A wetland up to the ordinary high
' water mark of Lotus Lake shall be of permanent construction.
6. Performance bond must be posted with the City to guarantee that any
overland haulage path to the fill area must be restored to it' s present
or pre-existing condition.
7. A grading permit showing minimal impact to the wetland shall be
submitted and approved by staff prior to any work beginning on the
site.
IAll voted in favor and the motion carrried.
IAMENDED REDEVELOPMENT AND TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN MODIFICATION NO. 9,
TODD GERHARDT.
Todd Gerhardt presented the staff report on this item.
Conrad: Any questions? Todd, what' s the purpose of the property
acquisition? I can see the parking lots in downtown but the Empak, what' s
happening there? Why are we doing that?
•
I Gerhardt: The Housing and Redevelopment Authority as it' s incentives
requested or gave approval to Empak, an incentive program that would
provide a land write down as a part of their incentive to locate in
Chanhassen. The facility was one of 98 ,000 square feet that generated
I approximately $200,000.00 a year in taxes so from that they had enough
money, 3 years worth of taxes, not different than any of the other
incentives provided to any of the other businesses that located in the
' industrial park but left over that much increment that you could also write
down a portion of the land. And to do that, the tax increment plan must
make notice of that land acquisition or write down.
1 Conrad : Questions? It looks consistent to me with the goals, at least
from a planning standpoint that we've looked at for downtown.
II Gerhardt: All the documents are brought, or site plans are brought through
the Planning Commission so you do review those prior to any approval given.
Again, this is a State law requirement that we bring it to you and pass
' resolution.
Conrad : Good . Thanks Todd.
I
Planning Commission Meeting
November 15, 1989 - Page 11
I
Emmings moved , Wildermuth seconded that the Planning Commission adopt I
Resolution No. 89- finding Modification No. 9 consistent with the plans
for development of the City of Chanhassen. All voted in favor and the
motion carried.
PUBLIC HEARING:
ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO AMEND THE CITY CODE MODIFYING ZONING
RESTRICTIONS AND LOCATIONS FOR CONVENIENCE STORES, GAS STATIONS AND
AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE STATIONS.
Paul Krauss presented the staff report on this item. Chairman Conrad
called the public hearing to order .
Emmings moved , Batzli seconded to close the public hearing . All voted in
favor and the motion carried.
just s: I read through this and I 've just kind of burned out on this a
g
little bit. What we did before on this seemed reasonable to me at the time
and what they put together now seems reasonable to me and I have a feeling I
they could put it together in a different combination and I think that was
reasonable too. I really don' t have any comments. The proposals that
Paul 's put together this time around seem fine to me. '
Ellson: I got a little confused when I read it. By saying that we have a
conditional use permit, what does that gain us?
Krauss : Conditional uses indicate to me that you have a use that is
permissible in the district but because of characteristics associated with
it, it requires additional review. If we say a use is permitted , you' re in I
a much more difficult position to establish.
Ellson: To add anything on if you want that. . . '
Krauss: Special conditions, right. And in this instance with auto related
uses, we' re able to set out , specify what those conditions are that we want
to have met before we would allow that use to exist.
Ellson: Okay. So we could actually do it on a case by case basis?
Krauss: Yes. I don't wish to give the indication though that conditional I
uses give unilateral control to the City to create conditions as they come
along. I believe that when you do make a use condition, you have an
obligation to establish those conditions so you can see if they' re met or
not and not to just develop them on the spot.
Emmings: But you do have some flexibility there because there' s a public
hearing associated with it and if there' s perculiarities in the
neighborhood for example where this thing is and the people come in and
talk about it, you can address them.
I
IIPlanning Commission Meeting
November 15, 1989 - Page
12
Krauss : Right and the conditional use permit ordinance does allow that as
some general guidelines.
Ellson: Okay. I like that. It' s just one of my pet peeves so I 'm glad to
see it being resolved once and for all .
Batzli : I guess I don' t understand the rationale for the difference
I between convenience stores without gas and convenience stores with gas
pumps . Is that the same, Council ' s feeling was that it was the gas pumps
that were the problems and not the fact that you're being flooded with
convenience stores?
IKrauss : Well we got into that a little bit and it took, I don' t know that
they actually came out and said that but that was what I defined that it
I was coming down to. We talked a little bit about convenience stores these
days and basically convenience stores are rarely proposed as such without
gas pumps. But a convenience store without a gas pump is a little corner
' market.
Batzli : Is that a Kenny' s?
IKrauss : Yeah.
Ellson: Or a Tom Thumb. Most of those don' t have gas pumps .
Krauss: In which case it really isn' t, it' s a consistent retail use and it
belongs in a lot of these things without any special review.
Batzli : So you' re not going to allow any gas in the CBD?
Krauss : No. That' s the way that was originally proposed . There was some
Idiscussion about it being inappropriate within the dense CBD area .
Batzli : So what do you do with the current ones in the CBD?
Non-conforming uses?
I Krauss : Yes .
Batzli : When would those ever be extinguished? If someone bought that
parcel , a different gas company bought the parcel, would they. then still be
allowed to . . .
IKrauss : As long as the use is continued. The grandfathering is a good
question. As long as the use is continued, there's no problem regardless
of who owns it.
Emmings : It' s either the use has to be given up for a year or it has to be
destroyed. More than 50% destroyed.
IKrauss : But if there was a wish to avoid that, I personally wouldn' t
object to an ordinance that permanently accepted those uses which existed
at the date of the adoption of the ordinance.
Planning Commission Meeting
November 15, 1989 - Page 13
Batzli : For instance the Amoco. They' re going to rebuild that. What
affect does this ordinance have on that?
Krauss : It' s already been permitted. We issued a building permit on it a !
few weeks ago.
Ellson: What about someone like a Brooke's that might want to expand or
something like that? They'd have to maintain just where they are because
that' s what' s considered grandfathered?
Krauss: It would be grandfathered in. There wouldn' t be an issue really
unless they wanted to expand the gas pump aspect of it. If they wanted to
expand the store itself say into the next retail space, it' s not something
that we would review.
Ellson: But if they wanted to put a few more islands in?
Batzli : I actually find it somewhat of a convenience to have a couple of I
gas stations downtownish personally so I just don' t know that I necessarily
totally agree with your clumping of the areas. I agree it would be better
handled with a conditional use permit. The only other thing that I wanted
to touch on was your measurement from gas pumps. I assume that's what
you're doing in these various sections . You' re actually measuring it like
gas pump to gas pump?
Krauss : Yes.
Batzli : Why are you doing that rather than parcel to parcel? !
Krauss: Parcel to parcel, I 've written some ordinances that are parcel to
parcel and what you get is a city that has no auto service. Parcels are
often quite large and for example, if you have a multiple tenant site as
where the Brooke' s is, you'd measure it from the nearest point of that
entire property to the nearest residential property and you'd never had a
gas station in any kind of proximity to residential . Even though the gas
pumps are 400 feet away.
Batzli : But here we have a 100 foot lot , or 120 foot lot. Your gas
station could abut the residential .
Krauss : Physically yes. The station could. The pumps could not.
Batzli : But does the entire station with parking and the traffic and all
the problems you' re trying to avoid, could abut the residential as long as
they put pumps on the far side of the lot.
Krauss : The most intense part of that use, yes.
Ellson: I pictured it that there'd be like a building between where all
the driving is going on and like the residential area .
Batzli: Not necessarily.
i
Planning Commission Meeting
November 15, 1989 - Page 14
Ellson: I know but that' s kind of.
Batzli : If it' s going to be fronting the street. In any event, other than
a couple of typos and I think we should say something about in the
I definition of motor fuel station and . . .gas pumps we talk about air and oil
dispensing. It's also required that they collect oil now too if they
dispense it. You may want to look into that. I' ll listen to what Jim has
Ito say.
Conrad : Jim, what do you have to say?
IWildermuth: Well, I 'm standing by my guns being basically a free market
advocate. I guess I could find some arguments that this agree with some
of the P's and C' s and X's in the little matrix here Paul but I think we
Icould probably find as many different opinions on that matrix as we have
people here tonight. There' s just one thing that does bother me a little
bit. If we' re going to say that gas pumps have to be 250 feet apart, why
I are we going to allow gas pumps and residential parcels to be so close as
100 feet?
IKrauss : You' re getting at two different situations with those setbacks .
The 250 foot separation is to avoid the clustering of, the Council' s fear
was that you'd have 4 gas dispensing operations on an intersection.
IWildermuth: That would bother me less than seeing a convenience store with
gas pumps within 100 feet of a residence . If they can all survive, fine.
Chances are I don' t think 4 convenience stores on 4 corners out here in
IChanhassen would survive.
Krauss : I wouldn' t dispute that and we discussed the .free market taking
Icontrol of these things at the Council meeting but they seem to want the
reassurance of having a separation requirement.
Wildermuth: Is that legal?
IKrauss : I had the ordinance reviewed by the City Attorney.
IBatzli : What's the difference between this and requiring a mile distance
between contractor' s yards?
' Conrad: It seems the same. Anything else Jim?
Wildermuth: No. Other than the fact that I 'd like to see that 100 feet
increased.
IConrad : The logic for 250. Does that basically eliminate , what does that
really do? What does 250 feet do to, the typical stereotype is 4 gas
Istations on a corner . I don' t know if we have many corners that that' s
ever going to happen to but what does 250 foot do to let's say a typical
intersection where that' s protential?
IWildermuth: It precludes 4 gas stations .
I
Planning Commission Meeting
November 15, 1989 - Page 15
I
Krauss : It precludes 4 gas stations .
Conrad: But how many can we have there? Probably kitty corner huh?
Krauss : Even then , probably not because the right-of-way is only 60 to 80 II
feet wide typically and TH 5 might be up to 100 feet now. You would be
able to have one on the corner and another one down the block is the
closest. '
Batzli : Then you put them in a row instead of on the same corner is what
you' re going to do with this.
Krauss : They'd be staggered , yeah.
Wildermuth: I just had the feeling that we ought to switch those numbers
around. Put that 100 feet between gas pumps and 250 feet between the gas
pump and a residence.
Batzli : I think just add a 0 after the 100 feet. 1
Conrad: So that 250 feet basically says only 1 gas station per
intersection. No two gas stations side by side basically distributes gas
stations throughout the buildable zones.
Wildermuth: Is that desireable?
Batzli : I don' t think gas stations, most gas stations wouldn' t do that.
Nowadays they've got all their numbers and they' re going to plug them in
and they're going to go for the right traffic volumes and everything else. II
They' re all franchises and I think you're going to basically allow a first
come, first serve situation.
Wildermuth: But convenience store with gas pumps are a lot like car
dealerships. They seem to work better when they' re in close proximity to
one another . There' s this energy. I don' t know. I
Conrad: I don't know about that. They do tend to cluster but that' s
typically based on traffic volume and limited number of intersections. I
really do care about that intersection.
Wildermuth: I really would not have any problem with convenience store
with gas pumps on adjacent corners of an intersection. 1
Batzli : Well when we both vote against it then, the City Council will know
that won't they.
Conrad : A couple things. Basically I don' t believe in the 250 feet. I
don' t mind the separation from residential parcels. I think that's
important. I don' t know if 100 is right but I like that in there. I like II
your final observation Paul on what' s appropriate. When you reviewed the
highway business district I think you're absolutely right there. Back up
to conditional use, I couldn' t accept a conditional use process until
I
Planning Commission Meeting
November 15, 1989 - Page 16
I
I knew what the conditions were that we were looking for and I don' t see
I them.
Krauss : Mr . Chairman, they' re in there in Section 3 and 4 on page 2. -
IIConrad: So those are the conditions for the conditional use process?
I Krauss : Yes. That plus the general purpose conditions that are applied . . .
Conrad: Have them treat those as conditions .
I Krauss : The ordinance is a little difficult to read because it' s taken out
of context but the sub-heading for those sections relate to conditions.
' - Conrad: So when a neighborhood came in and complained that something ` was
too close, what condition are we going to use to guide us? Actually the
condition is they can ' t be within 100 feet period . What is it that ' s going
to tell us that we' re going to impose 150 foot? What tells us that we can
I go up? Not a thing. The 100 foot is the absolute so we really don' t have
a guideline, on that particular condition we don't have a guideline to
increase the number of feet between the use. It would be subjective.
Krauss: You may have some ability under general issuance standards to
apply a more severe guideline. If you can justify it based on that
particular site and there's 12 general issuance standards that would apply
Ito all CUP's that would allow you to do that. On the other hand , you've
got to be careful to a point. You know, what we're looking at is
establishing tougher than usual conditions for these types of uses . If
I you're going to go beyond that, you need to have a rationale to support it
based on that particular site or else you' re being arbitrary and that' s the
tightrope that has to be walked. •
rConrad : Right. I understand that but I don' t understand the conditional
use process. If we have the specifics that we' re looking for right here,
I then what other conditions? What gives us leverage or flexibility to
review the thing and apply a little bit different standards? Those would
be things that would say what the intent of this ordinance is really to
protect the individual neighbor from having a particular nighttime traffic
I or whatever and therefore the 150 foot mark might be different. The 100
foot setback zone would be different. I 'm looking for those and I don' t
see those and typically then we get caught into the fact that this is the
ordinance and that's what we can apply and therefore I don't know what the
I conditions are that we' re really looking for to have the flexibility. I
don't want to see stuff that I don't have control over. As long as you've
got definitions in here for what staff is looking for , I don' t need to see
it because you can apply those things real clearly and it takes no input on
my part to make sure that you're applying those specifics.
Batzli : But the conditional use permit process would allow you to reject
it if it didn' t fit in. If 100 feet wasn' t appropriate, you could reject
the application.
IConrad : Based on what though?
11
Planning Commission Meeting
November 15, 1989 - Page 17
1
Krauss: The conditional use permit process itself gives you exordinary '
latitude. More latitude than you would if it was a permitted use under a
site plan.
Conrad: Well it sounds arbitrary to me though.
Krauss: It is to an extent but you've got general issuance standards here
and I won' t read all 12 of them but one of them is will be designed ,
constructed, operated and maintained so as to be compatible in appearance
with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and will
not change the essential character . Won' t be hazardous to planned
neighboring uses. It goes on and on. It' s kind of the mom and apple pie
things that give it some discretion.
Conrad : I won' t drag this out. I just basically have a personal '
preference. I don't want to see something that I really don' t feel has
some guidelines to it and basically I have a problem. Unless there' s an I
intent statement associated with what we're really looking for to alter the
conditions, I can' t do it. Anyway, those are my comments on this
ordinance. There's some good things in here and some things that are maybe •
not my favorite things and I would accept a motion. Annette, these seems
like one. . .
Elison: I'm trying to figure out how you'd say it. . . I move the Planning II
Commission recommend approval of proposed ordinance revision regulating
convenience stores. Would that work?
Conrad: Yeah. Is there a second?
Emmings: I ' ll second it.
I
Elison moved, Emmings seconded that the Planning Commission recommend
approval of the Zoning Ordinance Amendment to amend the City Code modifying
zoning restrictions and locations for convenience stores, gas stations and
automotive service stations as presented by staff. Elison and Emmings
voted in favor . Conrad , Batzli and Wildermuth voted in opposition and the
motion failed with a vote of 2 to 3.
•
Conrad: Is there another motion? ,
Elison: Can you send just a failed motion?
Krauss: Sure. It would help if there could be some statments as to what 1
the issues were.
Wildermuth: Yeah, why don' t we just state our positions. '
Elison: Do you guys just want to add your 2 cents?
I
r
IIPlanning Commission Meeting
November 15, 1989 - Page 18
Conrad : We can do that. Is there not another motion that somebody finds
to make this acceptable?
Batzli : I ' ll make a motion and see what happens . I move that the Planning
I Commission recommend approval of the proposed ordinance revisions
regulating convenience stores set forth in the packet dated November 8,
1989 as set forth except that the word "on side" shall be deleted and "on
site" shall be inserted there for wherever it is throughout this document.
11 Oil dispensing and the words "and collection" shall be added. After the
seventh line in the definition of motor fuel station, in Section 3,
paragraph 7, 100 shall be changed to 250. Section 4, paragraph 6, 100 feet
Ishall be changed to 250.
Conrad: What did you just do Brian?
Batzli : I just changed it so the gas pumps are within 250 feet instead of
100 feet of residential sections .
Conrad : Okay, that was your first one.
Batzli : There were both.
Conrad: Did you make them both 250?
Batzli : Yeah. I think that' s the only two areas where that is. And as
Imuch as I 'd like to do it, I ' ll leave the 250 foot requirement in there.
Conrad : Is there a second?
IEmmings: I ' ll second it .
•
Ellson: Okay, what' s the base difference? This residential neighbor part?
1 Batzli : Basically we've increased the distance ha
t t the gas station has to
be away from the residential neighborhoods so that in theory at this point,
I you have to have a mighty big lot. Basically at a 250 foot minimum, you' re
going to have to have at least one parcel , hopefully, between the gas
station and the residential section. 250 foot lot would be mighty big to
Icomply with all the setbacks.
Conrad: Any other discussion?
Batzli moved, Emmings seconded that the Planning Commission
9 g recommend
approval of the proposed ordinance revisions regulating convenience stores
Iset forth in the packet dated November 8, 1989 as set forth except that the
word "on side" shall be deleted and "on site" shall be inserted there for
wherever it is throughout this document. Oil dispensing and the words "and
Icollection" shall be added. After the seventh line in the definition of
motor fuel station, in Section 3, paragraph 7, 100 shall be changed to 250.
Section 4, paragraph 6, 100 feet shall be changed to 250. Batzli and
IEmmings voted in favor . Ellson, Conrad and Wildermuth voted in opposition.
The motion failed with a vote of 2 to 3.
r
Planning Commission Meeting
November 15, 1989 - Page 19
11
Conrad : Is there another motion? I
Batzli : What me to take the 250 feet?
Wildermuth: Take the requirement to the gas pumps out of it. . .
Batzli : Between parcels or you just want to take it out completely? 1
Wildermuth: Right.
Conrad: Is there another motion? '
Batzli : Well I ' ll do that.
Conrad : We can send it forward without a positive vote. We don' t have to I
compromise.
Emmings: And I don' t think that' s a particular bad idea. We already sent I
something to the City Council that we thought was alright and they sent it
back with a bunch of directions that Paul ' s taken into account and he' s
done some more on his own. They' re basically, to me it didn' t do a lot to I
send it back here this time. They're going to wind up, they seem to have
some fairly strong notions on how they want it to be and if they like it,
they' re going to do it and if they don' t, they' re not. I don' t see any
reason to prolong this.
Conrad: Okay. Is there another motion that somebody would like to make or I
should we send this forth with a negative vote and the reasons set forth?
Any motion?
Batzli : Why don' t we send it on with the negative vote. '
Conrad: Okay. Those of us who voted negatively for both motions, Jim
would you detail the reasons that you voted negatively. ,
Wildermuth: I can live with basically everything in here and I
particularly like the way you cleaned up the problem with the zoning Paul I
but I 'd like to strike any reference to distances between gas pumps. Other
than that, and I would be in favor of increasing distance between gas pumps
and residential residences.
Conrad : My feeling for the reason I voted no was I think the 250 feet is
really restrictive and although I haven't taken an inventory of the
intersections in town, I do believe that that' s going to prevent gas I
stations from moving in here and therefore in the end I think there will be
a lessening of competition and I don't agree with that. I think somebody
could persuade me where if there were opportunities , multi opportunities
for gas stations to exist I might pay attention but in this particular
case, I don't see any way that a couple gas stations could exist on the
same intersection and therefore I don' t believe we'd have a competitive
situation in Chanhassen. The other thing that I don' t like is a
conditional use process where the conditions aren' t clearly defined in
1 Planning Commission Meeting
November 15, 1989 - Page 45
i
Conrad : I just have a situation where I can stay a few more minutes but I
don't know that it would do it justice.
Krauss : We could hold it over .
IConrad: I think that's my preference. So what do we have?
Emmings : We have number 5 and number 7. Interim uses.
Conrad: Okay. Is that controverial in anybody' s mind? Will there be a
lot of discussion tonight? I 've got some comments on it.
Batzli : I have one comment.
I Conrad : Maybe we could try to get the interim uses taken care of tonight
and just hold the one item over .
IPUBLIC HEARING:
ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO AMEND THE CITY CODE REGARDING REVISIONS TO
THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO ALLOW FOR THE REVIEW AND GRANTING OF CONDITIONAL
USE PERMITS FOR USES THAT ARE TERMPORARY IN NATURE IN ALL DISTRICTS.
Paul Krauss presented the staff report on this item.
rEmmings : We' re going to be amending this one a lot. With every proposal
that comes in, we' re going to have to do an ordinance amendment which seems
sort of funny to me but maybe it' s the only thing we can do.
IEllson: It also gives us the chance to say no to them.
Conrad : It solves a particular problem right now. It's real incomplete
but on the other hand it does solve a particular problem and I think there
are needs for interim uses . I really don' t mind interim uses at all . I
think that's pretty good.
Krauss : And the context of interim rather than temporary is a better one.
Interim implies that something' s going to happen to change it. Some cities
I that have had temporary conditional use permits basically have had ad hoc
changes to the ordinance and so they just keep delaying when this temporary
use has to disappear .
IConrad : I'm going to open this up to the public. Is there any input from
the public?
IIWildermuth moved, Batzli seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in
favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
IEmmings: I already made my comments. I think it' s something that we need.
It's a hole in our ordinance now. We need something to plug it. I 'm not
' real happy about it because I think we' re going to be amending it when
something comes up and I don' t like that but I can' t think of any other way
I
Planning Commission Meeting
November 15, 1989 - Page 46
i
to do it.
Ellson: The only thing that I thought about and you kind of answered it
was I didn't like the idea about it could be extended or something like
that. In other words , this could be tied to something that we'd see
following or an end. Do you know what I 'm saying? That's why I was so
hesitant with the bank. He looked like he had an end but I was just not
sure that it could actually be tied to an ending point I guess .
Krauss: Right and one of the conditions of approval here is that the
applicant has to demonstrate that the date of event that will terminate the
use can be identified with certainty.
Ellson: Right so that makes it better .
Conrad: I' ll get out of order here but it implies, there was not a method I
for an extension. Now things do change. Zoning change. Land uses change.
Comprehensive plans change so when those changes, I think there may be, I
think there should be a methodology of applying for an extension.
Krauss: There would be. Basically you could come in and ask that the
approval be revalidated based upon a new set of conditions. '
Emmings: Or just ask for a new permit. If my permit expires on midnight,
Jnauary 1, 1992, I can come in and say I need a new permit.
Conrad: Okay. Are you comfortable with that?
Ellson: I don't like that they can extend it, that's for sure. If the
bank comes in.
Emmings: That' s not what he' s saying though. He' s saying that they'd
have to come back and apply anyway. It's kind of the same thing.
Conrad: It' s the same thing only different.
Batzli : My problem with this is the same problem I have with the
conditional use permit and that is, it' s fairly vague as to termination.
The conditional use permit, we really have a hard time trying to decide I
whether it' s terminated or not. This reads fairly clearly that the minute
that the violation occurs it's terminated. What normally happens is the
City is you write a letter and you tell them to change it back and then 11 that doesn't happen and then 6 months later you write another letter and
then somebody goes out to visit the site and then you decide whether you' re
going to have a public hearing or not. By this time you don't know, you've
allowed the supposedly terminated interim use to proceed now for a lengthy I
period of time. That's really the problem with the conditional use permit
and one that I see here also is that if it said that upon a violation
occuring or coming to the attention of the City, a public hearing will be 111
held and the City shall vote on whether it's in violation and it shall be
revoked, I'd feel a lot better than what's there right now personally.
That' s my only comment. In other words, there' s a definitive process for
this is what happens and if they rule on it, you're vapor fella. That' s
I
IIPlanning Commission Meeting
November 15, 1989 - Page 47
' what I 'd like to see but I' ll still vote for it because I think there' s a
hole that we need to fill .
Wildermuth: I like what you said Brian. I was comfortable with the change
I to begin with but then I agree that I think any motion ought to refledt
something like that .
' Conrad : I don' t mind that either . Anything else? The only other thing
that I wrote down here, and I don't know how to apply it but when you allow
a temporary use, do we want it to meet the intent of the district' s use or
is that contrary by definition?
Ellson: That' s a philosophical thing.
- t
' Krauss : It' s not philosophical . It' s just the discussion that Roger and I
had. My approach would have allowed you to consider anything anywhere—but
Roger pointed out some good reasons for not doing that. First of all it
I completely undermines the whole intent of structuring an ordinance the way
traditional zoning ordinances are structured. If anything could be allowed
anywhere on a temporary basis, why prohibit it on a permanent basis? Plus
he said that he felt there were some real problems within the context of
II the State enabling legislation for how you would regulate something like
that. It also tends, frankly, to lead to arbitrary determinations by
cities that could affect future development and neighborhoods and on and
on.
Conrad : You could make that point. I can make the contrary point. It is
I more specific. If you've got the intent of the district in mind, you do
have some guidelines . That' s again these intent statements that we talk
about all the time are real important. Once you understand the concept
behind an ordinance or a zone, then I don' t have a problems making rulings,
I as arbitrary as they may be because I 'm trying to match that intent
statement so that's why, I think I could counter Paul your argument on that
one but it basically, you've persuaded me that we can' t do this. But it
' still hasn't set the right guidelines. You've persuaded me we can't put an
intent in there.
Emmings: Why?
Conrad : Because if it met the intent of the district, it would have been a
permitted use in the first place.
Emmings: Well what about saying it should be compatible with other uses in
the district because see that will give some guidance too when you come
I around to amending. Because you're going to have to amend the ordinance
just about every time, you're going to be able to look at that but I think
it would be good to have something like that.
I Krauss: I asked Roger that exact question again because I had drafted
something that did say compatability and he said well that' s all taken care
of, as a lot of things are, by when he referenced that an interim use has
I to meet the standards of the conditional use permit. So when we went back
to that discussion earlier tonight, the 14 standards of a CUP section that
Planning Commission Meeting •
November 15, 1989 - Page 48
1
get to mom and apple pie, those all apply here.
Wildermuth: Except that it's got some kind of a time limit right?
Krauss : Yeah. ,
Emmings: I'm going to make a counter argument to Brian' s point that you
guys all jumped on down there. Rather than trying to figure out a specific I
system for enforcement, the event that triggers enforcement is very
specific here and I think enforcement is just a measure of the will and
determination of the City and the availability of resources and energy and
commitment and all those things. What happens, and what's a little bit
different about the CUP than this is with the CUP, first of all it runs
with the land and it' s embedded a little more than this ever would be
because this has an event or a time that terminates it. With a CUP there' s I
always some interpretation. They say he's violated a condition of his CUP.
Well , have I really violated it and you get into a big argument over that
and I don't think you' re going to have those kinds of arguments with the
interim uses just because the ending point is going to be very specific .
Otherwise it will never be allowed in the first place. Then whether or not
the City chooses to enforce it, the tools are certainly there already. So
I don't think you have to design the system for enforcement. I don' t think
it will add a thing . If the City doesn' t have the will to enforce it, it
won't do it and if it does, it already can so that'd be the other side of
that one to me. ,
Conrad: Okay, the one who makes the motion has the power on this one . Who
wants to make the motion?
Emmings: I do. I 'm going to move that the ordinance, amending Chapter 20
of the Chanhassen City Code by adding provisions concerning interim use
permits as presented in the staff report, November 6, 1989 be approved.
Recommend approval to the City Council. You all know what I mean.
Conrad: Is there a second to that washy washy motion?
Batzli : I' ll second it.
Emmings moved, Batzli seconded that the Planning Commission recommend
approval of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code by
adding provisions concerning interim use permits as presented by staff.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Conrad: Do we need a motion to defer the item 7, which is a public hearing I
to the next meeting? We do need that motion?
Emmings moved, Wildermuth seconded to table item 7, Zoning Ordinance '
Amendment to amend the City Code, Division 6, Site Plan Review to revise
the procedure, expand on development standards and require financial
guarantees for landscaping and other site improvements be tabled until the II
next meeting . All voted in favor and the motion carried .
Planning Commission Meeting
November 15, 1989 - Page 49
I
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Emmings mov ed, W it er u h se co n de d
to approve the
Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated November 1, 1989 as
I presented . All voted in favor except Annette Ellson who abstained and the
motion carried.
IOPEN DISCUSSION:
IKrauss : November 29th we' re going to hold the next special meeting .
Emmings: See no one called. I thought they were going to call around. No
one called me.
IIKrauss : Were we going to call on this one?
I Emmings: That was my understanding. I was a little surprised to see that
in here because that was my recollection . That' s what it said in the
Minutes also. That's alright. I 'd prefer getting a call though.
IConrad : How many applicants for Dave' s position do we have right now?
Krauss: I think we' re up to about 8 or 9. Would you like to schedule it
for the next meeting?
Conrad: Next meeting, yes .
IKrauss : And is the process that you have all of them present here?
Conrad: Yes. Sit outside. We' ll invite them in. We give them 10 minutes
II each. 10 or 15. Probably 15. If they've been here before, that doesn' t
take too long.
IEllson : 8 times 15 minutes?
Conrad : Yeah. That' s 2 hours . They won' t all make it.
IIKrauss : Why don't we turn it back a little. To give a little snynopsis of
themselves?
Ellson: I remember when I came through you had questions on the board .
Conrad: Basically we all ask questions and see. If you think that each
I question that we ask is one minute and we have 6 people here, that' s 6
minutes right there and usually at least 6 minutes. Is 10 minutes fair or
should we keep it at 15 minutes?
Emmings: Well one thing we might do is try to decide ahead of time what
common questions we have for all of them. That would speed things up like
we did that time when we had so many. That was a good system.
IEllson: In other words you' re judging them all on the same questions?
I
Planning Commission Meeting
November 15, 1989 - Page 50
Emmings: Well , and then ask them individual questions if you want to. i
Conrad: That's probably the best way to do it rather than us repeating
them and looking like jerks . So yeah, let' s bring them in Paul . We' ll
give them 12 1/2 minutes each.
Emmings: Why are there suddenly 8 when there was only 1 or 2? Is anybody I
beating the bushes? Is there any stacking going on here in terms of
interest groups?
Krauss : Not that I 'm aware of. '
Elison: Concerned Citizens for the Future of Chanhassen I bet have one or
two. ,
Krauss : We had approximately 3 or 4 based on the notice in the newspaper .
We had asked our secretary to mail out renotifying past candidates
and I had thought that it was done but apparently it wasn' t so when we
asked her to do it, we got 4 or 5 more.
Conrad: I knew there were some interested people that I was really 1
surprised didn' t apply. Anything else?
Wildermuth moved , Conrad seconded to adjourn the meeting . All voted in
favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 10: 50 p.m. .
Submitted by Paul Krauss
Director of Planning
Prepared by Nann Opheim
1
I
I
IIPlanning Commission Meeting
November 15, 1989 - Page 20
terms of our flexibility and the intent of what we' re trying to do.
II Anyway, we' ll forward this one and see how the City Council wants to deal
with it.
IIPUBLIC HEARING:
ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO AMEND THE CITY CODE, ARTICLE XXIV, OFF STREET
PARKING AND LOADING, TO PROVIDE DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS, INCREASED PARKING
REQUIREMENTS IF WARRANTED BY SITE PLAN REVIEW AND TO REQUIRE ENCLOSED
PARKING FOR TWO VEHICLES FOR MULTIPLE FAMILY DWELLINGS.
IPublic Present :
Dean Johnson - Cenvesco
IHal Pierce - Architect, Design Resource Group
Paul Krauss presented the staff report on this item. Chairman Conrad
called the public hearing to order .
Dean Johnson: Obviously we' ve been in front of each other before. I have
I a project that you know this does affect. I guess you know the part of the
change that I 'd like to talk to is the double attached garage with the
double, 2 parking stalls per multi-family unit. I guess the way in which
I 'd like to talk about it is in the fact of affordable housing . We feel
1 that in Chanhassen you have designated land R-12. The different multiple
family zonings. Some of the reasons for doing this I 'm sure in your minds
are for affordable housing. We also feel there is a market for it in here.
' Obviously I wouldn' t have been in front of you with the PUD in the R-12
zoning if I didn' t feel that there was a market for it. Just thinking of
the new businesses that are coming in with Rosemount and McGlynn Bakeries
I and now I believe there' s another one that you talked about earlier that' s
coming in on the industrial site over there. You' re going to be bringing a
lot of people in with this and these people don' t all make $40,000.00 a
year to afford a single family house or $35,000. 00 a year to afford an
I upscale multi-family house. I guess I want to get into those types of
things here so you know when you do this and you raise this, that you
realize what' s happening and what you're doing to the construction and what
I you' re doing to a segment of the population that now works here in
Chanhassen or now is going to work here in Chanhassen. I guess we should
talk about the product a little bit. With the ordinances you have, when we
chose a building to put on this site and as others are going to do after
11 me, we chose a unit where the garage was partially tucked under the unit.
When you have your 35% impervious surface restriction that you do have, it
kind of requires that. If the garage is now outside, even if it' s just
II attached like a house is off to the side of the house, you have not only
the house area that you' re dealing with but you're having a garage area.
So when you throw a 35% impervious surface, it' s hard to get within that
area with your design unless you're going in lower density. If you' re
going to take the R-12 in the case that I have and you're going to start
doing those types of things, it means your density is going down. If your
density goes down, the price per units going to have to go up because your
ground costs are there and your development costs are there and all the
1
Planning Commission Meeting
November 15, 1989 - Page 21
types of things that come with developing go along. We were also, and
I know I 've said this 100 times to you, is that we were trying to, in this
particular project and in any project that anybody' s going to bring in
affordable housing , is try to give alternative to rents. We found in
study of this and doing what a developer does to see if a project' s 1
feasible, that we were given an alternative for people instead of renting.
We found that we could build this unit and it would be slightly more per
month to own the unit but by the time you got the tax incentives figured
out and the homesteading all the other things, that it was actually
considerably less. We feel that the double car garage standard is going to
make both townhouses and especially apartments just cost ineffective. I
guess at this time I know an architect by the name of Hal Pierce, I 'm going II
to introduce here and I 'd like him as an architect to talk about the
different types of things that are going to be required in the construction
and the types of costs that you' re going to get into for doing this and I 'd 1
like him to show you what his thoughts are and what types of impacts
they' re going to have on that market and how it' s going to affect the
prices in that market. So if I may, I 'd like to introduce him now and
then I 'd like to talk after that if that' s okay.
Hal Pierce: I 'm Hal Pierce. I 'm an architect with Design Resource Group.
I 'm also on the Planning Commission in Plymouth so I sympathize with your
dealing with some things tonight. What I would like to talk about tonight
is basically how it affects the design of the building from the architects
point of view and the cost and basically we' re looking at, there' s 2 types
of units . One that Dean has proposed and another is the typical type of a
multi-family unit. If I could use your overhead. Basically this is the
typical tuck under type townhouse unit. Basically with single car garage, 1 II
we're at about 763 square feet. To add a double car garage in this type of
a design would add about 38% increased to the size of ,the ground cover and
add probably $10,000.00 to $15,000. 00 to the price of the unit. Because of
the tuck under , not only the garage is bigger but also because of the
configuration, the unit would have to get bigger also. Again, there could
be some other designs and this has been a very cost effective type of
housing design. The other type of design, I think they all 3. . .are typical I
3 story tuck under garage. I 'd say 90% of the multi-family is built like
this. 3 floors, a garage is underneath the units. Usually it's precast
concrete for the 3 hour fire barrier and we go wood frame on top of that.
Now these units that I 'm using are just a very standard, typical unit with II
the building with around 750 square feet for a 1 bedroom, abottt 1,000
square feet. . . Take a look at the parking and garage and I 've kind of
dashed in where the units would go above it. Basically a 1 bedroom
apartment would cover about 2 1/2 spaces of parking below and a 2 bedroom
would cover about 3 1/2 spaces. Now with 3 floors, we've got with the 2
units , that' s 6 spaces so we've got 6, parking spaces we have under the
units. We have 6 parking spaces, this comes out 1 to 1. To increase this
to what your ordinance standards propose, we'd have to go 2 spaces for the
1 bedroom unit and provide 9 parking spaces. The only way we could do this '
is basically eliminate the top floor and go to a 2 story apartment building
which would then increase the ground cover like I say to get the density
that is allowed in this zone or we could enlarge the units of course and
make those luxury units so we cover more garage space. We could attach the II
garages above the ground. I 've only known of one that' s done this and it
11
IIPlanning Commission Meeting
November 15, 1989 - Page 22
I
isn' t very handsome building . It makes some very large above the ground
I garages if they have to be attached or maybe go to a 2 story underground
parking garage which I haven' t seen done but I know it'd be very, very cost
ineffective. So what I tried to do with some of the actual physical
I restraints would be on the typical types of buildings that are being guilt
today. Are there any questions?
IConrad : Yeah, go back through this particular one again.
Ellson: Did you say if we had a 1 bedroom, you could have a 1 car garage?
I Krauss : That' s true. We did consider Mr . Pierce' s comments on this and
there' s probably some validity to it. Yes , 1 bedroom only does require
1 stall , however it takes up a smaller area so there' s more of them and
I conceiveably there could be a problem in cramming enough stalls under the
building unless the building footprint was enlarged because you had some
amenity room or something else that pushed out the first floor larger than
just the footprint that was required for the apartments themselves.
IHal Pierce: Just in response to that. I haven' t really gone into some of
the other things that go into. . .storage possibly, also trash compactor and
elevator . Mechanical rooms and stuff and also access with garage doors
usually take 2 spaces at each end . But usually it averages out with the
common spaces, we usually get a 1 to 1 ratio.
Emmings: Did you say that you're on the Planning Commission in?
Hal Pierce: In Plymouth, yes .
IIEmmings: What does Plymouth do with this issue?
II Hal Pierce: Plymouth has a 1 parking stall and 1/2 parking stall outside
at the present time for a multi-family which would be an R-4 zone.
Emmings: What about do you have something like an R-12?
Hal Pierce: Well that' s what would be our R-4 zone.
IEmmings: Okay, and there you have 1 enclosed and. . .
Hal Pierce: And 1/2 parking stall outside. So that's 1 1/2. They like to
I see more but that' s their number. I usually try to design so there' s
probably 1.7, 1. 8 parking spaces . One inside and over the minimum because
sometimes, depending on how many 2 bedroom apartments there are. They
don' t have, 2 bedroom apartments require 2. I have worked in some
I communities where they require 2 for a 3 bedroom apartment but that would
actually, if we looked at a 3 bedroom, we'd add one more parking space.
I Emmings: The thing that interested me about this is whether you have 1
bedroom, 2 bedrooms or 3 bedrooms, if you have a married couple that are
each, or the man and the wife are both working, you've got the same number
I of cars regardless of the number of bedrooms. Why would we relate it to
bedrooms at all?
I
Planning Commission Meeting
November 15, 1989 - Page 23
I
Krauss: There are statistics that demonstrate that the number of bodies
per unit is related somewhat to the size of the unit.
Emmings: But if it' s parents and children, the children aren' t driving for
the first 16 years or whatever .
Elison: Well even if it was parents and children that' s 2 bedrooms, that' s
definitely 2 cars but 1 car could especially a lower price place could be
easily be a single person that couldn' t afford a house unless they were
married so they're buying something like this. I would think there's a
higher probability of an individual in a lower priced home than vice versa.
I would just think there'd be more of a chance of it but you' re right. If
there' s a couple, there' s probably 2.
Batzli : To really ruin their statistics , I think I lived in that apartment II
building when I first got married and we had 3 cars.
Hal Pierce: I guess it comes down to, in trying to get that amount of II parking on the site and still stay within your 35% impervious surface area.
Krauss: I think there really is an issue there with the hard surface
coverage but the issue may relate more to the hard surface coverage
requirement than it does to the parking requirement. We haven' t come to
you with any kind of proposals to change it but based on a lot of
ordinances that I 've worked with, 35% hard surface coverage is pretty
tight. That' s a very tough standard to adhere to. Possibly that warrants
some reassessment. But you may have a cart leading the horse type of
situation here. What do you think is a valid design standard and then can
you build that within the ordinance. I think your decision should first be
is what's the valid design standard in terms of the number of stalls that
should be required and then if the ordinance needs changing to accommodate
that, then consider that. '
Batzli : I think the issue is really, if in fact that district is designed
to have a higher density and lower cost housing, the question is really
then what is the change in the affordability of that housing due to what
we're requiring here tonight. We' re jacking up the price $10,000.00 per
unit. Maybe that' s a value judgment we make. If we' re talking about
doubling the price of the developments by doing this, then maybe it' s
something we don' t want to do but that' s really their paint is that by
doing this, we are pricing the type of housing that we are supposedly
promoting in the district out of the range of the people that would buy it. II
Elison: Or change the hard surface or whatever.
Krauss: Well there' s nothing though as far as the density relates to
value. We have a developer here that wants to build to the low end of the
market segment and that' s fine but you could have another developer before
you that was working to hit another segment and it' s not the same kind of
requirement.
Emmings: We have the townhouses we approved just before Cenvesco first
came in down here and they were, all of their units had 2 car garages and
IPlanning Commission Meeting
November 15, 1989 - Page 24
1
they just did that so that obviously was directed at a different segment of
IIthe market I suppose.
Krauss : In the not too distant past I worked on a number of townhouse
II projects that were designed to sell for $300,000. 00 a piece and apartments
that rent for $1, 200. 00 and up. Now I don' t know if they' re going to ever
see that in Chanhassen but you can see different market segments and that' s
' not related to the density.
Conrad : Well you' re coming on impervious surface. In the more dense
districts, the higher density districts, a 35% impervious surface right?
65% hard is allowed.
Krauss : No . You've got a 35% hard surface coverage.
1 Conrad : In R-12?
Krauss : Yes .
Emmings: That' s what they've been struggling against with this project on
top of the hill . That was my understanding.
IIKrauss : In our recent analysis of the Cenvesco project, you had a lot of
the lots at 34%, 34.5%.
11 Conrad : 34 what? Coverage or open?
Ernmings: Impervious. 34 impervious. Hard.
IIConrad: In residential for sure we' re talking 35% impervious.
I Krauss: The maximum lot coverage is 35% so you' re looking at 65% green
area. Which if you think that you've already got setback requirements that
create open area. That you've got wetland protection that creates open
I space. You' ve got drainage that creates open space. You've got oftentimes
steep gradings that preserve open space. That doesn' t leave a whole lot to
work with. It' s another issue than what we' re discussing tonight but it' s
a tough standard.
IIConrad: That' s business that we' re allowing 70% or 65% coverage right?
IKrauss: Industrial, yeah.
Conrad: Industrial , commecial goes up to that? Okay. Anything
residential is the opposite? Okay. Any other comments? Do you want to
Icome back up?
Dean Johnson: You guys touched a lot on what I was having trouble
II designing with that building and a lot of the reason. It is hard to stay
within the 35% and build affordable housing trying to stay within that
thing. If you did increase the impervious surface, then there's more
flexibility with design. It' s easier to give things and still build
Iaffordable housing so I agree wholeheartedly with Paul there. I guess you
r. ` r'
Planning Commission Meeting
November 15, 1989 - Page 25
1
know where I 'd like to go and I 'm going to use the projector here some, if II
I may, is get into showing you the types of people that you have working
here. Showing you what types of qualifying it take to get these and show
that some of these people are making fairly good money. I 'd like to show,
I've got a lot of statistics on single parent families. On single people. II
I have a project that I did in Plymouth that I 'd like to show you what the
numbers actually turned out on because it' s a finished product in Plymouth
so if I may. I
Conrad: Sure, go ahead.
Dean Johnson: The first one here has to talk about occupations in the
II
metropolitan area. These are the different kinds of income that you see in
the metropolitan area .
Emmings: Where are the developers? II
Dean Johnson: They' re so far off the scale Steve, you can' t see them.
Emmings: Which end?
Dean Johnson: The low end of course. These numbers, just to give you some ,
qualification, come from Minnesota Salary Survey 1989. These same numbers,
now if I can find the brochure, there' s a brochure that' s put out. I don' t
believe it' s by the City of Chanhassen but it is put out for the City of
Chanhassen by the Minnesota Department of Human Resources is it? Economic II
Development . These same numbers are in that pamphlet that was put out.
The items such as secretary, 2, second division. Punch press operator . II Electronics assembly. Welder . Machinist . Tool and die maker . Those were
the items we took directly from that brochure that was put out for
Chanhassen. The reason I wanted to do it is I wanted to show you what
kinds of wages they make and what type of annual wage that works out to.
I 'd like to talk a little bit about the median range in Carver County. The II
median wage in Carver County is $21,112.00. Median wage in Minneapolis-
St. Paul is $22, 385. 00. These are from again this survey and the U. S. II Census Bureau. I 'd like to also show you this transparency. A lot of this
data came from the Metropolitan Council . This is a. . .Metropolitan Council .
It shows that 40% of the people are upper income. I believe on that they '
consider upper income over $27,000.00. The numbers are, they use the
dollar numbers from 1979 to 1980 because that's when the last. census was
taken. What they've done for this circle is to analyze what cost of living
increases and that are and this. . .is what they're projecting, what the Met II
Council is projecting from 1986 to 1995. So what' s happening is 40% of the
people have incomes that can afford single family houses. The other 60% of
the people cannot afford them or would have a hard time affording them. II I 'd like to go to then, let's see here. I'd like to go to what it would
take to qualify for the units I have before you. My particular units.
These are the 2 bedroom, single car garages we were anticipating. We've
gotten our bids and these numbers again you've heard before. We were
II
expecting to sell these at $55,000.00. Now if we were to put a double car
garage on it, it turns out I ' ve estimated a little low. Hal has figured
that they'd be in a range from $10,000.00 more up to possibly $15,000.00 II more depending on the style of unit. Let's take the lower end. If you up
I Planning Commission Meeting
:-
November 15, 1989 - Page 26
II
II it to $65,000.00, my price range, qualifying income for the single car
garage would need $26,400. 00. Principle and interest payment would be
$501. 00. Principle, interest, taxes and insurance would be $638 . 00. What
you would be doing if you required the double car is you'd be requiring
I $10,000.00 more against some in units. Some in the double car itself. If
you' re putting a double car garage on a unit and you' re doing it in a
townhouse, you have to attach it somewhere. You' re going to end up having
I to spread the unit on just to even find a place to put that double car
garage on that so you' re going to gain in the living space and in the
garage but you may require the qualifying income to be up to $30,556.00 and
I principle and interest $598.00 and PITI of $738. 00. Our 3 bedroom unit
that we had anticipated was $68 , 900. 00 and these people would need to
qualify at $31,442.00. Obviously we' re up over median incomes already.
Now we' re up over what the average person can take.
IBatzli : When you' re qualifying, what are you doing? Paying 10% down?
I Dean Johnson: 10% down and also figuring in a car payment because most
everybody coming in to buy one of these are going to, and I guess I use car
payment somewhat loosely. They' re going to have some long term debt
probably along the way so we added in some long term debt. Just general
IIexperience in business tells you that every time you qualify, somebody has
one type of loan or another . Most often a car .
I Emmings: So to the extent that you've got, these are all examples of types
of units that you planned into Oak View.
IIDean Johnson: These are what I planned into Oak View.
Emmings: And all these are aimed at the 40%. .
IIDean Johnson : No. Some of them are. The $26, 000. 00 is in the median.
Emmings: So it was $27,000.00?
IIDean Johnson: That was $27,000. 00 and then usually what happens is you do
have some down money so you do pick up some of the low. . . We realize we' re
not Section 8 housing. I 'm not trying to say that we' re Section 8 housing .
IWhat I am trying to say is we do pick up a category of that housing with
this project. I guess at this point I 'd like to show you what happened
when we went into the Creekside project. I don't know, were you people out
Iat the Creekside project? Did you people go out there?
Ellson: In Plymouth?
IIDean Johnson: Yeah. •
Ellson: I think we did.
1
Dean Johnson: This is what happened when I sold these units. This is from
going back through the files and determining who we sold to. We sold to
I 47% married people. I didn' t go back and actually get ages in this . We
sold to an awful lot of elderly. We sold to an awful lot of just starting
II
Planning Commission Meeting
November 15, 1989 - Page 27
out single couples. Not a lot of inbetweens. It was either end of the II spectrum was more empty nesters or just starting out. To give you an idea
of that, in the married people, only 4 families had children. There was 5
children total. One family had 2 children and the others each had 1 child
so 5 children went in with that and that' s why I say there was such a wide I
range. Either they hadn't started having children or left.
Emmings: How many units there? '
Dean Johnson: 128. So we've got a fairly good sampling. We've got 4
years of selling. 22% were single people male. To give you an idea of II children again. Of the 22% there, 4 of those had children, 1 each so there
were 4 children generated by those people. The remaining was made up of
31% of single female households. Of the single female households, we had
10 that had children, 2 had 2 so we gained 12 children there. So we ended I
up with a total of about 21 children in 128 units in this particular
project. These sold in a price range when they started out from $55,200.00
up to $60,000. 00 when they started out and ended up in the 60' s range, in
the upper 60' s by the time the 4 years had lapsed and building costs had
gone up and the different things that happened. I guess the conclusion I 'm
drawing from this is well , maybe we should go to one other transparency.
Not to transparency you to death but this is a transparency that was again II
this was out of the Met Council 's book. According to the Met Council in
the next years , single parent households, not single people but single
parent households is going to be 18% of our people that are going to go
into these types of units . I guess what I 'm saying to you is you' re going
to end up with a large influx of people that divorced or whatever the
reason is, have a child or 2 but there' s only 1 parent. Consequently the
need for 2 garages is going to be a burden to them. They' re going to need
the 2 bedrooms but they' re really not going to need that extra garage. The
other thing is in showing you at the Creekside project' is we had single
females and single males buying into this project. Most of them wanted the 1
extra bedroom for like an office. What were some of the other reasons that
were used in that case? Sometimes a guest bedroom. Sometimes an extra den
or a place to store things. They wanted that but they didn't really need
the garage. Okay? So you' re going to get those types of people that come
into this thing. I guess at this point I feel that I 've shown you that
there are going to be people that are going to go into those 1 story units
that are going to end up you know being in that price range that you know
to cut all 2 bedroom, 1 car garages is going to be a burden to these
people. I guess from there what I 'd like to do if I may is go into what we
found when we searched through Chanhassen for availability. We went to the I
multi listing computers. This is the 1989, it's a little small but
everything that was bought and sold and listed through MLS. This does not
represent every house sold but in other words, most builders do not put
every house they build on MLS. If they sold it to a client, there' s no
reason to put it up for sale so it doesn't make this. This is some new
houses and then some used houses. As you can see in the housing end, the
single family homes, you have one house that' s in an affordable range or in II
a range where these people can afford it. $54,000.00. The house was built
in 1930 and it's a rambler on Hickory Avenue. I 'm not sure where that is
but the majority of your houses are up in the $90,000. 00 range and more.
When you get into multi-family homes, . . . 54,000.00. The lowest is
Planning Commission Meeting
November 15, 1989 - Page 28
I
$64, 900. 00 and then it automatically goes up into the 70' s and 80 ' s and so
I again, you' re that step above. When you talk about the other project that
you approved before we came in, you're talking about South Lotus . I know
the gentleman that's developing that. I 've known him for a couple of
I years. He is building to a little upscale market than I am. In his market
I would go to a 2 car garage also but he is going towards that market. He
keeps bringing himself out of the affordable housing range and going to a
I little more upscale townhouse. So I guess what I 'm saying to you is with
these, the availability of this house in this price range is next to none.
You don' t really have affordable housing. I think another point that I 'd
like to bring up, I don' t know how many of you ever read the Council report
Iwhen I did go in front of the Council for the PUD but at that point Jay
Johnson relayed a story about a Korean family that through his church he
was trying to place in Chanhassen and he made the statement that he found
I " absolutely no housing that this Korean family could go into in Chanhassen.
None of any kind and I know that's in the Minutes so if you want to go back
through and read that. I know that he has a personal thing with it or—
personal contact with it. I guess the other thing is when we get into
I rental property because so far all I 've been talking about is townhouses.
In Chanhassen right now as of 8-89, August of ' 89, this comes from the
apartment guide. The organization called the Apartment Guide. Of the 354
units that you have that rent in Chanhassen, you only have a vacancy rate
of 6. 2%. 22 units is all that was vacant at that point. I believe also
that in your rental units, I don' t believe any of them have attached
garages . In fact some of them I don' t believe have garages at all and I
Idon' t believe any of them are attached. None of them are 2 car garages so
right at the moment you don' t have any of that and you've got an occupancy
rate or a vacancy rate of only 6. 2%. You could stand of that type of unit.
' In other words, low end unit. When you have a vacancy rate of that little
at that time of the year. That shows to me and to other people that are
knowledgeable that there is a need for that type of hdusing . I guess I was
going to read some excerpts out of the housing guide that the Met Council,
it' s part of this booklet right here. Housing and Development Guide. I 'm
assuming you people have this. If you want, I certainly can give you a
I copy of it or see that you get one. It talks about affordable housing in a
number of places and I guess I don't want to read the whole thing. I think
this should be read before you review this thing because some of the things
in here it does . . .are being done in Chanhassen and it might be good ideas
that you do want to do. But a couple of the things I will read. One of
them deals, it says several policies deal with ways local governments and
developers can facilitate production of affordable housing. They recommend
modifying zoning ordinances for housing size, lot sizes and garages. Then
we get farther back in this thing where it talks about ways to do
affordable housing. It says the policy plan. The main heading is housing
affordability. In that on page 13 it says eliminating garages. A garage
I can add several thousand dollars to the cost of a house. Many people
consider one a necessity but garages are not essential for basic living
needs. Eliminating a garage can substantially reduce the price of a house.
Market demand should dictate whether garages are constructed. These with
other comments on here you might want to look over. I guess the last thing
that I want to do is, well. . .transparency here is where Chanhassen falls in
affordability. Some of these have, these are alternative types of houses
other than single family. What do these people have? Do they have other
Planning Commission Meeting
November 15, 1989 - Page 29
alternatives for this? Chanhassen has only 23.8% of it' s housing is
alternatives. As you can see the goal that's set up by the Met Council ,
they would like to see 41% so the Met Council would like to see an increase
in this so it has recommended an increase. I guess for conclusion one,
I guess I feel that in Chanhassen there is a need for affordable housing
that more could be done and there could be more affordable housing. Two,
you would be reducing, if not eliminating, affordable housing in going to
these garages. You'd be adding $10,000.00 minimum cost a townhome unit
which is the means in which you can get affordable housing and you' re
certainly not going to get it in large lots and single family homes so your
multi-family method of doing it is about the only way open to you. Three,
you are cutting out a large group, well again these are all kind of parts
together . There' s a large group of people that can' t afford housing that
right now the housing is not being planned for or allowed for . With this
type of restrictions it would make it even harder . Again, getting back to I
you know the public that you are serving is, I 'm not saying that you're not
trying to think of affordable housing but there' s a large portion of the
public that is not being served that could be looked at. I guess the fact
of going to the garages would again stop anybody from being able to build
on R-12 unless it was in the luxury and larger category. You wouldn't be
able to use your R-12 for affordable housing sites which, not that that' s
the only reason for R-12 but it certainly is one of the reasons for R-12.
I guess if you were to ask me for recommendations, obviously I'm a little
impartial here so I don't know how much weight you put to what I say but in
looking at it as a person as well as a developer , if you change apartments 1
to having 2 car garages, you' re going to force it to only be luxury
apartments . I think that other communities have probably thought of what
you're thinking of now and not gone to it. I can' t imagine that parking
issues with apartment buildings is for the first time being brought up in
Chanhassen. Every community that I 've ever known has struggled with
outside parking in apartments and the junkiness that can somewhat cause and
towing the cars away and all that type of stuff. I 'm sure that they've
thought about having more underground parking , more enclosed parking but
realized that the cost effectiveness would just stop that and you'd lose
that flexibility of even being able to build anything but a luxury
apartments. And as far as the multi-family townhouse type, I guess my
recommendation is that if you need to raise it, not that I 'm saying it
needs to be raised but if you need to raise it , 2 is a bit steep because
there are those people that do not need that extra stall which you would be II
putting a burden on. Maybe the alternative is to go to a 1 1/2 stall .
Require half the project to be 1 car garages and the other hand to be 2 car
garages. I think there's a lot of basis for that and I think there's some I
good thought in that. If you see a need for doing it, don' t across the
board do it because you are going to be hurting some people and causing
them to bear an unfair burden. I guess that's all I have.
Emmings: Can I ask you a question Dean? Getting back to your project over
here, we saw on the graphic 2 and 3 bedroom units. Did you have 1 bedroom
units in that? Any at all? I
Dean Johnson: No but I think I' ll have to admit, after doing some of this,
some of this surprised me and I think there is some room for 1 bedrooms.
1
t
IIPlanning Commission Meeting
November 15, 1989 - Page 30
I
1 Emmings: In Plymouth in that development , were there any 1 bedroom
apartments in that or townhomes?
Dean Johnson: In Plymouth, they were all 2 bedroom. There were no 3
I bedroom. They were all 2 bedroom. Oh, we had one unit that had a 5 course
basement in it and in there you could finish a third bedroom, that ' s right
but the basic unit was 2 bedroom.
IIEllson: Didn' t some of them have 2 car garages in Plymouth? I thought
I remembered seeing 2 car garages.
IEmmings: Some of them do here too.
Ellson: It' s been a while but I don' t think so.
IConrad : Any other comments? Is there a motion to close the public
hearing?
Batzli moved, Wildermuth seconded to close the ublic hearing . All voted
P g
in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
IIConrad : Okay folks , we' re reviewing the whole ordinance and it' s more than
multi-family and parking spaces issue and it' s not a Cenvensco issue. It' s
I a real broader issue and some interesting thoughts . Jim, we' re going to
start down with you.
I Wildermuth: Dean, you did a nice job in your presentation. I guess I
started after reading this packet last night, I thought that 2 garages
stalls per unit was a desireable thing but at this po3,nt I 'm thinking
something less than 2 with an average blended figure of 1.6 or 1.7 or
I something like that might be appropriate. As far as the standards are
concerned, I don' t know where you dredged these up Paul but they look good.
' Batzli : Can we get the drawings in the ordinance too?
Krauss: I can put more of them in. I ' ll be the first to admit that
I ordinances are typically plagerized from one another and I plagerized
heavily on one that I wrote a few years ago.
Wildermuth: The other thing I liked about your proposal Paul was it' s
pretty broad. It looks at not just residential or apartment construction
but it' s pretty comprehensive except parking requirements in general .
That's all I have.
Batzli : In general , I agree mainly with what Jim said. Not knowing really
how many parking spots are adequate for any given activity, obviously we' re
looking to you Paul for guidance and I don' t know whether 2 is too many or
' 1 1/2 is enough. It's worked for Plymouth. Maybe that would work here. I
don' t think that we should necessarily impose some heavy burden.
Hal Pierce: 1 1/2 total . One parks in the drive. . .
I
Planning Commission Meeting
November 15, 1989 - Page 31
I
Batzli : Right. 1 1/2 total parking spots for each unit. But the point I
being that I don't know if 2 is actually required or needed. I don't know
what the statistics really say whether how many people have 2 cars and are
they going to load up their garage with junk because there's no place to
store stuff so they end up putting their one car outside. I think that was I
the original intent of why we started looking at having larger garages
because of the storage problem. They' re going to put their snowmobiles and
whatever in their garage. Suddenly they're going to have their car in the
driveway and then if they've got 2 cars, they've got 1 out in the street.
I think it kind of escalated from there and I don't know necessarily
exactly anymore what the problem is that we' re trying to solve to be quite
honest with you. If it takes a 2 car garage, then I 'm in favor of a 2 car
garage and I don' t know any better if that' s what it takes or if that' s not
what it takes. If it's a requirement that you make the garage over sized
and that handles it because then you can put your car in there and the
junk, then it' s all the same to me. I don' t care you know to be quite
honest with you as long as there' s enough parking so there' s not a public
safety hazard where everybody's parking on the street and you can get the
police cars and the ambulances and fire trucks through. To me it makes
very little difference. If there's enough parking so it's not a public
safety problem and there' s enough space in the unit that you don' t end up
with every car parked outside and I think those were the two initial
problems we started to solve and given this ordinance, I trust you
implicitedly that this is what' s required but he's presented things today
and it sounds like Plymouth has a little bit different angle on it and so I
don't know that I can make up my mind given that information. Comments, I
think you did a really good job. I had 3 minor questions. One was in the
first section, paragraph 2, it talks about required parking. Loading areas
shall not be used for storage, display, sales, rental , repair or motor I
vehicles or other goods or for the storage of inoperable vehicles of snow.
Wildermuth: Or snow I think it is.
Batzli : Is that inoperable vehicles or snow?
Krauss : Or snow. 1
Batzli : What' s an inoperable vehicle or snow?
Wildermuth: It's for storing snow.
Ellson: It' s so you don' t just push it there and leave it there.
Batzli : Oh, for the storage of snow. It all becomes clear to me now.
Conrad: Were you born in this area?
Batzli : There' s just too many or ' s in there I guess. That was about the
15th or. Okay, I see where that goes back to. One other thing that I just I
thought was really interesting was in the 75 degree angle on page 3. Do
you actually require more space between the 2 curbs than a 90 degree angle?
I tried for the life of me to figure out why you'd need more space when
you're parking at an angle then when you're at a 90 degree angle and I ' ll
11
I r
Planning Commission Meeting
November 15, 1989 - Page 32
I
' trust you there again but I couldn' t figure that out for the life of me.
Krauss: If you're looking at me for a good answer for that, in all the
years I 've worked with this ordinance, I 've seen this standard in other
1 places. I 've never had anybody propose 75 degree angle parking.
Batzli : Well at least there' s an honest answer . The asterick before the
' 45-60-70 degree angle.
Krauss : What do they refer to?
Batzli : Yeah, what are those?
Emmings : Is it to put one way aisles? That' s all I could figure out .
IBatzli : Are those one way aisles?
Krauss : Those are one way aisles , yes.
Batzli : Okay. My final question is, when you measure the stalls, are you
measuring it like center line to center line? Stripe center line or how do
' they normally measures these things? Do they just do a total square
footage and then divy it up according to the plan that they have?
Krauss: Basically what you do is if you have a parking aisle, you divide
it by 8 1/2 and that' s the number of stalls you can fit in that aisle.
I Batzli : But when you' re requiring a minimum surface area for each stall ,
that' s how you end up doing it then is you take the overall area and then
divide it by your number of stalls to see if you have that minimum number
of square footage for each stall?
IKrauss : Which section are you. . .
Batzli : Let' s see . I lost it now. Since this is such a fun question, why
don't we go on and I ' ll find it.
Ellson: I thought it was pretty detailed too. I liked how thorough it
Iwas. I liked the idea that no change of use can be made without coming
back and looking at the parking again. I thought aboutr we' re saying that
they cannot use the parking for any kind of storage. In other words, we're
saying we don' t want people to have boats sitting on the side and things
like that and you know, there's a fine line. They are an eyesore but there
is very few people in residential neighborhoods that don' t have a boat on
the side of their garage and things like that and yet we're penalizing
these people even more so to say, go to a A-1 Storage or something because
now we're not even going to allow you to do that so I 'm not quite sure that
I 'd want to penalize them more on something like that. I kind of question
I that. I don' t think bicycle parking should be a requirement for multi-
family type dwelling. I think that those people will in their garage with
their bikes and I see a bike stand thing at a school and public facilities
' and things like that but I don' t think it should be a requirement for a
home area. What's the reason behind one way aisles?
Planning Commission Meeting
November 15, 1989 - Page 35
the price range they want to sell to and they don' t have basements and I
think Brian mentioned this. They don't have the basements and they don' t
have the storage places and the storage has to be somewhere or it ends up
in the garage and everybody winds up parking outside but I think if we' re
careful , and where I would in particular be willing to maybe look at the I
impervious surface thing is on the visitor parking. Or maybe it's not even
visitor parking . Maybe it' s extra parking that' s outside but I don' t think
there's anything particularly bad in Minnesota about parking outside. I I
think there should be one enclosed garage. There' s no question about that
but if there' s a second car , I guess I don' t mind if it' s outside. I know
in my own neighborhood there are a number of homes, just as I drive down '
the street that I have to drive down to get down to my house, with double
car garages where the garage is entirely full of things and not one car can
get in there. I think it's a very common snydrome and I don't know why. I
think it happens everywhere. I don' t think it will just happen in this
segment of the market. I think it kind of happens everywhere but if in
these developments there were adequate extra outdoor parking to account for
visitors and to account for a place where these cars can go so they' re not '
just on the streets . I don' t like them on the streets . I don' t think they
should be there. I think they should be in the garage, in front of the
garage or in an extra parking . Some kind of an overflow parking area .
That would satisfy me.
Batzli : Let' s say you included your no more than 50% has less than 2
stalls? 2 enclosed. Something like that right?
Emmings: Whatever the number is.
Batzli : Then are you also going to impose a minimum of for instance. . . or I
something like that for the ones that merely have a single enclosed garage?
Emmings: You know when they bring them in here, they count the space in
front of the garage as a parking space. The driveway that goes into the
garage as a parking space so they always , I know for example when Dean
presented his project he said each one has 2 places to park. If it' s a
single car garage, it has 2 and if it' s a double car garage it counts as
just 4 so I don't know what we' re counting exactly. When you say 1 1/2.
Everyone' s, even if it' s a single car garage, it's already got 2 so I don' t
know what the 1 1/2 means. Unless you' re not going to count that space.
Batzli : Well that' s the question. Are you comfortable counting that space
and then merely having like for instance, not to base the whole ordinance
on his project but merely have 3 or 4 other spots per unit seemingly for
overflow parking if you will. In other words, for those spots where if the
spot in front of the garage is filled, where do you park? Do you have
these limited number of spaces available?
Emmings: Yeah, I don' t know and maybe you'd say if you have a 2 car
garage, for every single car unit you've got to have at least 1 overflow '
parking place somewhere else or something like that. I don' t know.
There's probably 100 ways to do it but like I say, if I was going to get
adequate extra parking and visitor parking , I 'd be willing to look at I
impervious surface. I wouldn' t be willing to look at impervious surface to
IIPlanning Commission Meeting
November 15, 1989 - Page 36
I
put up a garage I don' t think. A strict garage or something like that
because I 'd rather encourage people to park in their garages in the units.
If they want to battle the weather and scrape the windshield like Ladd
likes to, hey, more power to them.
IBatzli : If in fact I think if the spots in front of the garage are really
packable, then I kind of like your idea of having a minimum number of
I additional parking spots based on single car garages or something like
that. That would make some sense then.
' Emmings: That' s all I 've got.
Conrad : Okay. The general standards Paul in this ordinance, I guess some
of the things do fly out like the bike rack, number 5. I feel it does have
' a place in commercial but it doesn' t have a place in residential as far as
I 'm concerned so do we need, well I guess what would you recommend on
that? What would you recommend? And I 'm just talking for myself now. I
I don't know what the other Planning Commissioners are thinking but I do
think there should be some standards for commercial and downtown but I 'm
not sure I really want to apply them any place else so if that were the
case, what would you say we should do with that standard? Take it out of
the general conditions?
Krauss : I wouldn' t be opposed to deleting it entirely and if we ever felt
Ithat a bike rack was needed , just. . .
Conrad : Well , Market Square.
IIKrauss : That would be, and unfortunately we didn' t do it there.
Conrad: That's right and that' s a mistake.
IIKrauss : The alternative would be to say that this only applies to
commercial or retail developments over 15,000 square feet in size.
IConrad: On the other side of things, I think the retailers who move in
there will want to have bike racks so whether we. . .
Ellson : I think so too. Even a Dairy Queen would like. . .
Conrad: We don' t need an ordinance to tell them stuff that they're going
I to do.
Batzli : But they didn' t design in where they could put it conveniently.
Just in the parking lot somewhere.
Conrad : I 'd be real tempted to delete that in total . When you build a
project, there' s a lot of factors that go into the cost. You've got land.
You've got building . You've got profits and you've got amenities and I
guess some of the things, as you set standards for how we build here. . .
problems that we've seen other places or problems that we've seen in
IChanhassen. I don't know that the $10,000. 00 is the additional cost to a
unit. I don' t think that's an accurate number but obviously it is going to
Planning Commission Meeting
November 15, 1989 - Page 37
11
cost something . I guess I would change what I see in front of me however
and Steve, I 'm really not persuaded on the impervious surface issue. I
still think as you cram more people into less space, you still need areas
to be for people so I guess I don't know if I can solve personally the
problem that way but I can relate to the number of enclosed parking spaces II
that we have and I think rather than the 2 that the ordinance has, I
believe I need to accomplish 2 things. One, to have a place, inside place
to store a car and stuff and I don't know how to do the stuff. Unless we '
have a building standard that requires basements and storage areas. That' s
another way to solve some of our problems. It's not in front of us tonight
and it' s going to be hard to form a linkage between storage and this issue
but it is a fact and it' s something that has to be taken care of. I can' t II
get my car in my garage because I 've got junk in it. That's a fact. I
just don't have enough space. But, the bottom line is, I think we should,
I would sure be amenable to reducing the enclosed parking to 1. 5 versus the I
2. I don't believe we' re a singles haven based on the research that I 've
seen and I ' ve seen a lot of data on Chanhassen. I don' t think we' re maybe
the same type of singles community. It' s a pretty family oriented. Those
charts aren' t Chanhassen. I ' ll guarantee you that.
Emmings: They may not be today but what about tomorrow?
Conrad: Well , they' re not today so.
Ellson: Well , here's one of the reasons why.
Conrad : Could be. Anyway, I think I would reduce the requirement for
enclosed parking .
Emmings: I don' t mean to interrupt but if you say it' s 1 1/2. Does that
mean it's for the project or for each unit?
Conrad: For the project.
Krauss: It' s on a gross basis.
Emmings: Then you get a question, do you want all your 2 bedroom ones
clumped together or all your 2 car garages?
Conrad: I don' t care. •
Emmings: 2 car garages or don' t you care? Do you want to mix? '
Conrad: That's up to the developer. I don't know that 1.5 is the right
answer . The 1. 5 in my mind speaks to some of the situations that were II presented today. I think it's compensates for singles that might move in.
Emmings: It' s more variety.
Conrad: I think it' s more realistic. It probably gives, is not as
economic a hardship to a developer who wants to put in an affordable
dwelling here so. I
IIPlanning Commission Meeting
November 15, 1989 - Page 38
I
Ellson: You' re saying the 1.5 has to be completely enclosed?
IConrad: 1 1/2 on a gross level .
Ellson : Or everyone has to have a 1 1/2 enclosed garage?
Batzli : What about the additional parking?
IConrad : I think each unit needs 2 stalls. Each unit needs totally 2
parking spaces of which 1 1/2 has to be enclosed.
I Krauss : One of the things we tried to do in the ordinance is separate out
the ability to require visitor parking based on our review of the site
plan. Since Dean was relating a lot of this to his project, I know the
I last time you reviewed his project we were concerned that while the project
met the letter of the law, that while you had for example one private
driveway was 500 feet long and all it had was the 1 car garage plus the 1
Icar out in the pad in front of it. We said 500 foot of that is just too
long, is there' s 2 people there to have a party on a Saturday night out of
the 30 units that fronted on it, I can guarantee you that the fire truck' s
not going to be able to get through. Therefore, we should have the
I authority to require some visitor parking . I think it might be preferable
if you specifically relate this requirement to what you think the dwellings
are going to need and let us handle visitor parking as a separate
requirement.
Emmings : How would it work now? With what we have in front of us. The
section on page 5 there. That' s the one you go to right now to ask for any
Iproject, what you need for visitor parking .
Krauss: Right.
IEmmings : And now just to, how would relate this for example to Dean' s
project? Could you work that through for me because I couldn' t figure it
I out.
Krauss : If in fact we went to the 1. 5 gross , we would ask Dean to show us
how that's satisfied on a gross basis . Then we take a look at this site
1 plan and we'd say well you've met the requirement as relative to the number
of dwelling units but we go to the paragraph, the lead in paragraph for the
required number of on site parking spaces that says the City may increase
I the requirements beyond this minimum based on findings due to the proposed
design that additional parking is due to be anticipated. Dean's particular
site plan, or the one that we last reviewed was one that it was clear to us
that some sort of a visitor parking was appropriate on that extra long
II
private driveway because of it' s design and that' s not something that' s
easv. to set down specifically in a standard because it is site plan
peer lc.
IEllson: So this allows you to may increase if deemed necessary?
Krauss: Yes.
Planning Commission Meeting
November 15, 1989 - Page 39
Batzli: Interestingly enough though, I guess I 'm having the same problem
maybe that Steve was having.
Ellson: What page are you on?
Batzli : On page 5. That' s where you' re reading from that the City may do I
so if they find that additional parking demand is anticipated. For
instance, do you go through criteria for a multi-family dwelling? Maybe I
missed something here but then you just go to G?
Ellson: 6 (B) . I
Batzli : 6 (B) or 1 (G) , excuse me. Is that where you' re going to go to to
up the number? Is this going to be this whole one that you're going to
look at? '
Krauss : No. 1 (G) would be used if there wasn' t a standard provided in the
ordinance at all .
Emmings: Well there isn' t. For visitor parking at a multi-family.
Batzli: So you' re looking at 1 (G) . '
Krauss : No . I would interpret the 1 (G) specifically applies to if there' s
no listing for that category for use. What I would refer back to is
basically the purpose section of that sub paragraph on page 5 that says
here' s the minimum requirements that we' re establishing for that district.
Batzli : Following standards or minimum criteria, right. You don' t give a II
minimum for visitors do you? Okay, well you say on site parking areas of
sufficient size to provide parking for patrons, customers, suppliers,
visitors, you don' t even say residents, and employees shall be provided on II
the premises of each use. You' re going to have 2 parking , both of which
must be enclosed and then additional parking for visitors shall be provided
in accordance with the findings of the City so you don' t have any criteria
on which to base that.
Krauss: And there' s a reason for that. Let' s take for example that Dean
came in with a project that had 2 car garages for all these units and had II
over width driveways. With the 2 car garages per unit, ,you have 2 cars
parking out in front of the garage doors and with the oversized driveways,
you may have some latitude to say we can afford to have a car to park in
there. It' s not going to cause us a problem. Without having a
specifically designated visitor parking area.
Batzli : Okay, but now that apartment has a party. They have 10 people '
over . What are you going to do? Start parking in the neighbor ' s driveway?
Krauss: If we had a large enough drive aisle, if these were accessed off a II
private driveway. If it was constructed to a large enough standard as for
example a city street might be, that could absorb parking on one side and
still allow vehicles to pass, yeah we might accept that.
I
I/ _ ..-
Planning Commission Meeting November 15, 1989 - Page 40
II
I Batzli : You've got curb cuts all the way up and down. Are you going to
allow parking on the street?
I Krauss: But see those are all design issues.
Batzli : I know but these are the things you' re going to hit the first time
you try to implement this ordinance and then what are you going to say?
IKrauss: All I can attest to is. . .
I Batzli : It' s probably workable somewhere else but I 've never had to work
with it and you have so you've had the benefit of having to interpret this
thing . That' s just my question is how do you go through this and where
_ would you come down on something like that?
IKrauss : It ' s really site specific and that' s the problem I have with _i t.
I think you need some latitude to view what's being proposed in the context
I of how that design works on that piece of property and a hard and fast rule
for something like visitor parking is kind of tough to apply. It' s not to
say, I 've seen ordinances that do it. I would prefer to have the latitude.
IBatzli : I think with latitude the problem you' re going to get into is it' s
going to be, the developer comes in and you say we want 20 stalls of
visitor parking and he says, well what do you mean? The last guy that came
I in, you didn' t give any. Why are you being unfair to me? Then you' re
going to have to come up with some rationale. You' re going to have to have
all these findings of why did you do this in this case and not in the other
I and eventually you' re going to have standards anyway or else you' re not
going to have any standards at all . Then you' re going to end up with a
sliding scale like you wanted earlier .
II Conrad : Sure, bring me into your mess . Any other comments? Is there a
motion?
I Batzli : I guess I don' t know, I heard what Ladd said about having a
minimum of 1 1/2. Your 50%, is that the same thing in your mind?
II Emmings: I guess when I was talking about 50%, I was thinking that it
ought to be distributed. That it ought to be, each unit ought to have,
some ought to be 2 car and some with 1 car to kind of spread this out in
the project. That's why I asked Ladd the question I did. Did he care and
I guess he persuaded me. I guess I don' t care anymore.
Conrad: The ends will take the 2 car garages and the middle will take the
II 1.
Batzli : Or just make them all 1 1/2 to show us.
I Emmings: If it was Annette' s motion, then they put storage in the other
half.
Krauss : Yeah, I think you want to specific on that. If your goal is to
provide parking stalls, it should be on a gross basis for the project.
1
Planning Commission Meeting
November 15, 1989 - Page 41
Emmings: So each unit should have 2 parking spots and of the ones which
are enclosed, the project has to have an average of 1 1/2 or more. We
don' t care if it' s higher . We only care if it' s lower . A minimum of 1
1/2.
Conrad: Dean, you have a question. We' re struggling with this. A quick
one? '
Dean Johnson: What occurs to me when you talk about the 1 bedroom units .
It's just more information. Is the 1 bedroom unit. . .1 bedroom units. Is
that just going to be the 1 stall like we did in the. . .multi-family
townhouses or multi-family. . . I guess what I 'm saying is, I see a little
bit of a possible conflict there. How does that figure into these things?
Krauss: The ordinance accepts 1 bedroom and efficiency apartments.
Emmings: Yeah, but we' re talking about the project . ,
Dean Johnson: What happens to the total number then?
Ellson: Does the project need 1 1/2 even though some are 1 and 1 would '
have been an exception before.
Krauss : I would anticipate having to do some playing around with a I
calculator so that you only had 1 stall applied to those smaller units but
then all 2 bedrooms and above had that 1. 5 requirement.
Conrad: See I don't know. I have to let some expert tell me but even on a 1
1 bedroom, a married couple without children will have 2 cars so I
guess I 'm not totally sold on a 1 bedroom only needing 1 space. They'd
still need 2 spaces in my mind so I don' t know.
Krauss: Well, they would still have 2 spaces but only 1 of which would be
the enclosed one. ,
Conrad: versus the 1 1/2.
Emmings: So if the whole project is single, one bedroom places? '
Ellson: You could run the risk of having all married couples in there and
none of them. . . ,
•
Krauss : If you had 100 one bedroom units, a project that had 100 1 bedroom
units, you would have 100 enclosed stalls and 100 on the outside.
1
Emmings: And 200 cars parked outside.
Krauss: That's something else. I didn't put that in the ordinance but I
had a few projects over the years where you required that they have 1 car
enclosed and then they said in the lease that that's an additional $45.00
or $50.00 a month and nobody wanted to pay for it so there was a shortage
of parking on the outside so I got to stipulating that they have to give
IIPlanning Commission Meeting _
November 15, 1989 - Page 42
one stall in the rent with each unit.
IConrad : I don' t know. I think the City Council can wrestle with this just
like we are. I still think we have an issue of storage and parking and
I we' re kind of solving the 2 with this parking deal but I 'm not convinced
we've solve storage problems really but anyway. I 'm still waiting for . . .
I Emmings : But I think there' s a dramatic increase in the amount of stuff
people have and need to store when you move into a house as opposed to when
you live anywhere else. That' s my own experience. You accumulate a lot
more crap when you have a house.
IConrad : It makes sense but these many supposed affordable units have no
basements and we've gone through this problem before in Chanhassen and it' s
' been a complex problem. When you have no basements and limited garages,
you end up with problems. It's just an absolute thing. That's where I 'm
trying to solve that problem and I think there are multi ways to solve it.
This is one way to do it.
Emmings : I don' t think that a 1 bedroom, under the thing we' re proposing
now, I don't think there's any reason to treat a 1 bedroom different.
IConrad : Is there a motion?
' Batzli : I ' ll make it. I don' t know that I understand what you' re really
going for Ladd but we can just find out. I move that the Planning
Commission recommends approval of the amendments to Article XXV, Off Street
Parking and Loading set forth in the memo dated November 6, 1989 as set
' forth except with the following changes. In Section 20-1117, A(2) , the
word "of" shall be changed to "or" . In Section 20-1118, paragraph A(1) ,
this is by the way on page 2, after the word 18 feet a paranthetical which
I reads , (except parallel parking shall have minimum dimensions as set forth
below) .
' Conrad : You didn' t touch bicycle parking .
Batzli : Delete bicycle parking, I 'm sorry. That's paragraph 5 of Section
20-1117. I had that on my list . I wasn' t there yet. In paragraph
I 20-1124, the third line after the word visitors, insert the word residents.
Then in paragraph 6 (B) of that same section, we' re going. to change the
first sentence to read, actually make it two sentences. The first sentence
I would be, Two, (2) parking spaces. A minimum of fifty percent (50%) of
units shall have 2 parking spaces both of which must be completely enclosed
in a garage. Make sense to do it that way or do you like your 1 1/2
better?
Emmings: Isn' t it the same?
I Conrad : I think it' s the same. I understand mine but I think yours is
probably the same.
Ellson: A minimum of 1 1/2 enclosed.
Planning Commission Meeting
November 15
1989 - Page 43 '
Batzli : Well this reads 50% of all the units shall have 2 parking spaces , I
both of which are enclosed in a garage. I think that does the same thing .
And those are the only changes I have. That'd be the extent of the motion.
Conrad: Is there a second? '
Krauss : Would you mind if we also deleted the 75 degree angle parking? I
don' t think we' ll ever need it.
Wildermuth: I would rather see the number of the staff than put it at 1. 5.
Something less than 2 per unit.
Batzli : I guess what I would propose, if it' s been seconded, is that we
make it the number that it is but that obviously staff should take a look
at that number and see if it' s reasonable and make a recommendation to the I
City Council as well . I think we should put a number in there but you' re
right. I don' t know that our number is any better than the number that was
in there before we started tonight. '
Emmings: Well maybe check in with some other local municipalities .
Krauss: There are no other municipalities to the best of my knowledge that II
require more than 1 enclosed stall .
Emmings: Plymouth. Oh no, that's right. His is 1. '
Batzli : So we' re requiring 2 per unit and at least 50% of the units shall
have the 2 spaces enclosed. '
Emmings: It still contains an exception for efficiencies and 1 bedrooms.
Conrad: Is there a second? '
Ellson: Second .
Conrad: Discussion. '
Ellson: I just had a question on if anyone thought about may point about
the first page. I know no one ever mentioned it except me but, required
parking and loading area and the driveway, inoperable vehicles or snow.
We're saying here that a person can't put a boat or another car or anything
else out there? I mean I agree that you shouldn' t display, sell , rent or •
being repairing stuff out there but I don't know if it's fair to tell
somebody that either they can' t have a boat or they can' t keep their boat.
Conrad: See I read that. It didn't say boat. Is the word boat in there? 1
Emmings: Other goods.
Ellson: Maybe this doesn' t apply to that but I know we saw those at the
other one.
Conrad : See I paid attention to what you said.
Planning Commission Meeting
November 15, 1989 - Page
44
•
Krauss : It doesn' t say boat. I probably should say boat but I think the
intention here is that it' s not prohibiting you parking a boat. It' s just
prohibiting you parking a boat in the required stall . If you want to allow
I outside parking of these sorts of things on a project, you've got to
provide some additional spaces for it.
' Batzli: Well the key word there then is required right?
Krauss : Yes.
I Batzli : But I think in the nuisance ordinance or somewhere else there is
something that says you can't park a boat in front of your house and it has
to be on the side of your house . I think that' s covered someplace else in
Ithe Code.
Conrad: Right. I know we've talked about that .
1 Ellson: But this isn' t saying you can' t do it.
Conrad: You can do it.
IIEllson: That' s it. I didn' t want to take that possibility away. I ' ll
just leave it as it is.
Batzli moved , Ellson seconded that the Plannin g Commission recommend
' approval of the amendments to Article XXV, Off Street Parking and Loading
set forth in the memo dated November 6, 1989 as set forth except with the
following changes: In Section 20-1117, A(2) , the word "of" shall be
changed to "or" . In Section 20-1118, paragraph A(1) , "after the word 18
I feet insert, (except parallel parking shall have minimum dimensions as set
forth below) . Delete bicycle parking in paragraph 5 of Section 20-1117.
Paragraph 20-1124, the third line after the word visitors, insert the word
I residents. In paragraph 6 (B) of that same section, change the first
sentence to read, Two , (2) parking spaces. A minimum of fifty percent
(50%) of units shall have 2 parking spaces both of which must be completely
enclosed in a garage. Also delete the 75 degree angle parking. All voted
Iin favor and the motion carried.
IConrad: Brian's got to go and I 've got to go real quickly.
Ellson: Well we've only got one more thing.
IConrad: Well we have 2 don't we?
Krauss : You have 2 more. I guess one of them is fairly involved . It' s
I the site plan review ordinance. I guess if it wasn' t controversial, we' re
looking for ammunition in terms of handling projects as they come along . I
think that's the more important one but I could understand it. You'd want
to discuss it more at length than the hour permits.
1
PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION L
' MEETING
NOVEMBER 14, 1989
' Chairman Mady called the meeting to order at 7 : 30 p.m. .
MEMBERS PRESENT: Sue Boyt, Ed Hasek, Curt Robinson, Jim Mady, Jan Lash and
Larry Schroers
MEMBERS ABSENT: Dawne Erhart
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman, Recreation Supervisor
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Schroers moved, Lash seconded to approve the Minutes
of the Park and Recreation Commission dated October 24, 1989 as amended by
Larry Schroers on page 31 to change the vote on the motion to, all voted in
favor except Sue Boyt who abstained and the motion carried.
PRIORITIZATION OF PARK PROJECTS AND FIVE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
(Recording of the meeting started at this point is the discussion.)
Lash: Jim as long as you have a copy of the budget, do we have that in
' there. . . interpretive signage for $3,000.00?
Hoffman: That' s in ' 90.
Mady: We've kind of batted around the interpretive signage topic and said
it's nice that we don' t have to put a lot of stuff. We just don't want to
fill our parks with signs either .
Boyt : But that'd be a good place for it because the school has said they
use that park for nature study for the elementary school.
Mady: It'd be one of those things that maybe we can pick up a biology
major from the University, somebody like that who wants to work as an
intern to do a intern project. I 'm not necessarily saying put the signs up
' but telling us this would work and that would work. I don't know if that's
a biology major or horticulturists or what but. . .natural°ist? "
Schroers: Yeah, a naturalist. We're learning about interpretive signage.
It' s pretty seasonal . I mean things change. In order for it to be really
effective. You need to change the signs like 4 times a year. It gets
really costly and real involved and you know, a few things that are
permanent that are of particular interest, a description sign for that
would be fine but I think you' re getting carried away with all kinds of
signs. People walk up to them in the middle of the winter and they're
looking for an oak leaf and there isn' t an oak leaf you know.
Hasek: The ones that I 've seen that work the best are the ones that talk
about land forms and other natural features simply besides the oak woods.
They might address the fact that this is a natural stand of white oak
I
IIPark and Rec Commission Meeting
November 14 , 1989 - Page 2
I
forest on the edge of a pond created by the glacial melt. . . Those types of
things because when you talk about generalities, they last a while.
Hoffman: I think it' s a fairly good idea . I 'm just a little uneasy as I
I don't know maybe some of you about the upkeep. The maintenance. The
vandalism aspect. It' s a fairly isolated park.
' Boyt: There's always a lot of little vandals hanging out there.
Hoffman: Yeah, maintenance people aren' t in there every day. It ' s not a
real highly developed where people would think about doing something in
Ithat park before they did it down there. They'd just go ahead and hack
away.
Schroers : I guess if I had a preference, I would just do as little in that
park as possible. I 'd just leave it as natural as we can.
Hasek: I 'm not opposed to that.
IMady: I had a question on that park. I know one individual lives right on
the corner of the trail right off of Laredo who takes his dog every night
Ithrough the trail and allows his dog to do his daily constitution on the
trail every day. I honestly don' t know what we can do about that but it
just bugs the heck out of me when I ride by there and I see him doing that.
IHoffman: Call our friendly CSO' s . They do that. They get those calls
quite often. If I could , if anybody' s in the park over the next couple
years, just to keep an eye on the trees that the Boy Scouts planted in
I there. See what they do. Put what, 5, 000 trees down there. Seedlings
this past fall . Some aren' t bad so we' ll see how they do.
Mady: Hopefully about a third of them will come out.
Hoffman: They will . 95% or better .
IRobinson: What kind of trees?
Hoffman: Two kinds of spruce, a birch tree, a maple and a larch. Rice
IMarsh Lake Park.
Robinson: Interpretive signage down there. I don' t know how. . .you can' t
Iget in there.
Hoffman: That' s something we can probably take out of there as well for
1990. Off street parking was paved this year.
' Lash: Where' s the off street parking?
I Hoffman: You just drive into the cul-de-sac and then there' s a little
offshoot there and there' s a small parking lot with a sign. That is it.
Lash: Okay. I parked there. I just didn't know that' s where it was .
r
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 14, 1989 - Page 3
I
Hoffman: We received a call just a couple of weeks ago for , question from
a new resident in there about the ice rink there at Rice Marsh Lake. Does
it have a warming house, etc. , etc . so went over the merits or the costs of
putting a warming house at each of our neighborhood parks as well and what
that would take. '
Robinson: Where. . .
Hoffman: Right on the ballfield at Rice Marsh Lake. That park. '
Lash: I don' t know what can be done about this park but I have a problem
with this park. I feel really sorry for the neighbors that live down there II
during the summer when there' s the kids, games go on every night of the
week and it' s just , there' s traffic in and out of there all night long and
people are parking all over everywhere. Is there something that we can do I
about that situation other than waiting there another 5 years?
Mady: Sure. Cancel the kids programs .
Lash: Is there anything else we can do?
Mady: If you don't have facilities. Those were the only facilities II available when it started and those kids were willing, I don' t know of any
places that. . .
Lash: But it's been going on for quite a few years. '
Schroers: What programs are going on down there?
Lash: Ragball , T-ball .
•
Hoffman: Yeah, youth sports . Every ballfield that we have in the
community is being used.
Lash : So when you've got that overlap time for the first teams are still
there and then the second teams are coming, there' s cars all over
everywhere and I feel for the people that live there. I think geez if I
went and bought a house on a cul-de-sac because there was a park in the
backyard, I mean that' s a really nice set up and then all of a sudden to
have this, I feel kind of sorry for them.
Hasek: We play soccer there. We played in a fall league soccer this year
in Minnetonka. In the Minnetonka system and we went to a park that I
didn' t know existed off of Scenic Heights Road in Minnetonka and there are
2 or 3 small cul-de-sacs that abut up against the park. Almost everybody II that is around the park other than that, their back yard abuts the park and
there is parking all over the place. The neighbors are sitting in the back
yard watching the activities. I think it' s a matter of how it occurs. If
the events are there and they've been occurring and you' re accustomed to it '
when you moved into that situation is one thing but if it' s thrust upon you
is quite another . This park, I mean you' re talking about 2 or 3 soccer
games going on at the same time out there and they've got a huge totlot out
there. Like I said, there' s parking across, there are people who actually
I
IIPark and Rec Commission Meeting
November 14, 1989 - Page 4
I
try to park across these poor people' s driveways over there. I think
I
they've just gotten accustomed to it. It kind of exists over there. Just
because. . .park doesn' t mean the park belongs to you.
IILash: I 'm not saying that. What I 'm saying is, if these people lived
there before and , if it was me I would feel frustrated with it because it' s
such a nightmare all summer and I feel if there' s something we can do to
I correct it, I would certainly like to see that be done. If there' s nothing
we can do, there' s nothing we can do but I guess I 'd just like, if there' s
parking so people want to use it they can use it but there' s more cars down
there than that parking lot can ever handle so therefore people are all
I over the cul-de-sac . I pulled in there and there' s been little kids on Big
Wheels and people want to feel like they live on a cul-de-sac, they want to
feel their kids can go out and play on the cul-de-sac and there' s just cars
going in and out of there all the time.
Schroers : Has staff received complaints from any of the neighbors down
there?
Hoffman: I 've never received any complaints . The only park we' ve received
complaints about useage and parking problems is Meadow Green.
IIHasek : . . .a problem and we perceive a problem, whether the neighborhood
comes in here or not, I certainly would like to take care of it because I
think that' s what this commission should be is proactive as opposed to
reactive and we've gotten reactive over the course of the last year and a
half, 2 years now and I don' t think it' s a good position to be in. If we
can perceive problems any place in this city, I think we ought to do
1 something about it.
Lash: Maybe all the original people have moved out and people who are
Iliving there now. . .they don' t care. I don't know.
Hoffman: As you stated, once the additional parkland at Bandimere Park
comes on line, as ballfields in community parks, whether it be adult
community or youth community, we' re using them equally now, there' s no real
definition at this point. As those become available, we' ll move those
activities out of the neighborhood parks .
IILash: I guess I would like to see that it be our goal -is to try and move
it out of there .
IHoffman: It' s a goal .
Boyt: Do we have property that' s adjacent to the marsh? It seems like
there was a dirt road that went back around a ways.
Mady: They made a development back there.
IHoffman: A pump house yes. That' s park property.
Boyt : Well maybe you could encourage parking down there rather than in the
neighborhoods .
11
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 14, 1989 - Page 5
1
Mady: Basically you' re going right in people' s back yards.
Boyt: Yeah but it' s not in their yards and it is parkland. Maybe we could
take a look at it and see if there are possibilities down there and then
maybe we could talk to Jeff Bros and he could get the information out to
the families and the CAA kids. I didn' t know who' s property that was the
first time I went down there. I didn't know if it was their back yard or II parkland. If I should park there. If it' s a possibility I think we should
look into it.
Robinson: How about in right field? You go way out there. Is there a
road? Can you come in?
Hoffman: This is to the left as you come in there' s a road there. '
Mady: That goes to the sewer station. The sewer meter station for sewer
and water .
Hoffman: Yeah. There' s a lift house down there.
Mady: We fixed the shelter. Bandimere. ,
Lash: Did that . . .
Hoffman: Offstreet parking? '
Lash: And the basketball court. Did that just kind of get. . .
Boyt: Did we finish the title search? Oh, it went through?
Hoffman: The new Bandimere.
Mady: The community park? It closed . It closed a month ago.
Hasek: I don' t think so. I think they were doing title work. '
Hoffman: I believe the last thing Lori said there was no other problems on in
it.
Schroers : When I heard they still weren' t sure about that sewer line or
William's Pipeline. '
Hoffman: Yeah. I think that problem' s been resolved. We' re talking about
Bandimere Heights Park here. The little one.
Robinson: We can' t do anything with Bandimere Heights.
Boyt: Not until we know. '
Lash: Is that money, has it already been spent?
Hoffman: The $2,000.00 for the basketball court? '
r
II Park and Rec Commission Meeting r w
November 14, 1989 - Page 6
II
IILash: And that $1, 500. 00 for off street parking?
Hoffman: No. Nothing ' s been done there.
IIBoyt : Did we do a master park plan?
Mady: We need to do. . .get the whole thing tied together so we know how it
IIworks .
Hoffman: Yeah, the master park plan showed a soccer field and a totlot
Iover in that corner .
Lash: So there' s hardly anything that anybody wants to do there
considering the pending but that' s for 5 more years right?
I Boyt : Well then we can approach it later .
I Hoffman: That is one other park where we received parking complaints
during soccer games. But those were somewhat resolved.
11 Mady: Bluff Creek. We don't have the access road, that' s for sure.
Hoffman: South of golf course. Doesn ' t have an address .
I Schroers: What we need to do is designate this as an equestrian area and
let the people who have horses go in there and try to find it.
II Hoffman: So 1989, the interpretive signage, access road, that got chopped
in our budget .
IMady: ' 91. We still have it for ' 91.
Hasek: That' s another one of those private public parks.
IBoyt: I think there' s one guy that walked through it once.
Hasek: I 've been down there but only through private property by accident.
IIMady: We tried to find it once upon a time.
ILash: So that' s $11,000. 00's going into reserve?
Hoffman: Yeah. Moved forward.
I Mady: It ' s not money that was there. We stole that money. That became
part of the money we needed when somebody asked for this so we took it out
of there.
IILash : So it' s gone right?
Mady: Yeah.
I
11
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 14, 1989 - Page 7
Boyt : So this is kind of mythical .
Mady: It's not even here.
Schroers: What we' re thinking is if we ever find it, we' re going to need
to make an access road.
Lash : But if it' s not there anymore, we can' t put it into reserve.
Mady: No it's not reserve.
Lash: The money' s been spent. We can' t put it in reserve so we just put
it on into 1991?
Mady: Yes. '
Hoffman: That' s a good park to think about that we are preserving the
natural amenities down in that area so keep it in the back of your mind .
It' s there. Minnewashta Heights . Park ID sign last year . Nothing
occuring this year. Nothing slated for 1990. It' s a real small
neighborhood park. It does have a totlot there. Operated some playground
up there this year and there' s also the ice skating rink there. That is an II
ice skating rink that Dale had some concerns about that it' s a long drive
up there and it gets used very little. They come back after a couple days
and it has not been skated on but I felt it was real important to keep that 11
one to serve that area of town so it will stay there.
Boyt: is this where we had talked about a shelter at one time?
Mady: Yes.
Hasek: I think you're right. The only time we ever go there is when the II ice is bad over at Cathcart because we always know the ice will be good at
this one but everybody goes to Cathcart because that is the. . .
Hoffman: The place to skate. It' s got a warming house. ,
Schroers: At one time we had $20,000.00 I think for . . .
Boyt: An ice shelter, yes .
Hasek: But it was perceived that . . .
Boyt: Just like the tennis court at South Lotus Lake.
Hasek: We asked for something up there but the neighbors didn' t want it. 1
I mean that came through a request .
Schroers: I think we were thinking about a dual purpose bus
shelter/warming house type of thing.
Robinson: Let's leave it then.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting F-
November 14, 1989 - Page 8
I
Lash: Is that over by. . .
Hoffman : It' s right off of TH 7 in Minnewashta Heights .
'
Hasek: That' s the problem. See there' s the problem. Nobody knows where
this area of town is . Isn' t that show you.
Mady: It' s Excelsior. Herman Field.
Hoffman: Obviously access road and totlot have not been done in 1988 .
Mady: We' re just moving those into 1991.
Lash: But is this the $35,000. 00 that we had in reserve that was to be. . .
IIMady: Herman Field was $35,000. 00 that' s in reserve.
I Lash: Okay, and are we talking about getting going on that now next
spring?
Hoffman : This is another park that' s somewhat in limbo. It needs
IIaccessibility and public input. The input from the neighbors, if you
remember back to the last time we had those neighbors in to talk about the
development of Herman Field. Nothing concrete came about. Nothing was
ever approved to go ahead .
Lash: I thought we had decided on that.
IMady: Well we know where it can go. We do not have, we have to purchase
or get the easements to get to the park, actually into the park off an
easement. It ' s not been put in yet.
' Boyt: What' s holding us up? Because the neighbors don' t want us to
develop it?
IIMady: In your adminstrative packet, wasn' t there. . .
Schroers: No, we approved going ahead with some things there.
•
Boyt : Didn' t we request staff to check on the access?
II Schroers: I don' t recall that but I do recall that we okayed mowing a turf
trail to be used for cross country skiing and walking and also mowing out a
couple areas for picnic tables.
Lash : And open field and a small totlot.
Mady: Those were discussion on the master park plan but we have not funded
I anything yet because we don' t have access to the park yet. Now in our
adminstrative packet for our next meeting, we' ll be meeting with the Herman
Field residents again.
I
11
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 14, 1989 - Page 9
1
Boyt: We need to talk before the neighbors come in because we don' t know
what' s going on with that.
Lash: Well , and one of the things that we had requested, or that I
remember requesting staff to do was to get back to us, how much of the II things on that plan we could get for $35, 000.00. If all you can do is get
the road in there.
Mady: That' s why we' re meeting with the residents is to find out what
exactly they want.
Lash: We already did that . 1
Mady: Well it' s an ongoing project .
Lash: We had them in here twice. We had the survey. We discuss it.
Everybody seemed to be I think.
Boyt : We came up with a plan that it was going to be pretty natural . A
lot of the same elements. Mark was here.
Schroers: And there was a Plan A and a Plan B as to where the open area
was going to be and we selected one of those.
Lash: And there were boardwalks and a lot of different things. 1
Mady: All I 've saying is we do not have access into the park at this point
in time.
Boyt : But we' re wondering where. . .
Lash: Why go ahead and look at plans and do all of that stuff if we don' t
even have access to it? I mean that's kind of putting the cart before the
horse isn' t it?
Mady: Again, I believe it' s been put to Council to get it done and it 1
hasn' t been done as far as I know.
Hasek: We talked about parking too. We talked about access and parking 1
and the fact that we weren't going to put a park together until we had
access and parking into the park.
Schroers: And were also people that were concerned about their private 1
property and wanted a privacy fence installed along one side of it.
Robinson: We've got to find out. 1
Hoffman: Yeah, I don't have the full story. I hear bits and pieces
from Lori on this. 1
Mady: Put it on the agenda for the next meeting .
Hoffman: I ' ll ask her to bring back a full update. 1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting R
November 14, 1989 - Page 10
I
ISchroers : Well it should be in the packet.
Hoffman: Yeah, staff report.
II Mady: So anyway, there' s nothing been done. There' s still $35, 000. 00
that' s being rolled over .
ISchroers : There has been a feasibility study though.
Mady: But that' s done. This is really reserved for this park.
IHoffman: Correct .
Boyt : Yeah, that money couldn' t go anywhere else.
IMady: If you have other concerns, give Lori a call . City Center Park.
I Boyt : We didn' t do anything with the warming house this year did we? The
$2, 500.00?
I Hoffman: The $2, 500.00, improvements for 1989 would occur here in the next
couple of weeks so that may or may not be used up.
Boyt : We did the play surface and we did do totlot . We didn' t do hockey
Iimprovements .
Hoffman: Hockey improvements , I 'm not sure what the $1,000.00 was .
IBoyt: Fill in the holes .
Hoffman: They did a lot of improvements on the grading .
IMady: Yeah, but I think what they were talking about, when were talking
about that , there was a concern of to access to the second rink you had to
Igo through the first rink and moving the access point.
Boyt : I think they did didn' t they? By the fire station?
IHoffman: There' s one over there as well but.
Hasek: Will we do the bandshell next year? Is that putting the bandshell
Ibefore the rest of the park?
Boyt : Didn' t we want a park plan here too for City Center Park?
IILash: Is that in the budget for next year already?
Mady: Yes . $2, 000.00 for City Center . The master park plan is $25, 000.00
IIfor park development. . . That's for 1990.
Hoffman : Again , on this park, these projects have not been pursued
I because of the question of the community center and the community center ,
the new plan which is drawn does have a rough outline of what the park, the
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 14, 1989 - Page 11
1
ballfields and the soccer fields, what that area would look like if that
community center did pass.
Boyt: Who did that?
Mady: Mike Niemeyer did it. In the early on meetings with the community
center, the residents we met with to date, they' re saying they want to see
the City Center Park along Lake Ann. 1
Robinson: We got the park property, the park plan in here for sometime but
I don' t think we can do anything with this until . . .
Mady: We' ll know this spring . We' ll have a real good idea of what the
City wants. The meeting' s being held this month.
Robinson: But right now.
Boyt: No. We have to roll it over .
Hoffman: The hockey rinks are in need of new boards. That type of thing .
This park, whatever is decided upon, will depend on that community center .
Lash: . . .the totlot money?
Boyt: The hockey money might be used right yet?
Hoffman: The warming house.
Boyt: But the hockey, you don' t know exactly what it' s for? 1
Hoffman: Yeah. I don't know what that $1,000.00 was 'put in there for .
Schroers : I seem to remember something about pop machines and things like 1
that for in the warming house.
Boyt : We talked about that last year . 1
Schroers: Isn't that what that money was for though? I think that' s what
it was for .
Hoffman: It's a possibility. A private company did put the pop machine
out there this year and found that it didn' t generate enough money so they II
pulled it out of there as well .
Lash: How about play surface. What was that?
Mady: That' s for the totlot .
Hoffman: Chan Hills Park. That' s the new one that $30,000. 00 is slated
for next summer for general improvement.
Boyt: Did we see a plan this year?
11
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 14, 1989 - Page 12
1
Mady: No. We had $10,000. 00 in the budget for next year for Chan Hills.
Hoffman: That' s right. We slashed that at the last budget meeting .
IIBoyt : Well , we could put something in 1991.
Mady: Put $20,000.00 in 1991.
IHoffman: The park still is a little ways out in the boondocks yet from the
houses so.
IIBoyt : So it might be later .
Hoffman: Yeah. Once they bring the street and bring the houses down there
I and development follows. That was the other question of should we put the
ice skating rink in there when it' s so far away from the houses at this
point.
IIMady: Okay, so we don' t even have a master park plan on that park? Before
we get that, we can' t budget.
Boyt: But we could put $25,000 .00 in for a tennis court. $15, 000. 00 in
for a totlot.
IHoffman: General improvements , $20, 000. 00.
Mady: Why don't we just put $30,000. 00 for general improvements . Another
$30, 000. 00 for 1991.
' Lash: So you want $10, 000. 00 in 1990 and $30, 000. 00 in 1991?
' Mady: I 've got $10,000. 00 in 1990, $20,000.00 in 1991 and another
$30, 000.00 beyond that. That does serve a large area.
' Lash: Then are we rolling over the $2,000. 00 for the park plan?
Mady: . . .going to have to come out $10,000. 00 in this year ' s. Curry
Farms. They've got just about everything down there.
1 Lash: They've got seed and a little totlot. •
IRobinson: We didn' t approve that plan did we?
Lash: Mark brought a plan to us . He was nice enough to. . .parking and the
Idifferent ways of parking from that guy's house.
Hasek: Yeah, he' s got a master plan.
Schroers: And then we had the residents come up and say they didn' t want
the trail .
Hasek: And they didn' t want the parking either .
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 14, 1989 - Page 13
11
Lash: No, they didn't say.
Boyt : They didn't want a regular trail and they didn' t want the
sidewalk. . . We should put some more money in there. Did Mark finish the
plan? '
Lash : Oh, we need a ton. I mean that was supposed to have a ballfield and
a tennis court and a volleyball court. . . '
Robinson: That' s like the timeline of Chan Hills.
Mady: $30,000.00 for 1992 again. ,
Lash: Can' t we get anything in 1991?
Boyt: Yeah. 1
Mady: We won' t have. . .
Hasek: Put $10,000.00 in 1991.
Lash: What are we going to do for Chan Hills? I
Mady: Put $30,000.00 into 1992.
Lash: But we put $20,000. 00 for 1991. '
Mady: . . .we have nothing.
Hoffman: The same type of thing there.
Mady: Curry Farms has got grading. They've got a park. They've got a II totlot. They' ve got a graded park. Chan Hills has nothing but grass that
high and no grading. Nothing.
Hasek: Does Chan Hills have trails? '
Mady: I don't think there were trails developed in that thing .
•
REVIEW 1989 SOFTBALL EVALUATION SURVEY.
Hoffman: This was the first year that the softball survey was put '
together . That was also one of my goals to further use evaluation forms
for all our recreational programs to receive feedback so we can get some
ideas and improve not only our support programs but anything else that we
do throughout our department. So I pulled a couple different communites
and got samples of their survey. Came up with this survey. If you've gone
through it and you can see the response rate vary quite a bit from league II to league and not surprising that the 35 and over came in with the greatest
response because they do have the greatest response throughout the season
or input, however you want to put that. Why don' t we turn to page, the II copy of the survey itself and just run down 1 thru 8 there. The questions
1
IIPark and Rec Commission Meeting
November 14, 1989 - Page 14
II
IIthat were asked and see how we did and we' ll talk a little bit. Get some
commission input on how we can improve some of these areas. Overall rating
of the program ranks consistently high there. 8 and 10 and fair . Playing
nights/game times. Again, we got a little bit varied response there. The
I game times was what came in with the fair and the poor being the starting
6: 00 game time instead of 6: 15 p.m. .
I Hasek : Just a comment on that one. I 've got a real hard time moving that
one back. The reason is that none of those games start on time. There' s
always somebody that' s late and somebody' s complaining about it and I heard
the comment a couple of times last year , we pay our money too. We want to
Iplay the full time even though the umpire was late. They want to play
their full amount of time and then it pushes everything back and that extra
15 minutes in there for the beginning and end of the year makes all the
II difference in the world. I mean you' re talking guys that are starting to
lose their eyesight.
IISchroers : Where it says league, it says Mens C, Womens , Do-Rec B and
there's a number behind them. What does that indicate?
Hoffman: That indicates how many of those managers responded for each one
II of those leagues. That' s exactly why the game time was put at 6:00 p.m.
and not 6: 15 is because of the shortness of the day.
II Mady: It does make it tough for some people to get there but because of
the light situation in this part of the country, there' s nothing we can do
unless you want to play in the dark for the second game.
IHoffman: Yeah , we don' t have enough lights . Anything ' s a comr►itment .
Weather , make-up procedures seem to be fine. Officiating, we get a wide.
It's a little bit lower on the scale.
IIMady: It' s acceptable.
I Hoffman: It ' s something we work with. I work with an officiating ,
tri-country officiating umpiring service and they seem, it works real well
for us so there' s not a lot of input we can do on upgrading the umpires .
II Umpires are umpires and they get along with the players about that well .
Larry, have you got any comments on that one?
Schroers: I really don' t. I just think that maybe we expect a little bit
IItoo much out of them. I mean we' re not professionals and we don' t really
have the right to expect them to be quality so I think we can live with the
umpires.
IHasek: The thing that I have to chuckle about in that Mens Over 35 slow
pitch is when somebody starts complaining about balls and strikes. There
are leagues in the city that play with 2 pitches. You get 2 pitches. You
I better hit one of them. It' s just absolutely ridiculous. I mean there's
going to be 3 pitches thrown, you've got a chance to hit one of them. I
don' t care how bad it is, you'd better be swinging. I don't think you can
II fault the umpire for that. Everybody' s got their own strike zone. I don' t
care, it varies from one -to another. But when it comes down to the basic
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
II
November 14, 1989 - Page 15
1
rules about what's in play and what ' s out of play and some of those things,
those are things that all of the umpires should have down pat by now. If
they get in the league, the basics ought to be there. That' s what I 'm
concerned about.
Hoffman: We had a couple of first year umpires this year . That type of
thing. Number 5, receiving league information scored high and we had some
fair responses in there and that basically upon more information from them.
They would like to see more, they would like to see almost a league
newsletter throughout the year like the NFL newsletter to update them on
how teams are doing and who' s doing what in the league. There' s a
possibility in the 1991 budget that a 6 month seasonal will be put on staff II
to work with the summer programs and that may be additional duty.
Mady: Is it something that could be put in the paper? I mean the Carver I
County Herald publishes the Chaska' s standings. Why don' t they publish our
standings?
Boyt: Do you turn them in? I
Hoffman: We turn them into the Villager periodically and they publish them in
here in the Villager .
Boyt: Have they ever organized their own league?
Hoffman: Who? '
Boyt: The adults?
Mady: The Over 35 was a self organized league up until a few years ago.
Hoffman: At least 4 years ago. ,
Robinson: If they want standings, I don' t know why they couldn' t put out a
little newsletter themself. I don' t think it' s . . .
Mady: No. I don' t think it' s something the City can' t afford to do.
That's something the paper can publish.
Hoffman: Okay. Play-off structure and placement. No problems there.
Facilities are rated excellent , good, fair . Fees , everybody put good. Our
fees are not too high but they will continue to go up until they meet. '
Mady: The surrounding four .
Hoffman: What else can we get out of this? Additional comments. If you
just would like to read through that for your own interest. The last page
is one we can take a look at. Why do you participate in this program? I
feel it's a fairly important question on trying to understand what we' re
serving these people for . What they' re getting out of it. Meet with
friends and socializing. Competition had a fairly equal split and you' ll
find that varies a little bit from league to league. Mens Open league II seems to be more competition. Mens 35 and Over, Womens league, Industrial
IIPark and Rec Commission Meeting y T :
November 14 , 1989 - Page 16
II
II league tend to be a little bit more social however the industrial league
does come into the competition part as well .
Hasek: Todd , did I talk to you on the phone or did I talk to Lori?
IHoffman: About what?
I Hasek: . . .over the telephone. I had filled this out and it was in, I
think I was going to turn it in last week but I forgot this week but I
think the only, like I said, the only comment I had was on the officiating
and I did make mention of parking.
IIHoffman: Okay.
I Mady: I thought it was funny, comment number 7 was talking about the
fields being in poor condition. . .
IREVIEW LAKE ANN PARK GATE FEES .
Hoffman: This item was presented at the last meeting which I was not
I present. Upon the conclusion of discussion that evening the Commission
directed staff to investigate park facility fees in other communities. I
did a telephone survey of 12 other metropolitan communites which resulted
I in the following chart that is listed there. It just goes through and
lists what the findings are as they appear down at the bottom of the sheet.
So this is yours to discuss once again this evening.
1 Boyt : Something , I didn' t read all your discussion but something we might
want to do is ask for some direction from the Council ,on whether or not
they want the park to be self sufficient or if they want it to be open.
IHasek: Well it's not self sufficient anyway but certainly more self
sufficient with a fee there to help carry things.
Boyt: That seems to be one. . . issues .
Robinson : I think they would be looking for some discussion from us .
IIHasek: Didn't we have a consensus last week that we felt like we wanted to
charge? Did I hear that correctly?
ISchroers : I think that the consensus was the last time we discussed this
was to continue as they were in 1989 into 1990. I don't think that we
decided that we were going to change.
I Hasek: But there was a lot of discussion on how that was oin to get
g g 9
accomplished . Whether the stickers were going to be included and passed
I out with the fees and if everybody was going to get a sticker and then
there would be no sales or limited sales at the gate as opposed to the
pass. I mean I think we talked about if there' s going to be a fee, we
I might as well try to do something with it as opposed to having it out there
just for the sake of having it.
II
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
II
November 14, 1989 - Page 17
Hoffman: A few comments. Just to answer , I don' t know Curt if you have
questions about why we rehash this each year. It is written in our City
Code that each year this Lake Ann Park fee will be looked at. Reviewed for
changes or amendments.
Robinson: Can we come up with some different items? This kind of
influenced my decision. Do you charge general entrance or parking fee at
any community park and none of them do. We' re the only one.
Lash: But then it says if you have a public beach, then it's half and half II
so ours says beach so.
Mady: They charge for the beach. They don' t charge. . .
Hoffman: They charge for the beach only.
Lash: I 've talked about this with a couple of people just to get feedback 1
because I didn' t know and that was one of the suggestions I heard was to
move the gatehouse down to the last parking lot before the beach and people
would have to pay to either launch their boat or use the beach. 1
Hoffman: General comments on last year when this was reviewed by the
Council at that meeting . They did not make a specific recommendation on
whether we should charge the participants of city sponsored programs , being I
the playground program, the swimming program, softball program, but they
said we've had a lot of problems with these people. Let's resolve it. I 'm
not sure how we want to do that but go ahead and resolve it. 1
Hasek: And gave it back to us?
Hoffman: Yeah. Basically the decision there was made that those people '
would not be charged.
Schroers: I remember what some of the problem was now. We thought that it I
would make most sense to charge the parking fee for each participant in the
organized recreational programs, be it softball , swimming lessons or
whatever, when they sign up and register with the City. At that point just II
include the fee for the sticker and then give the sticker to the team
manager or whoever and make it their responsibility to give the stickers
out. The problem was that Lori said that a lot of the people, like the
swimming lessons and that sort of thing, sign up for it in Shorewood or
Minnetonka or wherever . Okay, I think the solution to that is if they' re
going to sign up for an activity that' s taking place in Chanhassen, then
they should come to Chanhassen, sign up for it here and then be charged the II
fee for the sticker along with whatever charges there are for the activity
and have it handled that way.
Hoffman: We can' t do that Larry. There' s no reason to take on that '
additional burden of accepting registrations here for other organization' s
programs. If we did that, it would cause some real organizational
problems. 1
I
IPark and Rec Commission Meeting
November 14, 1989 - Page 18
I
I Robinson: The Little League you know may play Minnetonka East out here.
Well , what do you do when the parents from Minnetonka East want to come?
Hasek: You give the stickers to the manager of the team to pass out to the
1 parents of the kids and voila. They have their sticker to come here.
Boyt : They' re only going to be here 2 nights out of the year . They' re a
Ivisiting team.
Hasek : Okay, then that' s taken into consideration when we charge the fees .
ISee the cost, we talked about that a little bit too. Maybe if it' s a team
event rather than charging $5.00 or $3.00 for the ticket and uping it for
the full 20 man roster another $60.00, maybe we up it $40. 00 and give
everybody a ticket. Well we can do the same thing for the out of town
Iones. The point is that you have a sticker when you come in the gate.
Mady: Why not up the fee and not have any stickers?
IIHasek: Because then the only people that are paying for it are the people
that are participating in events and there are a lot of people that come to
that park on weekends for open swimming . . .communities . The whole point was
I that we felt that the people who used the park, all of the people that used
the park should be carrying the burden.
Mady: Then why don' t we, if you want to do it that way, the people who are
using, when I read through this thing no one charges fees for the park
outside of the swimming area . So this . . .what we do is we charge the people
I who are, the swimming programs. They get it added to their fee $2.00 or
something for the whole summer . Then during the time that swimming lessons
are taking place, we don' t pick up gate fees . But when the swimming
lessons are done at 12: 00, whatever time of the day it stops, the gate
I attendant comes on and that' s it. Everybody either has to have a sticker
or . . .
Hasek: What this doesn' t show me, and maybe it' s here and I just didn' t
read it, but it doesn' t tell us whether the cost of that park is being born
by the general fund in these various cities .
1 Hoffman: Yes .
•
Hasek: If it is, then the taxes go up and you' re paying for it anyway so
I it's a moot point. We either , in my mind we either charge for the events
and we charge everybody a sticker to get in or we give it to the City
Council and let them carry the burden of maintaining that park completely
Iand take it off of our hands.
Hoffman: Remember at the last report that was brought in we generated a
total of $5,000.00 net revenue which does not.
IMady: That won' t cut the grass on one field .
IHoffman: So we are not supporting the park through this fee.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 14, 1989 - Page 19
I
Hasek: Could we support the park through the fee though? That' s the
question. How many people participated out there last year that, what
could have the potential revenue could have been that would have been
generated had we collected from everybody.
Hoffman: It could have been much greater but just a little background on
how I 've worked with this since I first arrived. When I arrived, half the
people were being charged that participated. The softball players were I
being charged. The swimming people were not being charged. City ordinance
plainly stated any car entering that park during this time period paid that
fee. I attempted that first year to enforce that. We got much negative
feedback. I was called out to that park numerous times throughout the
summer by the gate guards. The police were called numerous times for
irrate people because this was never done this way. This has never
happened. That evolved over the past 2 years. Last year Council got
involved with it at that level . We' re making people upset. We' re making
neighboring communities upset because they come down here and they have to
pay to get into a park to have their children, their grandparents , they
have to pay to come watch a kid. Council said last year, that's not worth
it. Let's go ahead and resolve that problem however you need to do that
and then last year we decided not to charge those participants. That does
reflect as I stated in my previous report, a loss of anywhere from I
$5,000.00 to $8,000.00 in gross revenues.
Hasek : But see Todd , I think it' s substantially more than that. What I
you're looking at is a number of people that have historically paid. What
I 'm trying to find out is what, if 25% of the people who use the park are
paying for stickers and the rest of them are just complaining about it,
what happens if we get 100% of the people that use the park. That' s
unrealistic. 90% of the people that use the park and ,pay for it, couldn' t
that revenue help us put equipment and stuff into other parks in this city? I
I mean if we' re losing $8,000.00 by only collecting 25% of the people that
use the park, aren' t we in effect losing $30,000. 00 or $40,000.00 that we
could be collecting and that $30,000. 00 or $40,000. 00 could go into the
budget in other places .
Hoffman: No . If you read through the report there from October 16th, we
decreased the daily pass from $3. 00 to $2.00.
Hasek: What we' re looking at is paying for the sticker -when you're going
in the gate . What I 'm considering doing is charging everybody for the
sticker through all of the events and only charging those people that go
through the gate on particular occasions. Perhaps it' s when there are no
events going on in the weekend and the gate is open and then everybody that
goes into the park pays for a sticker . Otherwise everybody that I
participates in an event out there has already got a sticker. They've got
the sticker to go in the gate. They've already paid their fee. Then the
hassle's only going to be from those people who are using it for that one
event and that' s a daily pass or whatever that is and that can be, we can
leave the structure the same way that it is if we want to. And maybe we
reduce it. Maybe we reduce the cost . The point is that I don' t think it' s
the fee that bothers people. I think it's the fact that they have to pay
for it when they go in the gate that bothers them. They have to buy the
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
:-
November 14, 1989 - Page 20
I
1 ster . If you give them the sticker , even though they' re paying for it,
Id :' t think they' ll mind so much. And it' s really no different than
taxing them, like these communities do in the general fund . I mean if the
tax structure for this came down and said that you' re paying an extra $2. 00
Ito use the parks in the city, they' re not going to care.
Boyt: Most people say, I think when the survey was done you asked them, do
II you want these facilities in our community and are you willing to pay for
them? They say yeah, I ' ll pay an extra $5.00. Well here we' re asking them
to pay $5. 00.
1 Hasek: Yeah, and it' s just the structure that the Council is asking us to
resolve to eliminate the charge for . I think what they' re asking us to do
is resolve how it' s handled and that ' s really what I 'm looking at. It' s
I not the fact that they' re paying. I firmly believe that they should pay.
the question is , how do we handle that.
I Hoffman: I do not think that building it into the fee is going to resolve
it. We' ll have to start dealing with Minnetonka Community Services on
their swimming beach lessons and say.
' Hasek: Can we send them a form from this city that has attached to it a
parking sticker? If they want to participate in our, this is the form you
use and along with that form comes a parking sticker .
IHoffman: Again, it comes down to the negativism that they' re going to look
at. They' re going to say, these other 7 beaches that Minnetonka Community
IServices offers swimming lessons at, they don' t charge us to get into the
park. Lake Ann does . We' ll go up here. We live in the northern tier .
We' re close to this beach as well .
IISchroers : You' ve got to pay to get to Excelsior beach.
Hasek: 25 cents for 15 minutes or half an hour .
Mady: We should install parking meters .
Hasek: Or you have to have a city parking sticker. I mean those are your
two options when you're in the city of Excelsior . If you want to park in
the street, you either pay the meter or you have a parking sticker for that
park and for blocks around there.
ILash: Maybe what we could do is, I think what tends to be the confusing
point here is not the people who live in Chanhassen getting a permit.
I They' re registering here. We could up their fee. Give them a permit.
That' s not a problem. Lori said that is not a problem. The problem comes
in with non-residents and those are the people who ' s kids would maybe only
be over here once or twice playing.
Hasek: Or swimming lessons .
II Lash: Yeah , or swimming lessons . Maybe what we need to do is say kids and
activities under the age of 18 or something, then you don't have to pay an
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 14, 1989 - Page 21
additional fee to get in but anybody over the age of 18 , when they' re
registering for something in Chanhassen, you have to pay extra to get.
Boyt : Then the gate attendant has to deal with every adult that comes in
and says, look I have a kid in my car .
Mady: Well it' s a parking fee. You can' t charge. This is a park that was
built with LAWCON grant money. We cannot charge the people to use the
park. We can charge for parking . That' s it. It' s a parking fee.
Lash: But for people who are just bringing their kids in for an event,
maybe what we can do is say we' re going to waive their parking fee.
Mady: Well we already do now.
Lash: Okay, so but the problem that we' re having now is we' re waiving it
for all the adults too.
Mady: The problem we' re having is we' re not consistent in how we charge 1
parking fees . We' re trying to get a consistency here. We don' t want
people saying fine, you' re part of Minnetonka so we' re not going to charge
you and all the people from Chanhassen who want to use it just for a Sunday
swim twice a year have to pay $5.00 to get down there and the guy
from Minnetonka who' s bringing his kid here every day for 2 weeks gets in
the park for free. It just doesn' t make sense to me. We' re inconsistent. 1
Boyt : . . .to buy a sticker so we can go out and work on the 4th of July.
That' s the only time I 'm out there is to work out there on the activities
but I have a sticker to do that.
Hasek: Do you mind?
Boyt : No I don' t. It' s five bucks . What are these people complaining
about? Five bucks or two bucks . I think it's too big a deal .
Hasek: The problem isn ' t , I mean we perceive that. The problem isn ' t here. II
It' s at the gate. That's where the problem is. That' s where the
complaining all starts.
Schroers : It's at the gate and it' s also the adminstrative problems that
it creates for staff and I wonder if staff has a point of view that you 11 would care to. . .
Hasek: I think they' re real clear about their point of view. I think the
staff would like to eliminate it and I can understand why. I
Boyt: We can go back to everyone needs a sticker to get into the park or
pay the daily fee and that' s it and then it' s up to the people to figure
out how they're going to get that done. They either go up to City Hall . If
they' re from out of our community, then they deal with it in a different
way. The softball players are adults . They can deal with it. They can
either buy a sticker and pay their daily fee. They don't have to argue
everytime they go in .
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 14, 1989 - Page 22
Hasek : But they do.
' Boyt: Well then maybe we need older park attendants or something or I
don't know. We need something else but it's $5.00. What's the big deal?
' Mady: It ' s just what you said there. It' s $5.00. What' s the big deal?
Let's pay it. My point is, $5. 00. What's the big deal? Let' s throw it
I out.
Boyt: Because our general fund is real low. Because there' s not enough
money. We go over our budget every year . Cut, cut , cut , cut in parks and
1 I 'd like to see some funds coming in for us so we can do more in our parks .
Lash: I think in 50 years or something when the City is fat and healthy
Iand has everything we want , then we can talk about letting people in for . . .
Hasek: And at that point, the 50 years when the City is fat and happy, it
will be part of your tax structure and we won' t need to charge. I mean
I you' ll be paying $10.00 in your tax dollars every single year for the parks
in the City and it will be all nice and happy but right now it ' s not.
' Mady: It' s not park money. It goes to general revenues. I think we' re
fooling ourselves here. It goes to the general fund . It gets used to
patch the streets over in Minnewashta. It gets used to fix the fire
Ihydrant in front of your house . It doesn' t go to the park though.
Lash: Personally I think if we' re charging a fee for that facility, I
think the money should be then circled around to be used in that facility.
IMaintain it and. . .
Mady: The other side of that coin is we' re getting all , the general fund
I is paying a substantial amount of money to maintain that park. A heck of
a lot more than $5,000. 00 so I mean it' s an accounting nightmare. To say
okay I 'm going to make sure that $5,000.00 goes there because we' re fooling
outselves . We' re taking out prime, spending over $50, 000. 00 to maintain
that.
Hoffman: The general fund pays for the lifeguards, the gate attendants ,
all of that stuff.
Schroers : But it' s just additional revenue going into the fund, then I
I think it' s reasonable to anticipate with the new facilities , the extra
fields and the improvements that we have made and intend to make out there
that there is going to be increased use and it will at some point in time
amount to a lot more money than $5,000. 00.
Mady: I guess the question we have in front of us is, how do we do this
adminstratively? How do we charge it and how do we do it adminstratively
I and I have yet to hear an answer that' s going to work. You' re still going
to have the problems at the gate. No matter what you do, you' re going to
have problems at the gate.
I
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 14, 1989 - Page 23
Robinson: We made $5,000.00 last year and we didn' t have any problems
because if anybody wants to ga in or hassle you, just go ahead and go.
What' s wrong with that?
Mady: I guess it just means that the people who are really, you' re not
being fair and honest to people. The guy who yells and screams and bitches
gets his way all the time and I think it' s about time that no matter who
you are, it's consistent throughout for everything. Maybe I 'm wrong and I
too idealistic but by golly, if you' re going to have a plan, it' s got to be
consistent. It' s got to be legally enforceable for everybody. You can' t
just say, well we're going to do it this way but if you complain at the II gate or if you live in Excelsior or this or that, ah heck, then what you' re
doing is just charging the nice people in Chanhassen for everything and the
guy who you' re trying to get money from is never going to pay.
Hoffman : That' s exactly what I did 2 years ago. It spelled it out plain II
and simple in the City Code and I attempted to do that and it did not work.
Schroers: What happened?
Hoffman: The complaints rolled in.
Boyt : Who was complaining?
Hoffman : First I 'd like to invite , if you'd like to, to stop out at the I
gate and work a couple hours. Almost every person that goes through there
has some comment about that fee . Every person that has to buy a sticker ,
definitely has a comment about the fee and it's not a pleasant job. It' s
not a pleasant place to be. People are aware of this. . .
Hasek: The simple fact is, it costs an arm and a legato live in this city.
It' s not going to change for a long time until they get things straighten
out.
Boyt: I don' t think there' s signage in front of the gate telling what the I
fees are?
Mady: Sure there is. A big sign right there.
•
Boyt: No, it' s beyond the gate.
Hoffman: No, there' s a menu board that says Welcome to Lake Ann. Daily
pass.
Boyt: No, it's not at the gate. It' s beyond the gate. '
Hoffman: It hangs on the outside of the gate underneath the window.
Boyt: It's the park rules that are 20 feet beyond that. Well , maybe it '
needs to be bigger. Just what the park fees are.
Mady: Welcome to Lake Ann. $5. 00 for you to get in. I
r
IPark and Rec Comxdssion Meeting
November 14, 1989 - Page 24
Hasek: I ' ll tell you, what we need to do is we need to hire somebody out
' there and simply tell them, you get to keep 50% of all the gate fees you
collect.
I Boyt: We had someone like that but that wasn' t our idea . That' s just what
he did.
Schroers : If that' s where our problems are at is at the gate , then that' s
I where we need to deal with them and we just have to come up with a logical ,
reasonable response to most of the questions that people are the most
common questions that they have in regard to the fee and people are just
Igoing to have to bite the bullet .
Hoffman : That' s where the problem occurs. It' s not created there. It' s
created here and the decision that is made each year on how to charge that
fee. Then we change it through the year and the public area, they get used
to it one way and the next year you change it again. If we go back and
change it again this year .
' Schroers : Okay, what kind of problems did you have this past season? This
1989. Did it work pretty well?
IIHoffman: It worked considerably better than past years because the
softball players were happy they didn' t have to pay to get in. The people
I who took swimming lessons or summer playground didn' t get hassled . The
visiting teams that came to play, Little League parents did not get
hassled . They didn' t have to pay to get in to watch their kids. So it
went considerably better .
IMady: Who paid?
I Boyt : Yeah, I guess we' re saying it' s not fair though because I paid and
Jim Mady paid so we could go work out there but people who don' t want to
pay don' t pay. I think what I 'm saying is I 'm not comfortable even though
it went real well .
ILash: And I don' t think it' s the softball players that don' t want to pay.
They just didn' t get charged this year. I think they'd happily pay.
Hasek: Not happily.
Boyt: They' re the ones that didn' t want a sticker because they don' t put
it in one car. They want it separate so they can switch it to 2 cars .
Lash: But if the gate attendant knows that these adults coming in with a
I uniform on did pay in their registration, even if they forgot their permit,
they would know that the guy already paid.
IHasek: See, I don' t think that' s a problem.
Lash: So you know, jack up their registration $5. 00. Give them a permit.
I If they forget it, they go down in their uniform, they should get in
anyway. They've already paid.
r
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 14, 1989 - Page 25
Boyt: We can do that with the softball players and the people that are
coming from out of town. The swimmers can have a change to purchase what
they need before they start swimming lessons .
Hasek: The registration fee for tournaments. I mean, when that thing goes I
out, did they have to turn in a roster . You give them one sticker for each
guy on the roster and maybe it' s only a dollar a sticker for the tournament '
for a weekend tournament or something . I mean it seems to me like it could
be done without a whole lot of problems .
Hoffman: State tournaments we cannot charge a daily entrance fee for . '
Hasek: A parking fee?
Hoffman: No. Not for us to host a State MRPA Regional Tournament. It' s '
right in their contract.
Hasek: Okay, is there a set fee on what we charge for that tournament? ,
Hoffman: For what we charge?
Hasek: The participating teams.
Hoffman: It' s we' re hosting that State as a benefit to the business
community.
Hasek: Oh, that' s right. I was talking about an invitational tournament I I
guess is what I was looking for .
Hoffman: Yeah, we talked about softball players . It 'would work out fine
there. Playground program, it' s a $5. 00 program. If you want to
participate at Lake Ann you pay $10.00. People just won' t participate
there in my opinion. They' ll come to another park so no need to have
playground in Lake Ann. '
Hasek: Wait a minute. What if you make it instead of $5.00 you make it
$8.00? I 'm not saying we have to charge, I 'm not saying there' s a set fee
for anybody going in there other than those people that have to purchase a
ticket at the gate. •
Hoffman: I guess we can' t be arbitrary. We need to have some. '
Hasek: Sure you can. Why can't you?
Hoffman: Well we were this year and . '
Boyt: This is a different kind of arbitrary.
Hasek: The point is that everybody is paying and I can see where you're
charging a guy $400.00 for a league long event in the summertime and you' re
upping that to cover the cost of something by $3.00 a ticket or $5.00,
whatever a seasonal is, and I don't think that maybe $5.00 is necessarily
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
:-
November 14, 1989 - Page 26
I
Iit. Maybe it is only $3.00 but again, I think that' s adjustable based upon
maybe the time that the event spends out there or something. I think that
that can be worked out and I think there' s something fair and equitable
there. We don' t have to have a set fee. The point is that everybody pays
I approximately an equal portion for using that park out there. Does that
make any sense?
' Mady: I think one thing we have to find out, from the LAWCON situation out
there we found out a few years back that we couldn' t charge the. . .we had
between resident and non-resident. Legally we couldn' t do it. We can' t
I charge for use of the park but can charge a parking fee. I think what we
need to find out, some research has to go into the LAWCON, is can you
discriminate the way we are by not charging some people and charging
others. I 've got the feeling that this is a federal law we' re dealing
I with, they've handled the discrimination situation already in there and
what we' re doing by saying yes to some and no to others , we' re in violation
of LAWCON already. I 've got a real . . .the City Code the way we are, we' re
I in trouble. I think we' ve got to have our Code right. What we do at the
gate might be something totally separate and I have a problem with that
anyway but we've got to be at least legal on paper .
Boyt: I have another fly in the ointment. Earlier this year I thought
maybe we could have some sort of reciprosity with Chaska or other
neighboring communities where we offer their residents resident status for
I our parks and they do the same for us . Just as a neighborly thing to do.
They do share some, we share with the Mens softball. Aren't you going to
be sharing some fields eventually?
IHoffman: No.
Hasek: Not yet.
IBoyt: In a few years they have some fields coming on line in neighboring
communities. We share in Chaska. . .
IHoffman : They don' t charge for theirs .
' Schroers : Ours will be on line before theirs will be.
Hoffman: We don't use theirs. They don' t use ours. •
I Boyt: No, they come here to play. The mens . The men come here to join
our teams. At one point we had talked about. . .
I Hasek: Then we'd have to get Minneapolis and Hudson, Wisconsin and Apple
Valley.
Boyt : Well I was just thinking of Chaska.
IMady: And Shoreview.
I Schroers : Chaska and Shoreview but the reality of that was that our new
fields were going to come on line before. Therefore that wouldn't help our
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 14, 1989 - Page 27
I
situation at the time.
Boyt : Well my thinking was with Chaska because some of our people that
live in Chanhassen really live real close to Chaska would like to use their
facilities and vice versa .
1
Hoffman: The only place they charge in Chaska is the clay hole and it' s
$.50 a day or $13.00 for an annual family permit. Something of that
nature.
Schroers : And is that to residents and non-residents alike?
Hoffman: They have a separate resident/non-resident fee.
Lash: So let me back us up just a minute now. It'd be great if we could I
make a decision tonight so we wouldn' t have to do this again another night
wouldn' t it? Were you saying where your adminstrative nightmare comes in
is with swimming? Is with youth activities when they come over here for 2
nights and possibly the playground program. You have to charge more for
the playground program. Not create a problem.
Hoffman: It' s not just adminstrative. I can certainly do that . We can go II
to Minnetonka Community Services and say our Commission and Council feel
that we need to charge to use the park.
Lash: But you' re saying it would create some. '
Hoffman: It would create some problems but mainly what I 'm concerned about
is what, the image that we' re putting out there to the people that are
using that park.
Lash: Maybe the image is that if you are enrolling your child in a program I
in this park, we want to encourage people to enroll children into the park,
into those kinds of things, therefore the parking fee is being waived for
that particular program. However , if you' re an adult, it's not that we' re I
not trying to encourage people to do that but I think the adults don' t have
a problem with paying as much as parents have a problem with paying after
they've registered their kid for something, then having to come and pay
again to get in to watch their kid do that. So if we just set it up so if I
it's a youth think where they're registered outside the ,city, . if it's a
youth thing and they' re registered here like the Babe Ruth and those new
things for the older kids that are getting started and they' ll be using
Lake Ann Park a couple times a week, then their fee would be bumped up
because they'll be using it a lot.
Hoffman: But when we work Lake Ann, or the schedule for the South Tonka
Little League, each one of those 12 teams that are in that league will at
sometime be possibly be scheduled to play down here meaning we would have
to make hundreds of passes available at registration and everybody who II registers for South Tonka Little League would need to get a pass and do we
charge them for that? We can' t charge people living. . .
Lash : No, I 'm saying the people who are registering in Minnetonka or South II
IIPark and Rec Commission Meeting
November 14, 1989 - Page 28
1
Tonka or whatever it is, wouldn' t be having to get a permit. If they' re
I only going to be coming over here a couple of times to play. . .and be done
with it. But the people who are out here every week using it, if they' re
registering in Chanhassen. They' re here weekly or twice a week playing ,
Ithen bump their fee up and give them a permit with their registration.
Audience: How would the gate attendant make a determination?
Hasek: During an event. If the event is on and your kid shows up with a
uniform.
I Hoffman: There' s nights when there' s Babe Ruth going on which you say it
should be paid. There's nights when both that and Little League are going
on so it does become very confusing at the gate when you try to explain to
Ithose gate attendants that this is what we' re doing.
Lash : Well one way or another , if a kid comes in in a uniform, either the
fee has been waived for him, or the fee was paid at registration.
IMady: What' s the situation. . .happens all the time. The child plays a game
at 6:00 and the parent has to work until 6: 00 so the child shows up with
II his buddy. The parent, as a good parent , wants to see his child play in
the sport so he comes to the game. Now we' re charging him a daily fee to
get in to watch his son play.
IIHasek: No, I don' t think so . The event is on. The event is on. There
are no charges for anything .
IBoyt: Then we' ll just maintain what we have now.
Hasek: How many people are going to be going into the park, well I guess
Ithat' s true. There may be a few.
Robinson: When we get the Bandimere property and get that developed, will
we also charge a park fee to get in there?
Boyt : It doesn' t have a beach. That's a big expense.
I Mady: This is the thing we' re talking about is the beach and the problems
we' re trying , we don' t charge anybody use of the beach yet the problem
comes from the kids using the softball field and we' re seeing here the
I people who have general parks, none of them charge fees to park. It' s the
ones with beaches that charge.
Robinson: It goes back to what Jan said a half an hour ago. Maybe we
Ishould move the gate down to the beach.
Hasek: We talked about that since the first year I was here.
IIRobinson: We went through a lot to get back to your first statement.
' Hoffman: And again, 50% of the communities fully pay for that and build it
into their taxes and 50% don't so if we want to try to get some back of
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 14, 1989 - Page 29
that $16,000. 00 we pay out in lifeguard fees , maybe we can put it down at
the beach.
Boyt : Maybe we can fence at the beach.
Mady: I think what this is is one of those situations where it'd really be I
helpful if we had a joint Council/Commission meeting to discuss it.
Boyt: I think we ought to table this. We don' t have to decide until
January.
Hasek: I' ll tell you what. I wish that the Council would read through the I
Minutes on this to just see how confusing it really is. It' s not a simple
matter of one way or the other . Maybe they' ll understand .
Boyt: That's why when we spend 4 nights with this and then send it to
Council and they say, oh, I don' t think there should be any fee at all .
I 'd rather have a little bit of that input now. Whether they want a fee or
don' t want a fee at all . It might come down to that. If they don' t want a I
fee at all .
Mady: Why don' t we direct staff to request that the Council meet with us '
before one of our meetings for half an hour or maybe we meet with them for
half an hour before one of their meetings.
Hasek: Or send us a representative. '
Mady: Everybody has their own opinion and if they. . .
Hasek: But they don' t have to all be sitting here to hear our opinion.
I mean if they send somebody at least so we can have a sounding board, they
could take the information back then and give us direction. '
Boyt: They could write back to us. They could. It' s hard for people to
show up for meetings. They could write back to us and it could be in our
packet and this could from Bill and this could be from Don and this could
be from Ursula and we'd have. . .
Hasek: It' s not an easy problem. We' ve talked about it for what? ,
Mady: Every year .
Hasek: minutes here and we' re right back exactly where we started. '
Hoffman: One other point I think of, I 've sat out there a number of times
with new gate and guards and that type of thing and said, we think of Lake
Ann Park as our premiere park in this community. We've got signs on TH 5
that indicate Lake Ann Park. People who are potentially thinking about
looking in Chanhassen to move out here, there' s always a number of cars I
that pull in there and want to take a look at the park. It' s $2.00 to get
into the park and they turn around. Cars do that all the time and we' re
just sending an image that you can' t even take a look at our nicest park
here in Chanhassen because you have to pay $2.00 to get in and they do a
IIPark and Rec Commission Meeting
November 14, 1989 - Page 30
i
U turn and out they go.
IMady: I know I 'm not supposed to make a motion but I 'm going to make a
motion to table this pending staff discussion with Council as to getting
II either a joint meeting or direction from Council what their indications are
and also I 'd like to see staff research whether or not LAWCON law deals at
all with are we allowed to disciminate the way we do with charging some
people and not others a parking fee.
' Boyt: Second .
Mady moved , Boyt seconded to table action on the Lake Ann Park gate fees
and directing staff to discuss with Council as to getting either a joint
I meeting or direction from Council what their indications are on fees .
Also, research whether or not LAWCON law deals at all with if the City is
allowed to disciminate from charging some people and not others a parking
fee. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
CONTINUE DISCUSSION ON ACCESSABILITY.
IMady: If you want, we can move this to another meeting.
' Hasek: I was just going to suggest that. I anticipated that Lori
actually about twice as much information. She's got some stuff coming in
from some other people. To move it on but generally in the industry,
accessability addresses not only the handicapped but the hard of hearing,
I the slight of seeing and the elderly. If you look through this ,
Bloomington is really at the forefront of the Metropolitan area I think.
Other communities are following suit and it' s not just this area . It' s
' kind of a national phenomena that started with the building codes and
accessability that they' re looking to spreading to other areas so it' s
coming at us .
' Mady: So hold onto this . I supposed we should move to table since it' s on
the agenda.
Hasek moved , Mady seconded to table discussion on accessability until a
later meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS:
' Mady: I have something that we' ll handle after we adjourn. Adminstrative
Section. Anybody see anything in there that they want to discuss? Fine. I
just want to make a couple comments on Lake Ann. I drove by there today.
I I 've driven by there previously and went through the park. . .it' s really
nice. The play structure is in place up on top. I didn' t walk through it
but that looks really nice. The fencing is partly, well half done it
looked like. . . .staff should go out and look at. The turn around ramp on
the end parking lot, it kind of comes out and ends, we' re just going to
Park and Rec Commission Meeting %
November 14, 1989 - Page 31
have people driving over that so we' re going to have to put curbing in II there or plantings or something to prevent that. Otherwise it's just going
to be a mud hole so take a look at that.
Hasek: Here it shows right here. I 've got a photos folks. I went down and II
took a look at it. I photographed it.
Hoffman: Any other discussion on either commission presentations or
adminstration section?
Schroers: Yeah, I have a couple of real brief things here. I attended the
National Institute on Park and Ground Management last week. It was here in
Minneapolis. I just picked up a couple of things for staff that I thought
you might find interesting. One is turf base is the home field advantage.
It's a surfacing , I guess what you'd call it is a surfacing mixture for
infields that is good for retaining moisture and holding down dust levels
and basically it' s a ready mixture of clay. I brought that and some
information on some new pieces of equipment that make park work a little
easier . You can pass that on. That' s about it.
Robinson moved, Hasek seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor II
and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned.
Submitted by Lori Sietsema
Park and Rec Coordinator
Prepared by Nann Opheim
1
I
1
1
CHANHASSEN PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
NOVEMBER 9, 1989
Chairman Wenzlaff called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. .
MEMBERS PRESENT: Richard Wing, Bill Boyt, Barb Klick, Bill Bernhjelm„ and
Wayne Wenzlaff
11 MEMBERS ABSENT: Candy Takkunen and Craig Blechta
L STAFF PRESENT: Scott Harr, Asst. Public Safety Director and Jim Chaffee,
Public Safety Director arrived later in the meeting.
Chairman Wenzlaff added the following items under New Business: Phone
_ answering at City Hall after hours.
ti
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Boyt moved, Bernhjelm seconded to approve the Minutes
of the Public Safety Commission meeting dated October 12, 1989 as
presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS:
Sgt. Robert VanDenBroeke: I 'm before you tonight seeking your ideas and
your concerns. The Sheriff recognizes that Chanhassen is growing and
changing faster than ever before. Furthermore he' s sensitive to the input
from the Chanhassen Department of Public Safety, City Council, the Traffic
Safety Committee and you the Public Safety Commission. In respect to this
the Sheriff's Department will be conducting a traffic study in an effort to
determine what changes this growth is bringing with it, and provide the
best possible service to the City. Pin maps will be used to reflect
current accident data. Statistics will also be studied to compare past and
current information. These will be taken from the Sheriff's Department
' reports and from the County's computer system. The study will be geared to
help evaluate actual and not just perceived problem areas. This will
provide information which will guide the Sheriff' s personnel in future
traffic enforcement policies. The intent is to be able to target times and
locations which have a disproportionately higher percentage of accident
rates. By concentrating on these areas, the City of Chanhassen can be made
' a safer place to live and travel . You as a Public Safety Commission
represent the residents of the City and therefore I request and appreciate
your collective input in our gearing up for the study.
Wenzlaff: Bob, did I miss the dates of the study or do we have any idea of
what we're going to do?
' Sgt. Robert VanDenBroeke: I 've been dealing with Jim Chaffee a little bit
trying to get some input from the Public Safety Department on what's going
to work best. We have information ready of course from ' 87 and ' 88 and ' 89
up until this date. We anticipated doing a pin map for the most current
accidents and that could be the ' 89 or ' 90. I'd like to do it for ' 89 and
one of the things that may hold up an exact date is we'd like to do it
right here in City Hall . In order to do that we' ll need a cork board and
IIwe'd like to do it in an area where the officers frequent so they-can
1 1
I
I
_
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Public Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 2
observe the map and visually identify areas of t roblems with the different
n
types of accidents and therefore target them on an ongoing basis. Right
' now we don' t have the cork board and it may not be available until about
the first of the year. So we intend to get started on it right away. It
will probably be sometime after the first of the year before the study' s
' finished.
Wenzlaff: So the data is going to be, this isn' t a study where you're
specifically going to go out and engage in any new activity? It's going to
be based on reports and both distant history and the most recent history
that we have?
' Sgt. Robert VanDenBroeke: What we'd like to do is take a look at a 3 year
period so that we can get the most current trend. I think 3 yeas is about
what we want to look at so that hopefully will give us a base to work off
' of and compare the future to.
Klick: Are you going to track MBA's with injuries? Without? Do you have
criteria on how you' re going to track?
Sgt. Robert VanDenBroeke: We tend to track the 3 types of accidents.
Fatals, personal injury accidents and property damage accidents. What I 've
1 done in the past, we' ve done this in the past and typically we' ll use
different colored pins for the different types of accidents and placing
them on the map so they' re readily identifiable where you' re most serious
accidents are.
IWenzlaff: How does for instance, 2 things come to mind because of the time
of year we're at. How does weather play into this? Obviously doing it
I over a 3 year period will have a nice amount of input that will cover all
seasons but how does weather play into identifying the problems. Is there
a date I guess associated with these incidents that will be somehow marked
' on the map because of weather and also downtown changes? Is there a way to
address that I guess?
Sgt. Robert VanDenBroeke: The previous study that we did that did not
directly involve the City of Chanhassen, I haven't seen a great variance in
accident frequency by season. I think drivers typically adjust their
driving habits and granted like your first snowfall you're going to get a
I few more but over the season it pretty much averages out I believe. People
pretty much catch on.
Klick: What are your objectives from the study? What do you hope to do
with this information?
Sgt. Robert VanDenBroeke: Well we hope to be able to, as I indicated, use
I it for traffic enforcement policy to a degree. We want to learn exactly
where our problem areas are that we should be targeting. We've got a lot
of calls from citizens. I know Jim and Scott receive a lot of calls on
areas that are perceived to be problem areas and many of those calls are
warranted. There are probably also other areas that we are not getting
calls on that we probably should be targeting that this study may help us
identify. Also, areas where we have some very verbal residents that may
2
Public Safety Commission Meeting I
November 9, 1989 - Page 3
11
not have accurate perceptions, we may be able to identify areas that need
the time more than those specific areas of high complaints that may have a II
low frequency of accidents or other problems. Traffic problems.
Klick: So you're looking more at the enforcement in those types of issues
versus roads and signage and speed limits? I
Sgt. Robert VanDenBroeke: We're looking to have solid information for
preparing a traffic policy on enforcement. It will give us a little better II
opportunity to be able to react to the trends in the City.
Jim Castleberry: It will provide the City with a lot of useful data for a
lot of different things. Be it engineering. Other traffic safety related
things. Enforcement' s only one part of that whole program. 'It' s not
information that's just useful to Chanhassen. It's useful for the County.
It's useful for the State and it's something that Chanhassen is only 1 of 9 II
contract communities that are going to get this.
Wenzlaff: You in fact mentioned the study that was done earlier that II wasn't specific to Chanhassen. What kind of benefits came out of that one?
What happened when that study was done?
Sgt. Robert VanDenBroeke: That was specifically for Waconia and we '
expanded it to include the entire County but we specifically addressed the
City of Waconia because they felt they had an accident problem in a given
area. The study didn' t indicate that their perceptions were accurate. It II
showed us some other things.
Jim Castleberry: I think in that case they were looking for some design
changes and speed limits and things.
Sgt. Robert VanDenBroeke: They were looking for signage there too
I believe. They were interested in putting up a 4 way stop because they
felt that would benefit a given intersection. That was in 1983.
Klick: I'm glad to see you're doing this. I think it's a real good idea.
Wenzlaff: You bet. So you think we would probably see some results from
that long about the January timeframe?
Sgt. Robert VanDenBroeke: Sometime after the first of the year . '
. Give us a
chance to get our pin maps up and take a look at those. The statistics
part of it we can put together certainly sooner than that but we'd like to II
have it completed in 1989 before we finish it off I believe.
Jim Castleberry: . . .some kind of report. It's the kind of thing I think II Mr. Chairman that's probably an ongoing, once we get it established, that 3
year period is stretching out and you'd want to monitor changes and needs.
Wenzlaff: Have we ever done that before in Chan that you're aware of?
Jim Castleberry: Well informally.
3
Public Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 4
Al Wallin: Way back when I was Sargeant.
' Wenzlaff: How long ago was that?
Al Wallin: 15 years ago.
Wenzlaff: Okay, so it would be probably not terribly valuable information
today but it has been done?
' Jim Castleberry: Yes, it has been done so I don' t want to say it's never
been done. It has been done.
Klick: I don't know if it would be helpful but PI can be from lighter
laceration to a critical patient. I'm just thinking if we're trying 'to look
at the data from all angles , if you could break it down at all in terms of
not, it wouldn't be dollar amounts but maybe in terms of are there some
• injury severity scores or something. I'm just thinking for an intersection
you know versus a laceration versus someone who had their spleen and liver
removed or something. Do you know what I 'm saying? I don' t know how to do
this but I'm just trying to say that PI can mean very little. I just think
as long as we' re tracking this, maybe there's a way that we can take a look
at that too to see if some of the intersections that would be of greater
.risk, greater concern.
Jim Castleberry: That's true. I think though the frequency of accidents ,
I whether they're fender benders or whether they're accidents of fatal all
the way from the minor to the extreme at an intersection, with the
frequency of those accidents I think is going to tell you that you need
something done with that intersection because somebody may roll through it
I faster or just blow the stop sign and have a fatal there, that doesn' t
necessarily mean that a fender bender couldn' t have been prevented by
engineering also.
Sgt. Robert VanDenBroeke: We could capture some of that data perhaps from
the State accident reports but quite frequently, as you know. . .that initial
calls on serverity on injuries at the scene, especially from a law
I enforcement perspective are usually not that close. . . .patient long
afterwards or come in 2 days later with injuries so it might be real
difficult to do that with accurancy.
IKlick: And I hear what you're saying. I think that's true. I was just
trying to get a feel for that.
IBoyt: I think one of the things about your study, I hope it's just part of
a bigger study. That this is one indicator of traffic safety but it's not
the only indicator and it may not be the best indicator because people
I aren't going to, they don't want to sacrifice other people to determine
where the bad spots are. So we're going to need more on this traffic study
than just the pin map of where accidents are occurring.
ISgt. Robert VanDenBroeke: Do you have some specific input on what you'd
like to see?
4
i
Public Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 5
1
Boyt: We talked about this before and unfortunately I don' t. I'm just
sharing a frustration that we can't wait for accidents sometimes. I mean
that's what engineering is all about. They anticipate that.
Wenzlaff: But it'd be worthwhile to look at citations versus having an
accident but also just a citation. I would expect we'd see more citations
issued on TH 5 just because of traffic but would that be something that
would be valid to give us some information?
Sgt. Robert VanDenBroeke: Part of the statistical information that I hope
to have in here Wayne is in reference to citations versus accidents. There I
have been some studies done in the past where there's different formulas
you can use for what type of citation activity you should have per accident
and I 'm not sure those are valid for this community but what we are in the I
process of doing is pulling up the total citations written over the 3 year
period and comparing those to the accidents and to see, without looking at
indepth statistics, I believe there's a trend that in the past year we have
an increased rate of citation issuance in the city of Chanhassen. I won' t
go into details on the reasons for that. I think there are a number of
reasons but what we want to look at is see if that's made a difference in
our accident rate. Traditionally that' s one of the main reasons you issue I
traffic tickets is to bring about voluntary compliance by the citizens that
use the roadway. If you don' t have the voluntary compliance, you probably
are going to have accidents. They actually are meant to prevent accidents.
The citations are indirectly but directly they're meant to create voluntary
compliance. I do intend to have that information in with the study.
Wenzlaff: Good. I think Bill 's point is well taken that the accident '
information is very valuable and I 'm very pleased to see that that's
happening . Beyond that, we'd like to think that there are some other
statistics that are available from all the information that we gather in
the community that would, and again with Bill , I don' t have an example of
what they would be but hopefully we can find something out besides tracking
- accidents to find other things that might be helpful to us. It's a great
start.
Audience: This is the area we' re most intimately involved
with. . .engineering issues or crosswalks or signage and staff and probably
provide. . .
Wenzlaff: I guess an example might be, just coming to mind, domestics or
other calls for service and if we have any kind of a pattern there and I
would kind of guess without knowing anything that it would be pretty small
but if there were other things that we can track besides accidents, we'd
like to encourage seeing that. If the information is valid, it would be
great.
Boyt: I'm sure that would be valuable Wayne but my thought is about I
traffic. Specifically about traffic and speed control and just movement of
people. I wish I had expertise, I'd be happy to offer advice but I don' t
and I trust that you' ll just do more than simply the pin map.
5
Public Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 6
I
Audience: Well we're certainly sensitive to the issue and it's not just
I Chanhassen. . .to provide with data and hopefully make better long range
plans.
Sgt. Robert VanDenBroeke: Is there anything specific you'd like to provide
as far as input tonight or. . .an ongoing basis if something comes up that
would be beneficial, we'd appreciate that. Thank you.
ICARVER COUNTY SHERIFF:
' Wenzlaff: Do we have a separate Carver County Sheriff's Report?
Chief Deputy Jim Castleberry: Well I have a couple of things. Mr.
Chairman I guess other than the monthly report and I haven't been through
I the packet to see if it's in there but I assume the August statistics are
there and would respond to any questions that you have. The other thing
with regard to traffic that I wanted to mention is we had a meeting this •
I morning with Scott and Jim and Chief. . . , the Sheriff and myself. It's
something that we're going to do on a monthly basis to hopefully get a
better working relationship. There's a lot of expertise in that group on
I planning on a number of law enforcement issues. I 'm sure Scott will talk
about some of them that were discussed but one of those that I wanted to
mention is in December is kind of our Christmas present to the citizens on
I the east end of the County we' re going to do a DWI traffic saturation. We
won't be giving people a free ride home but we'll give them the next best
thing and that's a ride to jail if they're caught under the influence. It's
something we did about 5 years ago here in Chanhassen. I don't know that
I our numbers were real staggering but any numbers that we had were certainly
valid and we' re going to do that again with the cooperation of State Patrol
and see if we can get Scott and Jim out there and myself. Some of my
Istaff. We' ll beef it up and we' ll also publicize it. We want the public
to know that we take it very seriously and we' re going to be out there and
be very aggressive in that level of enforcement. Second thing I wanted to
mention to you is that the Mayor generally attends these and Jim as well
Ibut on the 30th of November we' ll be having, it's kind of a bi-monthly
meeting for the contract communities and you are welcome to attend. We
have them in various cities around the County. It's an opportunity where
I we take a couple hours, much like what we do here and we discuss police
issues and all the different facets as it relates to the County' s level of
law enforcement. Whether it be warrants or whatever . This particular
I month we're going to talk about the possee comuputer system. Some of the
changes that are taking place there. Eventually we' ll be able to capture
data live I hope as our dispatchers are putting it out, typing it in. I 'm
going to be leaning on a. . . in the not too distant future as we get our new
I communication center up and running for some training ideas. So we're
going to talk about that a little bit. The other thing is we have our
chief investigator come and he has a little bit of a breakdown on some of
I the crime trends and cases that have been cleared by arrest that sometimes
don't make the media and sometimes do. Sometimes you hear about it,
sometimes you don' t so it's an opportunity for a forum there to discuss
some of those things so if you'd like to attend, you're more than welcome
6
Public Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 7
I
to do so. That's going to be in New Germany. Just ask Scott if you need
to know how to get there. That's at 7:00. The last item is that we're
excited. Scott and Jim again were down today and they had a chance to see
the new communication center. We think that that's going to make the,way
we dispatch our calls and deal with emergencies a lot more efficient. ''
We've got state of the art equipment. We're set up for a 4 position
communication center so if we have to, we can run 4 people. We have a new
antenna on top of the fire station that's going to help out a great deal in III
of our portable coverage here and the extent of the County. We' ll be
going through some new training and looking at our policies and procedures.
Just the old equipment we had was very outdated and we had a lot of
problems and we think it's a real positive step in solving some of those so
I'm excited about that. I' ll entertain questions that the Commission might
have.
Klick: I'm naive on the radios but do we have any real dead spots in
Chanhassen or any?
Chief Deputy Jim Castleberry: We sure did. We had terrible coverage on
portables, i .e. we'd get an alarm at one of the Dinner Theatre for example.
People go in and we certainly get enough of them to check for prowlers or
whatever. They can' t get on a portable so it makes it real difficult. ,
Klick: Is this going to be corrected then?
Chief Deputy Jim Castleberry: Yes. Real concerns about officer safety '
when you can' t communicate with them. It's been a long time in coming so
change is in the wind.
Bernhjelm: Do you have a CAD system Jim?
Chief Deputy Jim Castleberry: It's in the 5 year plan Bill as is to maybe
look at a microwave system to make some of that a little more efficient too
but right now the call level and the sophistication of the calls probably
doesn't justify it but certainly the new system can accommodate that as
well as some other options like digital, encoding, with. . .secrecy or
privacy of the airwaves, that kind of thing. The scanner line may be cut
out once in a while. Anything else? If you haven't noticed, I'm back.
You're stuck with me for a while.
Wenzlaff: Great. Thanks for the report.
CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT:
Harr: I don' t believe there's any specific report Wayne. There is a memo II
of mine to Jim regarding fire prevention week with detailed stats showing a
great effort by the Fire Department which they're to be commended on but
nothing else. '
Klick: I have a question. Dick could I ask you since Dale's not here?
And I know you've given me some of the protocols for rescue and stuff but, II
you know I know you have trucks and ladders and rescue units awl all that
7
Public Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 8
kind of stuff. Do you have like a pathway or. . .for each call that certain
units are sent out on? I 'm speaking specifically medical, I was just
' looking through the August report and I know that the large majority of
your calls usually are medical and rescue correct versus fire? Do you have
a protocol where not everyone is sent? If there's first responders on the
scene and you know we've kind of talked about that back and forth but. . .
Wing: Did you read the copy of our operating procedures?
Klick: Yes.
Wing: We send one rescue truck with 3 personnel . The closest truck,
' whether it be the west truck or the east truck. One squad car. Normally
we get 2 and oftentimes get 2 and a paramedic unit which we assume is
generally close by. Protocol beyond that is if a member lives between the
call and the station, that he would respond direct and he becomes the
officer in charge. Being that we all have just about identical training
whether we're EMT or first responder , we' re all familiar with the
equipment. We normally try to operate with no more than 3 men because
we've found that even the worst of circumstances, 3 men can handle it with
the deputy coming in, with paramedics coming in. So one of the issues that
we've dealt with in the years past was getting too much equipment
responding because my position was that the real threat is to the
responding equipment. The perceived threat statistically is medical
generally being not very significant. Very seldom life threatening and
there's numerous cases, 2 this last month, where there were near accidents
' or accidents occurred as our equipment responded. Generally a rear ender
type. If somebody tries to get out of the way and someone doesn' t know why
they're stopping at a green light. So if that answers your question Barb.
I We' re responding the nearest rescue truck with a 3 man crew. The nearest
squad is responding and paramedic unit and that could encompass also Scott
or Jim. CSO's. There could be other units involved but that's our core
unit that by our operating procedures responses. We discourage people
I
coming from home. That would be in opposition to our operating procedures.
Klick: Would it ever be deviated upon like say if the Sheriff ran across
' the accident and they decided at the scene that maybe somebody had a knee
injury and wanted to go in. Would fire automatically always come? Would
you ever be cancelled and just the ambulance for a minor PI, I guess is
Iwhat I'm asking.
Wing : I think the officer certainly has discretion as I think we do but
now we're into a County policy and the County policy, through Greg Davies,
' is simply that anytime a PH goes out for a 911 call , a medical , that the
fire department is paged.
Klick: Right, I'm saying do you ever get cancelled before you. . .
Wing: Absolutely.
1 Audience: Especially say the lower one. St. Francis might get there
before any other emergency unit and actually save. . .
8
Public Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 9
.1
Wing: Did that answer your question?
Klick: Yes.
Wing: Was there any point to that Barb? I don' t word that facetiously. Do I
you have any input?
Klick: My question is always safety of the fire fighters for one. I think
everyone going Code 3, I mean when it's not necessary, it's a concern and
also it's costly to the City and so I was just interested in where that was
headed and I know you had given me some of your rescue protocols in the
past.
Wing: . We are paying everybody and I 've sort of taken a stand on that
because I feel we all go through this training. We' re all getting woke up
at 4:00 in the morning and we're all entitled to the pay because at the end
of the year I don't know if it adds up to enough to say well only x people
can show up. Plus on a volunteer department, you can't count on the split
crew which we operate. We operate a split crew by the way. We have broken I
into two separate units where on every other day, or actually we're doing
weekly now, we have a crew assigned that has to show up and is responsible.
The other ones can come in for pay if they choose to but we do have two
separate units that are broken up. Now first of all to move the calls
around a little bit more to make sure that everybody is getting in on the
activity. Also to give the other people the option to sleep in if they
choose to. AT 2:00, 3:00, 4:00, 5: 00 in the morning when it's a local
medical call. That doesn't pertain to fires.
Wenzlaff: Anything else on fire? 1
Bernhjelm: I just want to offer a motion of commendation to the fire
department. To all of the groups that were involved in the Fire Prevention I
Week efforts. The Open House and the school presentations. It looks like
a lot of participation and a lot of effort went into it in terms of the
fire fighters themselves. Several wives I see were listed on the duty
roster for the school presentations. I think we have, we don't pay these
guys enough to do what they do and when they come in and donate their time
like this, I think they deserve our thanks and I would hope that perhaps a
motion could be introduced at the next City Council meeting in accordance
with that.
Bernhjelm moved, Klick seconded that the Public Safety Commission recommend I
that the City Council, at their next meeting, make a commendation to the
Fire Department for their efforts during Fire Prevention Week. All voted
in favor and the motion carried.
CHANHASSEN PUBLIC SAFETY: '
Harr: As I think you're aware Wayne and for everyone, Jim has a class at
Hamlin on Thursday nights so I think the mid-quarter was last week so
hopefully he' ll be back soon and I know he' ll be in later if we.g.that
9
Public Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 10
late. We have a number
of things here to discuss that Jim didn' t
I specifically itemize here but one of the issues, Barb that you had brought
up was the issue of City Ordinance training for new deputies. I 've talked
with Jim Castleberry and that will be included in the future to take some
time going over specific issues and Jim came up with an excellent idea'.
I Going from my suggestion that the Field Training officer and the recruit
come up and spend some time with Jim and/or myself. He said how about a
day or so. I thought that was a real good idea so we' ll be pursuing that.
IIs that alright? Secondly, I 'd like to just go down to the sight line
issue listed as unfinished business there if I may when there's my letter
in response to the issue last month. The only response other than, well
Julie Boden, Deputy Boden gave the one specific response and the fire
I department and utility department both expressed concerns regarding higher
vehicles. To remember it from that perspective as you had mentioned Wayne
so I've submitted by letter . I think that's what he was asking for based
' on my contacting the various groups that are listed in that letter. The -
only other issue that I 'd like to discuss at this time is animal control
and extending the contract and we talked about that last week to put on
I tonight's agenda and Wayne, if this would be an appropriate place, I'll
comment on the meetings we've had with the 5 cities we've been providing
animal control .
IWenzlaff: I have no objection unless someone else. Let' s go ahead .
Harr: Alright. Just a little background. On September 12th we started
I providing 20 hours a week of animal control services for the 5 neighboring
cities because Midwest unexpectantly pulled out and they were in a crisis
situation. It's really worked out exceptionally well . The temporary
contract just goes through the end of this year and all 5 cities are
I
requesting strongly, if not pleading that we consider continuing on with
it. It's really been a spectacular opportunity to meet with the City
Managers of these 5 cities. It' s given us a chance to get to know each
I other and really has been I think a neat experience for everybody. I told
Jim and the group that I would not even consider it if it meant detracting
from service in Chanhassen either by pulling our people away from what we
anticipate scheduling them for or by taking a vehicle away to limit
service. Now the one vehicle has been out of town sometimes when we would
have liked it here but on the temporary basis, that was alright so that's
the basis that I said I would entertain any possibilities with. As far as
Iadminstrating such an effort, I think is little compared to what additional
service Chanhassen gets in that those 20 hours per week we have someone
that's available for call outs in Chanhassen at no charge to us. It's
Ireally not taking significant adminstrative time. It's kept Bob on full
time and as I said, when they're working in the other cities, they'll
respond to our calls and they're coming and going and so we really get 20
Ihours of availability for free in that sense. The major stumbling block
has been the issue of a vehicle. I just don't see that we could even
entertain the idea with our one truck because I just can't have it out of
the city that much because that's the vehicle that we would use to respond
to an emergency calls or a Chanhassen resident. We've met weekly with the
city administrators to try to come up with an idea and it's been difficult
because it' s not a business proposal per se. We've really been trying to
work with these people rather than saying, okay we're running a_btginess
I10
Public Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 11
I
here so we've tried to look at everybody's needs including ours. We've 11 examined many possibilities and the most appealing is to have Chanhassen
purchase a used 4 wheel drive pick-up truck that would have a topper on it.
The other cities would pay through the hourly rate over a 3 year period
half of that vehicle. Chanhassen would pay for the vehicle up front. II Would be responsible for half the cost and it would be ours and at the end
of the 3 years, half would be paid off again through the hourly fee. We
toyed with ideas of saying our Council is not interested in purchasing
vehicles so if you want this, the 5 of you will have to purchase the
vehicle outright in proportion shares. Well that just unwieldy. We talked
about having South Lake Minnetonka P.D. own the vehicle. All these other
cities buy part of it. We'd mark it. It's just unwieldy. We talked about II
new vehicles. We've talked about cheaper vehicles. The other cities
basically said we'll pay almost anything per hour if you' ll provide this
service and the vehicle. What we decided was that we could purchase a used II
4 wheel drive truck and Bob and Deb and the other cities we've talked to
thought that a pick-up truck is best because it isolates the animal . 4
wheel drive because it gets them in and out of the areas that they're going
to. Particularly in bad weather and we thought that for $10,000.00 we
would be able to purchase a vehicle that would be good for this purpose.
The difficult part is that Chanhassen would have to purchase or under the
suggested route, Chan would buy the vehicle for $10,000.00 and pay it off, II
half of it, through the contract. I think it's a great idea because we'd
get a $10,000.00 truck with our markings, etc. for $5,000.00. We would
have people, 20 hours of free service or availability like we do for
minimal adminstrative time and that's the suggestion that we would like to
entertain at the first Council meeting in December . Deb and Bob feel that
it's workable. The City's really let us draft a proposed contract with
anything we wanted in it. We' re looking at a $22.00 an hour fee and we're II
looking at 3 years just because that way it lasts long enough so we don' t
have to be scurrying, re-examining it. I don't see that it detracts from
Chanhassen service at all. In fact I think it'd be beneficial .
Klick: Scott, is it at. . .
Harr : Yeah, $17.00 right now. So just open that up for discussion. '
Boyt: Why is it $5.00 an hour more?
Harr: To pay for the vehicle.
Boyt: So we're not figuring our current vehicle costs in the contract? ,
Harr: Not to be purchasing the vehicle, no. Just covering what we
estimated fuel costs to be for just the 4 months Bill.
Boyt: So we've been subsidizing them for $5.00 a hour?
Harr : No. The additional money is to help pay for the $5,000.00 share of II
the vehicle. We disagree. Okay. Subsidizing.
Wenzlaff: Do we know what it costs us to provide that service? If we' re
charging them $17.00 a hour now. Do we know what our costs are
r
Public Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 198
- Page 12
Harr: With that $17.00 an hour , I think we came out making, coming out
several hundred dollars ahead was all .
Wenzlaff: But we're covering the CSO' s time and the operating costs of the
vehicle?
Harr : Correct.
Wenzlaff: But no depreciation?
Harr: For just those 4 months, correct.
Wenzlaff: But if I understand you correctly then the issue could very well
be that they pay $24.00 or $25.00 an hour, something reasonable if it
turned out that that's what was necessary to cover the contract but not
have us make an undue profit off of them?
Harr: Our figures come to $22.00 an hour .
Wenzlaff: And that would cover both the additional cost of purchasing a
' vehicle and I 'm sure Bill ' s concerned about not covering the depreciation.
That's all fine and dandy presuming you' re going to abandon this thing at a
certain time but if you have to replace it , you've got to building for that
replacement time.
Harr : Well at the end of those 3 years, well we'd own that vehicle. The
day we enter into this contract it'd be a matter of paying off that
' $5,000.00. We' re just looking at the 3 year period at this point and
again, we picked the 3 years just because that' s what joint powers
agreements generally go.
IWenzlaff: Is that 20 hours per week for all the 5 cities combined?
Harr: They each, well Victoria for instance has 2 hours.
IIWenzlaff: But I'm saying it's a 20 hour total?
Harr: Well yes. I 'm sorry, yes. That's right.
Wenzlaff: Counting that over 52 weeks, that's $1,040.00 a year times 3
' years doesn't come up with $5,000.00 unless my math is wrong here.
Harr : I wish I had our total figures .
' Boyt: Well they're saying $5.00 an hour. They increased the fee by $5.00
a hour which will generate $5,000.00 and plus.
Wenzlaff: A year? Got it. Thank you. I guess my concern was also buying
a used vehicle. I don' t know what our experience is in the longevity of
those vehicles but 3 years for a vehicle seems to me to be, I don' t expect
II we'd have anything left over at the end of 3 years would be my opinion.
I 'd question whether it was serviceable as a city vehicle.
12
Public Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 13
Harr: I think with the type of use this one would be getting, that it
would work out. It wouldn' t be having any heavy duty use. Any of the high II
output runs. It's not a proposal that we' re pushing strongly. It's one
that the neighboring cities would like to see and we can see some benefits II
from but it's not one that we' re pushing and that' s why I wanted to talk
about it tonight.
Klick: So the bottom line, when you said we're several hundred dollars I
ahead, are you looking at units? Hours per expenses? Time that we're
actually out making the calls versus the time we're in here? How did you
factor that? '
Harr: Ask that question again. I'm not sure what you're specifically.
Klick: Right now we're 20 hours a month that we charge them correct 4" I
whether they get the service or not? Is that correct?
Harr: Correct. '
Klick: And have we looked at, I 'm asking you numbers here, the actual time
that we're out servicing those people? '
Harr: Well yes.
Klick: And that's where you came up with your several hundred dollars, is II
that correct?
Harr : Correct. ,
Klick: Okay. And my second question is, the additional 20 hours that we
would get if we purchased this vehicle, like we're doing now, we have the
one CSO vehicle correct?
Harr: Yes.
Klick: Is this another 20 hours of time that we would have a vehicle
visible with our markings driving around the town? That would be
additional too?
Harr: Yes.
Klick: We would have if we stopped?
Harr: Yes.
Wenzlaff: I don' t know what City Council feeling would be toward coming up II
with the $5,000.00. I 'm certainly in favor of, it sounds like a good deal
to provide the animal control . I agree with you. I don' t see it as,
certainly there's some opportunity for problems but I think they would be
minor and I would agree that the adminstration would appear to be pretty
negliable. The concern that I could see would be the outlay for the
vehicle up front and I 'm sure City Council is concerned about fat; '
13 '
11 Public Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 14
I
Harr : And I 've told these 5 other cities that the current Council is very
I conservative, particularly regarding the vehicle issue. That we just
didn' t feel that these other rather unusual ways of everybody buying a bit
of a vehicle and putting it under South Lake's title was appropriate. This
I would be an opportunity but again I 'm not going to continue on with a way
that will take time or service away from Chan but I just think any other
way of doing this without us owning the vehicle just presents too many
I problems. We've got to keep it as easy as we can. We are going to need
another CSO vehicle in the near future. This is an alternative, a rather
creative one to having one on hand.
I Klick: Had we thought about at all in terms of donations? I know Mr.
Redmond had given some cars in the past or even some of the local community
groups? I mean if money is that tight, is that something the City is open
towards for vehicles?
Harr : We had talked about that at a meeting with the Sheriff not too long
I ago and I'm not sure exactly where Jim had left that but at that time we
just were relunctant to go asking again. We left it with them that we were
interested in a donation but we haven't gone asking for a specific vehicle
for this purpose, no.
Wenzlaff: I guess what I 'm hearing from the entire group is that the issue
appears to be only one of money. Does anybody object to the premise of
Chanhassen continuing to provide the animal control service?
Klick: No. I don't want to lose money but the thing that's important to
me if we can, all things equal , the 20 additional hours of visibility and
I the police officers here are expert at that but I think isn't that part of
the preventative thing? The visibility and driving around and all that so
I'm looking at it as 20 hours per week. That's a lot of hours per year
U that we have someone else in uniform around here, which is important to me.
If we could get that, that's a good bargain.
' Harr : Yes, I think so.
Wenzlaff: And I think more importantly it's the City Council who's going
to decide the dollar issue. If I may be so bold, I think it's probably
I more our place to agree with the premise for providing it and all the
positives and acknowledge that the financial issues need to be resolved and
they're not going to be resolved by this group.
IHarr: The community section of the Star and Trib did an article on it and
it's one of the few times that I 've been totally misquoted on several
issues with us. I think they were looking for some sensationalism with the
IMidwest issue but they just couldn' t dig it up so they went with what they
had. One thing that they said and a bit of misquoting of me was, well we
didn' t go looking for this and we don' t particularly want to continue it.
IWell, that's right. We didn't go looking for it and we don't want to
continue it if it's going to affect ns at all but we see some of the
positives that can come out of it and that's what we're looking at.
14
r
Public Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 15
I
Jim Castleberry: Just a couple thoughts and I 'm not trying to play devil 's
advocate here but Chanhassen was involved in a tri-city agreement at one
time. . .CSO for Chaska is one issue. Scott that I think you want to look at
because I'd encourage you to come up with the money to buy a new vehicle.
I think in 3 years a used vehicle, our experience at the Sheriff's office
and I think even when we were working with Eden Prairie or Chaska, we were
going through a vehicle every 2 years and we were buying some pretty
expensive vehicles. I think the other thing that you need to look at, as
the city of Chanhassen grows, as does the rest of the corridor here, 20
hours isn't going to be sufficient service and they're going to want. . .
finally want to expand that and you need to be prepared for that. '
Harr: Good points.
Bernhjelm: What's the arrangement Scott in terms of calls? If there's a
dog call in Victoria, then our CSO's take care of it whatever time of the
day it comes in? Assuming like 16 hours a day or whatever.
Harr: Right. If it was during a time, at least the way it is right now
and the way that I would recommend that we pursue it is if Deb and Bob were
here and there was a call in Victoria, they'd take care of it and apply it II
to their 2 hours a week. The way we've been pursuing it on off duty times
is time and a half, 2 hour minimums and actually the majority of these
calls have been able to be dealt with over the phone. Those call outs have
been held to a minimum. The officers have really been handling most of
those.
Bernhjelm: What about, how do you manage, let's say there are no dog calls I
in Victoria in a particular week, do they then for the next week patrol for
2 hours to make up for that or how does that work?
Harr: They'll just get, we' ll apply that and keep track of that and if
it's overtime, then it's billed out accordingly but if there aren' t any
call outs, then they'll just get their regular 2 hours and it melts
together to a certain degree but we've keeping records and so far it' s just
been working out very smoothly.
Bernhjelm: Are there any adminstrative costs figured into the hourly rate II
in terms of computer time or secretarial time you need?
Harr : There hasn't been no, but that's something we may want to look at as
well. It's really not been much at all but I 'd have to check with Jean on
that.
Jim Castleberry: Just one other thing, and this just came up Tuesday at
the County Board meeting with the Veterinarian for Chanhassen. I can' t
remember her name.
Harr: Jody Arndt? '
Jim Castleberry: Jody Arndt approached the County Board about establishing
a Carver County Humane Society. Are you aware that they're trying to get
15 '
' Public Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 16
I
one in Scott and Carver County. At least one of the things she proposed in
' her presentation to the County Board, because they're looking for County
Board funding, is not only housing the animals but also going out and
picking them up in terms of injured animals and strays which is not animal
' control per se in terms of. . .may be part of a solution to a problem here.
Harr: I know that Jody's real good because she's very concerned and does
everything she can to prevent the euthanizing of animals and it's a very
' nice relationship too because as I 've mentioned before, she's the vet that
all the cities had contracted with so I don' t mean to sound too ambivalent
but we can see some good things out of it. We can anticipate some of the
' difficulties that you've said as well . I think it's workable. I don't
think it would detract from what we're doing and I don't think it would
over the 3 year period but it certainly isn't a business that we went out
soliciting either.
Bernhjelm: Would the figure be set for the 3 years?
Harr: No.
Bernhjelm: And hours are set?
Harr : To be reviewed and agreed upon each of the 3 years with a contract
ending if all parties didn't agree. So there's some, I 've written in
escape clauses to it so if it didn' t work out, we could terminate.
Wenzlaff: If I could summarize then, I basically hear 3 things that I
didn' t hear any objections to the concept of Chan continuing to provide
I that service. I heard 2 recommendations. That you look at a new vehicle
versus a used vehicle and I'd like to add my voice to Jim's. I think
that's a real concern. Number 3, that this body isn't prepared to deal
I with the financial issues but that we certainly want to see this being a,
well not a strongly profitable venture. A not profit free venture. I
don' t see this costing the City of Chan money other than if we elect to
invest in a vehicle which we see direct benefits from. Would anybody care
1 to correct or add to that?
Klick: I just would like us not to overlook the possibility of a donation.
I don't know, maybe Bill you can speak for City Council. I mean, is the
City open to I mean even hitting up the Lion's Clubs and things like that.
Is it something that can be done?
' Boyt: I wouldn' t venture a guess .
Klick: Okay. Maybe someone can ask Mr. Knutson.
Boyt: Sure.
' Klick: I mean if that's the barrier and there is no funds for something
like that, I 'd just be interested if it's there why not.
Boyt: Sure. The City could accept it. I mean we could legally accept
it. As to whether we would or not, I don't know. I would like,.. t.add
1 16
Public Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 17
though, I kind of hear a subdued nature about this and I really think this
is an excellent idea. It -allows us to have somebody who has expertise in II
animal control . That's pretty amazing when you think about a community of
10,000 people. It gives us somebody who's centralized and has
responsibility for it. I can remember when my dog got locked up a couple II
years ago and it took me 4 days to find the dog and it was at the vet but
the County didn' t know it. I think that offers a really tremendous
opportunity for Chanhassen to say to surrounding communities to the north
of us, we can do this to everybody's benefit. The only down side I see is I
you've got to find the money in your budget and I don't know how you're
going to do that because you came in with all these priorities of things
you wanted and I can, for my part, and I think something for the Council to II
think about is I could see the Council saying, we'll find somewhere the
money for the half that the northern suburbs are going to be picking up but
the half that Public Safety is going to be acquiring, I think has to come
out of the Public Safety budget which means you're going to have to give up
something that you thought was important.
Harr: We went with Don Ashworth yesterday to review the status of 90's
budget and he thought it looked workable but on the same premise so we' ll
continue to hammer this out with the other cities but at this point I just
wanted some input from the Commission which I appreciate. ,
Wenzlaff: Do you feel like you got?
Harr : Yeah, some good ideas. Thank you. That's all I have on Public '
safety specifically Wayne.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS: SIGHT LINES WEST 78TH STREET. '
Wenzlaff: Okay. I guess I 'm not certain. Did we cover the sight line
issue in Unfinished Business?
Harr : I didn't think there was anything more to it. Everyone was
contacted and given an opportunity to get that done with. '
Boyt: Wayne, I think the question is also addressed to the Public Safety
Commission. It seems like we're interested in getting as much input as we II
can so I 'd like to think if Public Safety Commission members have some
input, that you get it in the Minutes.
Wenzlaff: As far the sight lines? I guess I feel like I made my '
recommendation last meeting which was to make sure they get into the fire
truck and go around town because I drive a Suburban which is a taller
vehicle than a small car and it's amazing, that's probably only a couple of II
feet difference but it's amazing the difference in perspective you get.
And if we have a landscape architect who drives, pick your brand, Honda or
something that' s a relatively smaller vehicle and has never been inside the
fire truck to sit in it, I think it would be very difficult to imagine how
much that changes your perspective and that was my input.
Bernhjelm: Has he come back with his proposal yet Scott, do you know? '
17
Public Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 18
' Boyt: Yes.
Harr : Okay, he has? I haven' t heard specifically.
' Bernhjelm: In response to the input he's received?
Boyt: No. I think we had basic agreement on what the proposal was. His
I new proposal so he came back with that. As far as, I don't even know if he
has all the input from everybody. Does he?
Klick: I think he was awaiting that from us. Wasn't that where we left
it?
Harr: Yeah. I don' t know what direction and Mayor maybe you can help as
I well, I thought he was just going to put in our recommendations into their
final plan. I 've had no contact with them since I submitted this letter .
Have they done anything else with it Don that you' re aware of?
IMayor Chmiel : No. . .maybe what you should do is recontact them and find out
where we're at.
IWenzlaff: I would hope you could ask him directly if he' s had a ride in
one of our nice red trucks yet. It's not that long of street and this
isn' t that far from his office.
I 'Harr: Will do.
Wenzlaff: Any other comments on that?
NEW BUSINESS:
IA. CONSIDER RECOMMENDATIONS TO ESTABLISH A POLICE STUDY COMMITTEE.
Wenzlaff: Scott, I hope you can help me out on item a here.
Harr: Yeah. Actually I'd prefer to put this one at the end and hopefully
Jim will be here because he's been in contact wit the Sheriff about it and
' has briefed me on it but I wasn' t privy to that specific conversation so
I 'd rather wait and hope that Jim gets here if we could so he could comment
directly. Al, is that alright with you?
IWenzlaff: Okay, let's move on to item (b) .
IB. CONSIDER STUDY TO REVISE SHOOTING BOUNDARIES.
I Harr : Okay, there's a number of issues on here that we're basically
looking for comments, input and motions one way or the other and the
shooting boundary issue is one that just , I'm sure Jim Castleberry had to
deal with that continuously as we do and as the growth continues to occur
Iin the areas that are prime hunting areas, we get justifiably concerned
I18
Public Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 19
calls but it's also a real emotional issue because. . .
Wenzlaff: People with guns .
Harr : Yeah. Well that's why they like to come out here. That's why many II
people like to live and enjoy that area and we've had some very, very
unhappy people as we've had to turn down some of the requests even though
they may have been in this area. Just too close to the growing residential '
areas and those are sketched in on one of the final pages there. Jim's
recommendation, the second paragraph of the cover memo is that this be
looked at by the Commission and I know that what he's specifically thinking
about is having this looked at outside of the regularly scheduled
commission meeting so it can be viewed with some detail by a committee
that's interested. And Jim wasn't there a previous committee that reviewed
the hunting boundaries before my time? '
Jim Castleberry: I think a couple of times but I don't know what year .
Boyt: Before me. It's come up as a controversial issue in the last 3 '
years but there hasn't been a study committee in the last 3 years.
Al Wallin: I think this was done. . . in the early 80's was the last
committee that was formed on it.
Harr : Do you recall Dick?
Wing: No. It's been a long time.
Harr: Okay. Then it sounds like it'd be a very appropriate time to have a II
committee. Jim and I were thinking that a sub-committee would be the most
appropriate to do some delving into the issue.
Wenzlaff: I'd like to suggest that whoever's on that committee, that we '
have an even number of hunters and non-hunters so that we get both sides
and see if we can hammer something out. I was traveling at Lyman and TH
101 about 3 weeks ago. Called the Sheriff's Department on a Saturday
around noon. There's a little triangle there right at Lyman and TH 101 or
there was, of corn that was left standing after the bulldozers went through
for the south end of that new development and there were two guys out with II
shotguns trying to roust pheasants I think from there. I didn' t know what
the rulings were but I suspected it was a problem. I see here within 500
feet of any road, street or highway. I was trying to picture in my mine I
when I went through these Minutes last night how many places we've got left
that between 500 feet from a house and 500 feet fxom a highway is there.
And this is a personal opinion and not that of the Chairman please so
somebody else speak up but I question, we' re concerned about the noise from II
snowmobiles. We're concerned about drunk drivers and yet it seems like
there's some magic to people having the right to run around shooting off
firearms inside the city limits of Chanhassen. I suspect that we've gone II quite a ways from the days when this was drafted to where we are today. I
have some real concerns. 500 feet is an interesting distance. That's a
long ways to throw a rock. It's not very far for a rifle slug. I 'm sure 11 you gentlemen can speak to that. We're talking handguns that will go what,
19 '
Public Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 20
1
3,000 feet and still cause fatal injury and compare that to a rifle which
people would use to hunting deer.
Bernhjelm: You can't use a rifle in. . . .,
Wenzlaff: What can you use? What kind of shooting is allowed?
Bernhjelm: Rifle slug and archery. That's what you use for a deer rifle,
slug or archery.
' Wenzlaff: Okay. How far will a rifle slug go?
Bernhjelm: It depends .
' Boyt: Well it will go a good long piece. It will go 500 feet and hit
something that you wouldn't want to hit. As long as I 'm rolling let me
interrupt here. I think that what we've got is good. The conditions there
' are gradually ruling out Chanhassen as a place to hunt. The one difference
Wayne between this and snowmobiles and other things is that this has to do
with the way people are choosing to use their property. As long as these
other conditions are met, I for one don' t see telling them, and I know this
' is a problem. I've worked with the County and with Jim and probably with
Scott when this has been a problem down by the river for instance with deer
hunters and archery people and what not. But I would prefer myself to see
I it continue as it is. I think we pull this out and it's going to be one of
those issues that gets us almost nowhere and it's going to be a real
exciting trip to nowhere because people see this as a basic right. To hunt
I on their property when it's safe and I think you' ll find the State defines
some of these things. About 500 feet here and there. It's not an
arbitrary number from the City's standpoint. It's just I think the State
guidelines. Al wanted to say something.
IAl Wallin: A lot of cities that have open area get, want the safety of
it, are going to deer stands. So in other words, they have to be elevated
I so you're shooting down. That's the only place that you can hunt. You can
only hunt from a deer stand elevated whatever the footage is off the
ground.
Wenzlaff: Well I would certainly support and Bill your point is well
taken. Maybe there's a couple of things. You brought up something that I
don't read in here which is that of the property owner . That we may be
I able to restrict this to property owners or guests of a property owner. I
don't know how you'd word that. That may be a big bag of worms. I was
certainly concerned when I saw these guys standing 30 feet from Lyman
Iand TH 101 with shotguns and while I recognize that they're going to
hopefully shoot up into the air to chase a bird, anybody who's been
involved in any kind of sports knows that the adrenalin gets pumping and
you take aim and pull and when you realize you were aiming at TH 101 and
1 you hit a Honda instead of a honker , that concerns me.
Klick: I probably have the least knowledge of boundaries and hunting in
I the past here but unfortunately I am very biased to public safety. Last
weekend a 13 year old boy was killed by a gunshot wound. Died %f 'bdominal
1 20
Public Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 21
I
wounds on the table so you can talk about private property and land rights
and stuff but private property unfortunately is adjacent to other areas •
where it's public property so it' s difficult for me when I see children
dying and I know that's one whole end of the spectrum and there's a place
for hunting and it's a sport and all that. I'm just much more cautious and I
conservative about this whole area just because of my background.
Unfortunately I'm biased but it's difficult to see and I know even in areas
where it's okay, we all continue to have accidents. There's no getting
away from all that but it's just hard for me to see the more growth in
Chanhassen, the more population, the more people move out here to take
their dogs in the walk in areas that maybe the signage isn' t good and they
think it isn't private land. Not everybody has no tresspassing signs up
and so on and so forth and it's just real unfortunate for me to take a look '
at some of those consequences.
Wenzlaff: Bill , to address your point too about land use, we have an
ordinance that says you can't park your boat or your recreational vehicle
in the front yard of your property. It's got to be on the side of your
garage or in the back and well granted we don't specifically prohibit
people from that use, in many situations it is a practical prohibition
because there's no way to get that vehicle back there based on how the
house is built or whatever and I think that' s done for the "good of the
community". That an appearance issue. I really have a strong feeling that
I question the place for recreational firearm discharge inside the city
limits. I don't know how you control that. It's gone, the city has grown
and it's tough. I hear what you're saying about the fact that it's going
to gradually get narrowed to the point where it's hardly worth trying to
get the map anymore because you' ll find the one section of the middle of
somebody's field that you can't drive to, that you can go out and discharge I
a firearm but I 'm very concerned, as Barb is, about the safety issue.
Bernhjelm: As long as we're talking about personal biases, I agree with I
Bill. I think people, especially the people that have large tracts of land
in the city and have been here for a long time. You don't see farms
changing hands at this point between new farmers. There aren' t any new
farmers coming into Chanhassen. The farms that are changing hands are
going to developers or they're being passed on to children of farmers who
have been here for many years. I'm not at this point ready to regulate, to
say that the city is to the point where we have to regulate this type of I
activity that's been in many cases a family activity on a particular piece
of property for generations. I don't think it's an appropriate role of the
government to protect to the absolute or most perfect degree people from I
themselves. People have the right to recreate. Snowmobiling is dangerous.
Swimming is dangerous . Driving a car is dangerous. Driving a ATV is
dangerous. Walking down the street is dangerous. I don't walk down TH
101. I used to walk all over this town. I don't walk because I don' t walk I
down TH 101. If we had a trail system down TH 101, I would sure walk or
ride my bike. I don' t do it now because of where I live. It's dangerous.
I think I'm a reasonable adult and I recognize what's dangerous and what I
isn't dangerous . That's not an appropriate role of government despite the
tragedies that occur in hunting. Despite the tragedies that occur in all
other forms of recreation. I don' t think it's appropriate for us as a
governmental agency to take people's opportunities to recreate 4swo.. as long
21 1
IIPublic Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 22
11
as we have some reasonable regulations that protect others from our
recreation. I think the current system here, it would appear that it does
that very well given the geography and the type of property that' s left
available to hunt in or on in Chanhassen. Other restrictions could be
I enacted in terms of the type of wetland that could be used at a particular
site. I think Jim you go out and check the site almost always when you
issue these permits don' t you? So elevated stands may be appropriate in
certain locations for deer hunting and that kind of thing so I 'm at this
Ipoint at all ready to ban hunting in the city.
Wenzlaff: Jim I'd like to ask a question and you may not have the
Iinformation but I heard from both Bills that this was primarily dealing
with property owners. Are these the people who are coming in and getting
the hunting permits? That wasn' t my perception but I have no factual basis
for my perception.
I ti
Chaffee: I would have to say the majority of the people getting the
shooting permits in the city at this time for the particular pieces of
Iproperty are not the property owners.
Wenzlaff: That was my perception. Who is it then? Is it friends of the
property owners? Is it people who decided they saw a nice tract of land
and stopped and asked somebody if they could hunt on it and the guy said
fine so they come in here and get a permit?
I Chaffee: For the most part it's friends of the property owners. Somebody
that the property owners know.
Klick: Do you have to get permission right now? You do don' t you to hunt
on someone's land?
Chaffee: Yes you do.
IKlick: And what happens if they call you? Is it a misdemeanor or what
happens to them if they' re caught hunting illegally on someone's land?
IChaffee: In violation of the city ordinance it's a misdemeanor .
Boyt: And it's not easy to catch people. We had this thing down here on
Pioneer Trail which was clearly endangering people. It was not in line
with, it was one of these grayed out areas but catching the people was
impossible. I appreciate that. I appreciate Jim's position on this. It' s
Ivery understandable why he would come in and do this. I guess I 'm just
saying we've got, I believe we have good regulations, as much as we can
have. This is going to continue to be a problem but I think that if we go
Iforward with this, other than to improve it, if we go forward with the idea
that we're going to prevent people from being able to hunt in Chanhassen at
this time, that it's just going to stir up things and we' re going to end up
with about what we've got now.
' Wenzlaff: I disagree. I think it will stir things up if you start
affecting people on their own property and I think that's an excellent
Ipoint on your part so maybe that comes under the heading of improvements.
1 22
Public Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 23
I
I don't think you stir things up to prevent friends or people from the
outside from coming in. I can't see that as a great hardship. '
Bernhjelm: I don' t see it as any of our business to deal with, to prevent
a property owner from inviting a friend to hunt on his land. I don't think II
that's an appropriate role of government. If it's okay for the property
owner, it's okay for whoever the propert owner wants to have on there.
That's a taking of the property.
Boyt: Wayne, Dick recalls this but if you go back just 2 years ago to I 11
think maybe 3 years ago when the first goose hunting permits were issued in
the metro area. I want to tell you, there were some really excited people II
because the State put those regulations out at the last minute. We had
virtually no time to go through and approve them and they were really upset
at some of the Council people for saying well, we're not so sure we should II
let you shoot on top of that neighborhood. Well , so I 'm just saying , I've
been through this discussion at least 2 out of the 3 years I 've been on the
Council . The people who will come in here will be very distressed if they
think that we're going to make it impossible for them to hunt and that
means, well I 've sort of made my point. There's no point in going on.
Wing: Jim, you work with this on a daily basis. What's your
recommendation? I don' t see the issue here as friends. I see the issue as II
straight hunting. When the goose permits were issued, it was a nightmare.
I didn' t have a personal issue with it but the guns going off made me not
want to rake leaves those days. Even though it was a shotgun, I somehow
there's a symbolic fear there I didn' t appreciate and we're used to, the
city is such that there really isn' t much hunting space left. As a matter I
of fact, some of the best hunting space in the city is in the no hunting
area. That's some of the most isolated train wise is out by Lake
Minnewashta. What is your personal recommendation on the hunting situation
Jim? Leave it along or do we have to get stricter?
Chaffee:
I 11 get to an answer in a minute. I brought this to the
attentin of the Public Safety Commission because I see controvert' brewing . '
I will agree with Bill Boyt that this is a tremendous eye catcher I guess
for hunters. They will be out in force to protest if we try to restrict
it. I'm trying to avoid a tragedy that may occur. I'm trying to be
proactive. I 'd hate to have to go back and look at this as a result of a II tragedy but there are rights that we're looking at. And as Bill said, the
rights, even though they have been abridged if you will, of the property
owners north of TH 5 were in question when the goose season started back 2 II
years ago. These land owners north of TH 5 and probably could have shot
geese to their heart's content and done it relatively safely, were
prohibited from doing so by the City Council but not because the City
Council wished to do it. Nobody had time to really react to the
regulations as they came out. From an enforcement standpoint Dick, my
recommendation is to restrict hunting totally down to TH 212. It's easier
from an enforcement standpoint to know that there's no shooting going on II north of TH 212 and therefore if you have any shooting going on north of TH
212, you know it's in violation. Right now it's really tough to enforce.
I 'd say it's darn near impossible to enforce. From an enforcement
standpoint, that would be my recommendation. From an individual. rAght
23 1
Public Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 24
I
standpoint, I guess I have no recommendations. I was looking I guess for
I some guidance and suggestions from the Public Safety Commission possibly
for inclusion in the agenda for December 's meeting .
I Wing: One further question and then I ' ll rephrase my question to you.
Which lobby do you think would be the strongest? Hunters or the
non-hunters?
I Chaffee: It would be my opinion that the hunters would have the strongest
lobby..
I Harr: And yet Dick I think the majority of complaints are coming from the
new developments. People moving in from the suburbs that certainly aren' t
used to being that close to this activity and I think some of the comments
I we've gotten are equally as emotional from them. But those are all the
reasons that we thought it was appropriate to at least bring up tonight
because we're hearing it from both sides as the one letter Jim included
here indicates.
Klick: Maybe the recommendation would be to, instead of let this go for 10
years now that we're growing faster and I hear everyone saying here and
it's very difficult to choose what's best but maybe we could just examine
this more often as times change.
Chaffee: If I might add , I guess it' s myself that's on the hotseat when
I these issues are brought to my attention on a daily basis. I have denied
permits and have gotten a whole lot of grief from it. I can continue
operating in the present mode and I can do it fairly comfortably as long as
I everybody understands that there are going to be some irrate people when I
do deny permits when I don't think it's safe. I still have that authority
to do that and I will continue to do that. I'm not going to sacrifice
Isafety. I just thought this might be a little easier.
Wenzlaff: This map that we have that's got the, I presume these are the
newly platted areas. How old is the information on here as to platting?
IChaffee: That was done a year ago by Jo Ann.
' Wenzlaff: Okay, so I would be willing to bet that there's a fair amount in
addition to that that's been platted in this last year based on the number
of building permits and everything . Would that be a safe assumption?
IChaffee: I don't think I 'd go along with a fair amount. There may be 1 or
2 subdivisions in here that aren' t included but I think for the most part
this covers a lot of it.
' Wenzlaff: Obviously we have some healthy disagreement here which is
indictative of what we would get from any group of people I would suspect.
IJim, what would you recommend as a course of action here?
Chaffee: I guess I would say that we can table it for this evening. I 've
got a whole file on how these boundaries were developed about 9 years ago.
' I guess I 'd like to see a motion of some sort to say whether yoy cant to
1 24
Public Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 25
I
continue looking at this. Whether you want to let it ride and let me
handle it on a daily basis. Take a look at it again next year. See how
many complaints we've got. We're logging all the complaints now on
anything we receive so I can log the complaints on the shooting. I will
say right now that I've not had a lot of complaints on hunting right now. '
Bernhjelm: How many permits have you issued Jim?
Chaffee: Somewhere around 80. '
Bernhjelm: Is it mostly firearms or archery?
Chaffee: Shotgun and bow and arrow. 1
- Audience: How long do you think it will be before the Met Council pushes
the MUSA line a little bit and this thing takes care of itself? II
Chaffee: If you talk to Paul Krauss , the Planner , he would say
possibly a
year-year and a half. Before the development occurs though, we're looking II
probably 3 years.
Bernhjelm: I guess I 'd offer a motion then that we let the situation ride.
I think the areas that you've colored in on the new map Jim are essentially ,
those areas that have been platted and would fall within Exception A there
that no shooting is allowed on any platted lot. Just basically to have the
information as a guideline for some guy comes in and wants a permit and you
can say, well you can forget about this area, this area and this area.
Most of the time they already know where they're going to hunt anyway when
they come in right? They know the property owner and it's a 80 acres tract II
or something so that' s not really, you're not getting a lot of over the
counter traffic in terms of I want to come in and hunt. Where can I hunt
type of a thing . Okay. I guess I 'd offer the motion that we let the 11 situation ride as it presently exists .
Boyt: I'd second that.
Wenzlaff: As a point of discussion here. You mentioned the MUSA line. I 'm 1
having a little trouble on the map but is the MUSA line not down about
where the number 4 is on the right side? Is that Lyman on here? ,
Boyt: Yeah, that's about where it goes. That Lake Susan development is I
think all in the MUSA line.
Wenzlaff: Right and it cuts off at Lyman so there's a significant area
there that's not hunting banned just because there are MUSA services
available and I think to presume that MUSA will eventually push that is
true but to think that anything is going to happen real quickly. MUSA
services have been available up in a lot of that area for a long time.
Well, for certainly a number of years and so I don't want to make our
recommendation based on the fact that we think the MUSA line is going to
dictate it. I think that's a false assumption. The rate of development
certainly will . Any other discussion before we call for a vote on the
motion? '
25 1
Public Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 26
I
Klick: Yes. I would just like to have this put on the agenda next
' September.
Harr: Next?
I Klick: Next September. A year from now before the next hunting season
maybe just to continue to look at this annually.
I Boyt: I would encourage you to do it in July or something. If we're going
to take action in preparation for hunting, we've got to be a couple months
out.
Klick: Wasn't it November?
t _
Boyt: It depends on what you're hunting I suppose. I think archery opens
Isomething like around September.
Bernhjelm: Labor Day weekend usually or the following weekend is when
archery deer hunting usually opens.
Klick: That's a good idea . Maybe we could just look at it annually in
July.
Bernhjelm moved, Boyt seconded that the Public Safety Commission take no
I action at this time to revise the shooting boundaries. All voted in favor
except Wing who opposed and the motion carried.
IC. PROPOSAL TO BAN CIGARETTE SALES FROM VENDING MACHINES.
I Chaffee: Mr . Chairman, this was included in the packet I guess to solicit
support from the Public Safety Commission. This is something thats' s
scheduled to go to the City Council on November 20th. They will look at it
and make a decision on whether to amend the ordinance to prohibit the sale
I of tobacco products through vending machines or to let it stand as is and
let the cigarette machines continue to be utilized as they are. This is
something if you all recall that White Bear Lake passed I think it was in
October. I just heard recently, I just heard tonight as a matter of fact,
I that Arden Hills has passed a similar ordinance. I guess we' re just
looking for some kind of reaction from the Public Safety Commission so
when I present it to the Council I can say that you support it or you
didn't support it.
Wenzlaff: I' ll start it out. I'm very much in favor of it and at the risk
I of being facetious Bill, would you like to comment on whether or not this
is an issue. Whether you feel this is going to be strongly felt as an
issue against somebody's rights here?
Boyt: Well I 've got some comments on this thing. I'd be happy to make
them when we drift to my end of the thing here.
1 26
Public Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 27
1
Bernhjelm: Jim, how many of these licenses that are attached here,
licensees are using machines versus over the counter sales?. ,
Chaffee: That I don' t know.
Bernhjelm: So there's no differentiation in the licensing procedure? '
Chaffee: Not that I 'm aware of.
Klick: You have my full support. I mean we brought this up last time.
I'm totally in support of banning cigarette machines in Chanhassen.
Wenzlaff: Does anybody feel banning them would be an undue hardship on any 1
business or individuals or anything?
Bernhjelm: Have the businesses been notified that this is. . .? '
Chaffee: . . .and he said he would be contacting the business owners. Along
with that, the public hearing notice that went to the papers, it was in the II
Villager today, was sent to all these license holders.
Bernhjelm: So we haven't heard back anything on it? '
Chaffee: I've not heard, well I 've heard through the grapevine but I 've
not had any direct contact with any of the license holders.
Bernhjelm: What's the angle from the grapevine?
Chaffee: The Prairie House Restaurant I heard is protesting . Al , did you II
want to make a comment? I say the Sheriff's Department is taking some
stronger enforcement actions against minors and tobacco products and the
Sheriff told me today that because they are taking this stand, along with
the Chaska police who are making it a top priority, that they've seen the
migration of the kids who buy cigarettes and now can't from Chaska into
Chanhassen out of the machines.
Al Wallin: That's what we're hearing . I don' t know as though we're
actually seeing it but that's something. . .
Boyt: Maybe I can stir up some conversation here. One of the interesting I
things is that in Tokoyo they sell alcohol in vending machines. Now we
don' t see that, well I can say I haven' t seen it in our community. Selling ,
alcohol in vending machines. Are you aware of that? And that's illegal
but yet we're selling cigarettes in vending machines and that's illegal .
It strikes me as an interesting curiousity. When I look back and consider
over my lifetime and probably everybody elses in here, we can remember
buying, not that I did but an illegal item was available in a vending
machine. I think that there's some interesting questions here that maybe
haven't been answered about what about commercial businesses where kids II aren' t likely to ever be in there or under 18 year old people. Generally a
commercial business can't hire somebody under 18 and put them at least in
an industrial environment. Their insurance would kill them. I'd really
like to see Public Safety hold a public hearing on this. I think the
27 11
IIPublic Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 28
II
advantage is that it gives the Council time to see what the issues are. To
I review those. To think through them and then obviously the people come to
the Council meeting anyway but you kind of have a sense from where they're
coming. It's too bad we' re not doing this and I guess I ' ll take that as an
I intro to say that I 've got some serious questions about the Public Safety
Minutes. We got last month, I didn't see them until this week. I
question if it' s really valuable to type of minutes when like in this case
the Council 's never going to see what we say in verbatim until a month from
I now. It's an expensive proposition to put these Minutes together . I think
we should rethink that issue maybe and this is just one example.
Specifically with the ordinance, I think something to think about is the
I way the proposed ordinance is written, it says no person shall sell ,
dispense, I think somewhere in it it says give any cigarettes. Does that
mean a parent can't give cigarettes to their children? I think that' s
I " pretty unlikely that we' re going to go in and arrest a parent for giving
their kids cigarettes so I don't know if we need to take that into account
in the wording . I support the ordinance. This is one that I 'm ready to
take flack over. I think the other council members I 've talked to about it
I are in general support of it but I think we'd all like to know what are the
problems with it. What are the things that we ought to fine tune.
I Bernhjelm: I can see a whole lot of difference. It makes a whole lot of
difference where the particular machine is located. I don't think there's
too many kids walking into Pauly' s and buying cigarettes in their machine
but there's probably a heck of a lot of them like you say going into
I Filly's and to the bowling alley and buying cigarettes in their machines.
I don't know what kind of revenue Pauly's is going to lose if we take away
their machine or if maybe they' ll just go to over the counter , behind the
Ibar sell them and that will take care of the problem. I don' t know. But I
guess that' s pretty much up to them to tell us what the problems are and
like Bill said, I think we should have, I guess I would rather have had
I more public input about this particular issue before I take a stand .
I agree that cigarette machines, vending machines should not be in places
where they are easily accessible to minors . That just doesn' t make any
sense. However, if a manufacturing plant wants to have a cigarette machine
Iin their lounge for their employees, I guess that' s kind of up to them.
That's kind of the way I 'm looking at it.
IKlick: I think we' ll have a lot more control if cigarettes were sold over
the counter in terms of ID and enforcement. I think there are some rights
you have with employers and cigarette machines although if you want to
catch the trend, everyone's going smoke free. . .all the smoking sensation
Iclasses so I think that will take care of itself. Employers who are smart
have to know where their dollars are coming out of their pocket books.
Because of cardiac problems . . .long term and I predict that that will become
Imore and more the norm that there will be smoke free employer work places
so I don' t think that will be as much of an issue, as much resistence
although again I 'm just sitting back here without that input. I think that
IIfor us to pick and choose where these machines, where people can sell them,
where they can't, I think you say so Pauly's is not open for minors. Well ,
then we' re just going to encourage more kids to try and sneak in there. I'm
not a police officer and I don' t have a lot of expertise in that area but I
think it should be all or nothing . I would welcome public opinion on this
11 28
Public Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 29
1
and public support and I suspect that more than anything we'd find,
hopefully more support by the public and probably more resistance from the II
people. In terms of the pocketbook, I don' t think if these people can sell
these over the counter, we're not going to hit them in the pocketbook and
hopefully they' ll embrace this and work with the Public Safety officials.
Wenzlaff: I think it's worth noting that there's only 2, as nearly as I
can tell from the 1988 cigarette licenses, there's only 2 places that
probably fit the employees only bill which is Victory Envelope and Empak.
Instant Webb in here no longer sells them which I 'm sure is a move like
many other places to go to a smoke free environment. If we wanted to be
concerned about those and I think it's a valid point of discussion but that 1
would be easy to determine by calling those two businesses and saying would
this be a major impact to you if we passed this ordinance.
Klick: And Instant Webb and Victory and United Mailing all have some
connections? -
Wenzlaff: Yes. '
Klick: So I would suspect that. . .
Wenzlaff: I would guess that Victory Envelope may not replace their ' s as
well when that expires. It looks like it's coming up here. I guess I
shouldn' t say that. That' s a guess . No fact. But certainly there' s only II
two places we'd need to call to determine if that's a problem. The rest of
them are available for selling to the general public and I think that
asking them for the same degree of responsibility with cigarettes that we
ask them for with alcohol which is to see a face when you sell it, is not
an unreasonable request.
Wing : I think it's real helpful in these discussions if we have precedence I
to look at. I think going further, we should have the available ordinances
that we could look at and review. Just to get a feel for what some of the
other cities have done. '
Boyt : We've got that in here. There' s only one.
Klick: I think it was Shoreview who adopted it last week and you thought '
it was who?
Chaffee: I heard it was Arden Hills. Maybe Shoreview did too. I
Wing: And that's the extent of the forerunners of this thing to date?
Chaffee: I 've heard that' s in the nation to date. ,
Wing: Oh, okay. Then it's not. . .
Boyt : Well it would be good to see whatever Arden Hills or whoever has .
I 'm just saying, at the time this was put together there was probably just
the one.
79 '
IIPublic Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 30
I
Wenzlaff : The only objections I 've heard here is really the one of revenue
Ikind of becomes not a moot point but it's certainly addressable by another
method. You lose some convenience but it doesn' t say that the bowling
alley for instance has to stop selling them. They have personnel there
' when they're open so there are other ways to do it. The other issue that
I heard which I think is valid is about a problem for employers who wish to
provide that. To me it's presumably so employees don' t have to leave the
Iworkplace to go get cigarettes which could involve extra time away or
potential for accidents or any number of things. I'm not quite sure where
to go. I stated openly that I 'm kind of in favor of it.
IKlick: This open forum that you propose Bill , would that be conducted by
Public Safety or through City Council? What are you foreseeing for that?
' Boyt: Well I think the City Council is going to have a public hearing on
this directly. I guess I 'm saying for future issues, I think that when
it's a public safety oriented issue and this one is, that this would be a
good place to hold the public hearing. And if we had Minutes of those
Imeetings, it would be to the Council ' s advantage to be able to see the
issues as presented by other citizens prior to the meeting. That's what the
Planning Commission does . Park and Rec Commission does that and there are
Itimes when it would be appropriate for this commission I believe. I would
suggest that anyplace where those under 18 can frequent, I would, at least
from what I know at this point, find it easy to support this ordinance.
But from places as businesses , bars, I think those places are places that
18 and under folks shouldn't be in in the first place and I would just as
soon hold the owner accountable for that and let them have the machine if
they want it. So maybe I 'm striking sort of a little bit of a midground
Ihere. Having worked for an employer that had -cigarette machines, if the
machine goes, those employees are not going to be able to get cigarettes at
the workplace because the employer sure as heck isn' t going to provide
Isomebody to sell them and I don' t think we want to be in the business of
getting into somebody elses business that far .
Wenzlaff: Who makes the determination of whether it' s a place that would
be frequented by 18 year olds?
Boyt: If it' s a bar , it' s not legal for them to go in there. I think
1 that's a pretty dog gone good clue.
Wenzlaff : That takes care of the bar but it doesn' t take care of the
Ibowling alley. It does if the cigarette machine is in the bar but they
typically put it in the entryway so people coming into the bowling alley
and the 16 year olds sneak around the corner, plug the money in the machine
Iand then comes back out. That kind of defeats the purpose of what we' re
trying to accomplish here.
Bernhjelm: That could be handled by licensing. That could be handled
through licensing. In other words, if you' re going to license, you don' t
III just license a business to sell cigarettes any which they feel like doing
it. You're going to license either a vending machine. If you license a
vending machine, then you license the specific location in the structure
where the vending machine will be. In the case of the bowling alley, which
11 la
Public Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 31
1
is probably of the most concern, the only place that the machine would be
approved is inside the bar where minors don't ever go. Or aren' t suppose 1
to go.
Klick: But are we encouraging more traffic for minors in places they
aren't supposed to be?
Bernhjelm: I don' t think a kid's going to go into Filly's with the
gigantic bouncers they have there to try and get a pack of cigarettes.
That just doesn' t seem logical to me. Once he' s in he' s going to have a
beer too so.
Klick: When's this on the Council ' s agenda?
-Boyt: The 20th. I think that's what it says here, the 20th. 1
Klick: Would we like to do a hearing and push that back on your agenda?
What would your people think here?
Bernhjelm: I think Tom Workman, it looks like from the memo that they' re
cranked up, ready to roll with this thing.
Wenzlaff: I sure wouldn' t want to do anything to throw water on what he' s 1
trying to. He' s obviously put a lot of work into pulling this together .
Boyt: I'm sure it' s already in the paper as an agenda item. Not that Tom II
wouldn' t, I don't know if he' s willing to pull it or not. I know he's keyed
up about getting some action on it. I don' t know whether a month delay
would. . . 1
Bernhjelm: Maybe we can not take an official stand and if we have our own
comments, then we can address them either by attending the public hearing
or submitting comments in writing .
Chaffee: Or if I may, Bill Boyt and the Mayor are here. They can
certainly paraphrase your comments at the Council meeting on the 20th. 1
Wenzlaff: Does anyone see the need for a motion on this?
Boyt: Well sure. I think it's a good idea if you've got one. 1
Wenzlaff: I guess I would say that I 'd like to make a motion that 'we are II in favor of proposing a ban on cigarette sales from vending machines in, as
what I heard from the Council, I 'm trying to paraphrase this for the entire
group so we can all agree on, in any case where they' re accessible to
people who shouldn' t be purchasing those products and we have a concern and II
hope for a way of dealing with a business for instance who might want to
provide that service to employees who would have the legal right to
purchase cigarettes elsewhere. Does that about cover what we discussed? 1
Boyt: It covers my concern.
Wenzlaff: A second? i
11 1
Public Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 32
' Bernhjelm: Second.
II Wenzlaff moved, Benrhjelm seconded that the Public Safety Commission
recommend in favor of banning selling cigarettes from vending machines in
places accessible to minors but not limiting places where adults only can
access, i .e. businesses and bars. All voted in favor except Barb Klick who
IIopposed and the motion carried.
IKlick: A medical person has to say nay. I 'm sorry.
Boyt: And your position is that there shouldn' t be anywhere in the city
right?
Klick: They shouldn' t be anywhere in the city.
Boyt: Well we can sure pass that onto the Council .
Wenzlaff: And I 'm in agreement with you on a personal basis.
D. LETTER FROM DON ASHWORTH CONCERNING THE SALE OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO AND
ILLICIT MAGAZINES.
I
Chaffee: Well this more or less dovetails what we just talked about
although there's, I guess I 'm not looking for any particular action from
Ithe Public Safety Commission. Only to note that the last page was an
opinion from our City Attorney and to quickly summarize, the sale of any of
these items to an individual , to a minor is a gross misdemeanor. I think
Ithe question is, as I addressed it in the memo, is what do we do with that
16-17 year old who' s at Brooke' s Superette and sells one of these items to
somebody that shouldn' t have been able to purchase it? And that individual
or the clerk who sold it was not aware of the laws . I mean, do we want to
I prosecute? What do we want to do? Go after the owner. I guess those are
the concerns that the City Manager had when he brought these issues to our
attention. Certainly we can handle the sale through the Statute process
Ibut the question is whether we want to pursue that. If the individual
truly didn't know and wasn' t aware of the law, then who do we go after?
' Klick: I think Don had something in here that I was in agreement with.
Wasn' t it something the employer has the employee sign off?
Boyt: Right.
IKlick: I'm all for going after the owner and he can discipline his
employees he wants but if he knows upfront the rules and he has these
• people sign up front, that's his responsibility to his people as much as he
II would with hazardous waste or anything else and I think the accountability
would be on the owner . So my support would be to prosecute the owner .
Bernhjelm: They can' t really prosecute the owner. .,.�
19
Public Safety Commission Meeting 11
November 9, 1989 - Page 33
Klick: Why not? '
Bernhjelm: You can' t create vicarious criminal liability?
Klick: Why not? '
Bernhjelm: Because it's not legal . If the owner of Brooke's Superette is '
in Des Moines, Iowa because that's where the corporation is that owns
Brooke's Superette and a 16 year old kid here sells cigarettes to his 16
year old friend and he' s caught, you can't charge the owner of Brooke's
Superette in Des Moines , Iowa with a gross misdemeanor. ,
Klick: Isn't he accountable for his employees' behaviour?
Bernhjelm: Not criminally accountable. The way you attack those guys is
you take their licenses. That's how you do it.
Boyt: What about the manager? '
Bernhjelm: Same thing . There is no, you guys know and there is no
vicarious criminal liability in this kind of a case. Is that right?
Harr: We haven' t worked it down to this level of offense yet.
Boyt: It does exist in other levels . If they pollute and we can go after
the owner.
Klick: So he would lose his license for selling cigarettes? ,
Bernhjelm: He could if the City Council chose to revoke or suspend his
license. '
Klick: Sounds good to me.
Wenzlaff: So this sounds like a procedure that typically by the time we
get done with some reasonable methods here would involve a warning letter .
Probably a visit and at some point, after a collection and I hope it' s a
small collection, of warning letters that he's not allowed to have a
license.
Harr : If I could just comment. I wish I would have hurried back a little
faster. One reason that I 've been taking a bit of time on this one is
because I saw some potential concerns there that Roger addressed point
blank and I want to take it step by step. What I 'm working on with Deb is
pursuing Roger 's idea that problem areas are education and enforcement. I
just had a conversation with a Hennepin County Juvenile Prosecuter.
Hennepin County is now handling juvenile alcohol offenses by strict mail in
fines. Absolutely amazes me. Carver County's willing to take more time
with these issues and it' s been supported by the Sheriff and Mike Fahey and
I have been exchanging phone calls but what I 'm working on with Deb is
setting up a system to go to the various retailers and taking advantage of
that opportunity to advise them of these laws. Talk with them about other
33 I
Public Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 34
I
I issues, crime prevention. Respond to their needs and create a real
positive interchange.
Klick: This is with the employers now you're speaking?
IHarr: Yeah. The various retailers and do a whole lot with the contact.
The letter from Mike Fahey is very good and these people need to be made
I aware of it. There are some situations where kids certainly are buying
these kind of things but I think most of it is just not monitoring youthful
employees enough. Looking at it like well, what's the big deal. We' re
going to remind them what the big deal is about it. I was just relunctant
to go wild with ordinance amendments in requiring that every possible, as
Don mentioned, that every person that may be selling these things sign a
-permit on it. I 'd rather make it a more positive thing because I don't
Ithink people are doing it as deliberately or I think we could work with it
positively. I 'm not being very articulate but that's what I 'm trying €o do
with this. There's a good movement afoot in Carver County and I think we
Ican piggy back on it.
Klick: I agree with what you' re saying Scott. It's always best to try out
IIwith a positive manner but there are some people that unless you hold
something over their head , they're not going to comply.
Harr: And I think we've got the basic tools to work with it and we' ll have
' the support of the law enforcement agencies and the County Attorney and
that's, I was just getting on a discussion with Dave Huff. I don't know if
you know him Bill but Juvenile Prosecuter with Hennepin County. He was
Idefending this mail in fine. That's one of the reasons I was a few minutes
late but I think we've got a different perspective here that's real
supportive of our education and enforcement attempts.
' Klick: But Scott don't you think that, I can' t remember exactly, if they
had the employees sign such a card that they were made aware of this
ordinance. Don't you think that would force the education of the
ordinance? I mean what harm do you see in that?
Harr: I don't know that I see any particular harm in it.
IWenzlaff : It's certainly an adminstrative nightmare.
Boyt: I don't think so. I think the person, the store owner has their
IIlist of employees. They have that for any number of other reasons and if
they create a card file with these things signed in them, maybe it's just a
good way of educating people and the City wouldn' t have to do that.
iWenzlaff: I think the ones who are good will already do that. The ones
that we' re concerned about will sluff it off.
Boyt: It's interesting that people have a pretty quick way of figuring out
we' re serious about and what we' re not serious about. An example for me is
smoking in these like Brooke's across the street or whatever that
1 establishment is over there. That' s illegal but people do it. It' s not
just there, it's any number of other places where it's illegal but they've
I �a
Public Safety Commission Meeting 1
November 9, 1989 - Page 35
1
realized that we don' t enforce that. I mean not just us but in general the
State doesn't enforce that stuff. How's this different? I mean right now II
I think because of our , a month ago when this was hitting the Star and
Tribune about well, the State's going to change how it approaches this, I
saw some of those things clipped out and on the counter of some of the
places that sell it so they must have thought well, we're now going to be
serious about it. If we don' t do anything, I see in 6 months, a year it
will be just like it was before.
Harr: I think that the reason it may not Bill is because now there' s a
concerted effort, a drive to enforce these issues and I ' ll be honest with
you. I think law enforcement tends to look at this as, or has tended to
look at it as well , this isn't that big of a deal. I mean we've got
criminals to catch. We've got adult felons and one reason is because when
officers refer these kind of cases to court, traditionally they get told
hey, this isn' t a big deal . Now from the Sheriff's, from the County
Attorney, we' re being told it is a big deal. The only reason that at first
glance that I thought well , do we really need to make people sign it to say
they know it's against the law. I think everybody knows it's against the II law to sell these items to juveniles. It 's a good way to force them to say
yes, I do know. I was just looking at it from a little bit more of a
positive. Okay, here' s the law. Here's what we can do to help. Please II call. We won't write you off or make you feel embarrassed because we have
better things to do. So that was just my thinking but what harm would come
of making them sign it? I don't know that any would. I just wondered if
it was necessary but it could drive the point home. '
Boyt: Well we' ll make a motion.
Wenzlaff: I was just going to say, I think we've come full circle. Anybody I
want to discuss it further or make a motion? I'm not sure that it requires
a motion to be totally honest .
Boyt: I think it' s always a good idea if a commission makes a motion so
that there's clear understanding as to what their direction is rather than
just sort of leaving it up to the imagination. '
Bernhjelm: I ' ll make a motion recommending to City Council that they take
a firm stand on any violations of city ordinances and State Statutes II regulating sale of tobacco and alcohol in the licensing process in terms of
quick, consistent and severe action against the licenses of those
businesses that are found to disregard laws relative to the sale of those
items. That' s the end of the motion. I guess we can have discussion. '
Boyt: Well I ' ll second it. Let's have some discussion.
Chaffee: I'd just like a point of clarification. Bill , did you wish to I
include magazines in there? You just said tobacco and alcohol .
Bernhjelm: Well I guess the only problem I have with magazines is the term I
illicit. If there's a specific definition in the Statute, I don' t have the
Statute right. . .here tonight so I don' t know exactly but.
35
Public Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 36
I
Chaffee: There is a specific definition and it is a gross misdemeanor to
sell to a minor .
Bernhjelm: Sure we can include that.
' Wenzlaff: But we don't have the licensing issue to fall back on.
1 Chaffee: That is correct.
Klick: They don't know that.
IIWenzlaff: Oh yes they do.
Boyt: Well you've got this same kind of awareness, commitment to an
Iunderstanding. I 'd be amazed if anybody' s selling illicit magazines in
Chanhassen. I don't know how they define them either but I can imagine it
must be something pretty dark and gloomy.
IChaffee: That's Playboys and Penthouses.
' Boyt: Are illicit magazines?
Chaffee: According to State Statute, yes.
IWenzlaff: Any further discussion?
' Bernhjelm moved, Boyt seconded that the Public Safety Commission recommend
to the City Council that they take a firm stand on any violations of city
ordinances and State Statutes regulating sale of tobacco, illicit magazines
and alcohol in the licensing process in terms of quick, consistent and
severe action against the licenses of those businesses that are found to
disregard laws relative to the sale of those items. All voted in favor and
the motion carried.
E. CONSIDERATION OF AN ARCHERY RANGE AT LAKE SUSAN PARK.
IWenzlaff: I've read the information. I don't know if everybody else got a
chance to. Jim, I guess I 'm really looking for a recommendation from your
office to know what you think.
IChaffee: I checked with the Park and Rec Coordinator , Lori Sietsema and I
checked with the assistant, Todd Hoffman. They both agree that in their
' opinion this is a healthy, productive sport and it doesn' t present any
safety dangers where it is located. Where they have it located on the map.
I asked if the Park and Rec Commission was in favor of it. They said it
Iwas. I don't know where they would have any more expertise than we would
really as lay people in safety matters. I guess if all those people are
for it and have given it a location at the park, I don't see it to be a
problem on paper . We can certainly, it' s nothing that' s cast in concrete.
1 If they put the thing up and it does present a safety problem, we can
lA
1
Public Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 37
11
address it then but as it stands right now, I don' t see any problem with
it. I
Wenzlaff: Have you visited the site?
Chaffee: Not specifically since the proposed archery range was on the map. I
Wenzlaff: Are you familiar enough with it to feel comfortable that it's
isolated and has as much natural . . .
Klick: . . .because they've operated four archery ranges for the past 60-70
years. I asked them about regulations and incidents and what type of
history they've experienced and they're 60-70 years and the superintendent
that I talked to had been there for 32 years, said there had only been one
-incident. There was a park in close proximity. He did make
recommendation for placement that a hill would be the safest and I looked '
on here and it did say the slope is 1 to 2 degrees.
Boyt: You also have a berm.
Klick: He thought that would be the safest and that would be at the top fo
the hill . That there wouldn' t be any pathways and stuff. He did talk
about fire hazards. That' s something else we should consider . Usually
they use for the butt of these, bales of hay and I would be happy to share
this with Todd Hoffman if this was approved. He just gave me some
information to compact this tightly. . .and the types of materials they found II
to be low maintenance and most cost effective and less fire hazard, etc.
and I 'd be happy to share that with him. And the other question I had on
here then was in terms of scale. I didn' t see a scale on here and you said '
the range was good but we see this future. . .
Boyt: It's not drawn to scale. It 's not going to be 100 yards anymore. '
Wenzlaff: Do you know how long it is Bill?
Boyt: No, but in talking to my wife about this, she said that it in fact
wasn't to scale and it was going to be like 40 yards or something. A more
typical archery range distance. I guess 100 yards is pretty unusual .
Bernhjelm: Competitive archery is sometimes shot at 100. '
Boyt: Well , maybe that' s where it came from but maybe they' ll change and
go back to the longer distance. I don't know.
Bernhjelm: Hunting, typical hunting distances for archery don' t exceed 40
yards. But competitive target shooting does. '
Boyt: I've used the one at Lake Nokomis. If ever there was one that
should skewer somebody. In a busy urban park like that one is and I don' t
think anybody, well if you say one instance in all those years clearly
nobody, and one of the advantages, we' re way out in the open so the archer
can see what's going on and the people can see what' s going on. We really
need this. We need to get people out of their backyards with their archery
17
IPublic Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 38
II
targets and into a place where they can. . .
IBernhjelm: Edina's had one for a number of years and there's never been a
problem.
IKlick: So my inclination would be that Park and Rec. . . look at the site,
thought that it was safe. I don't see any other public safety issues for
us.
IWenzlaff: Barb, would you care to make a motion?
IKlick: Okay. I make a motion to accept the proposed archery range at Lake
Susan and if there are any incidents, that they would be directed to Public
Safety with useage of this range.
IBernhjelm: I'll second it.
IKlick moved, Bernhjelm seconded that the Public Safety Commission recommend
to accept the proposed archery range at Lake Susan Park and that any
incidents be directed to the Public Safety Department. All voted in favor
Iand the motion carried.
IWenzlaff: Okay, we have a couple of new business items and Bill I wrote
yours down on the Minutes and I would like to cover that as well. City
Hall , just a comment. I called up here a couple weeks ago in the evening.
You've got the new voice routing system. I talked to one of the
Idispatchers down there and I heard in the background the officer get out at
Chanhassen City Hall. Called up here. The phone rang about 18 times and
then they picked it up and hung it up rather than answering it because the
Iring was annoying them so of course that made me in a real pleasant mood so
I dialed it right away again. That happened about 3 times. I don' t know
what can be done about that. Clearly we need to do something if that
Ipublic safety phone is going to ring, maybe we can put another answering
machine on it. Maybe we can route it to the Sheriff's Department. I don' t
know what the right answer is but it was very irritating to know that
someone was here and all they did was pick up the phone and hang it up so
1 that the ring didn' t annoy them.
Chaffee: We have looked at that and we are looking at putting on another
Iauto attendant to prevent any of the backlogs that are occurring here
during the day. At night you're not supposed to get through. That' s the
idea. However, there is a way and the reason we wanted the auto attendant
Iwas for when the deputies are up at City Hall , as soon as you hear the
recording. As soon as the connection is made, you hear the recording .
Instead of waiting to push the 3 or the 5, you can go ahead and dial in the
extension that you want and it will get it right back into the office. It' s
very convenient for the deputies then for people who need to call in. The
IN dispatcher then gives whatever extension the deputies at to the caller and
then the caller just plugs in that number and you get right in. What you
Iwere doing , you were getting caught up in the ring if you will , the search
and I 'm surprised you didn' t get any of the recordings that would say the
I 38
Public Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 39
I
City Halls are closed but we have. . .
Wenzlaff: Do you only get that on the main line and if the first. . .
Chaffee: Did you push 3? '
Wenzlaff: Yes. And nearly as I can tell , if the first trunk is busy, that
recording is busy playing to the first person who called in and I was the
second one who called in and I got into the system.
Chaffee: Yeah, you can get tied up into the system and we' re looking into
that right now to prevent that from happening. Carol , do you know, do we
have a night number for public safety? So if Wayne called up and pushed
the 3 and got back to us, what would he get.
Carol Dunsmore: If he got on line 1 he'd get the recording. If line l's 1
already tied up, you would just ring into oblivion.
Chaffee: Okay, so those are concerns that we' re addressing with Telephone '
Specialists right now.
Wenzlaff: It was irritating to me. '
Chaffee: And to several others too. I mean we' re aware of that.
Appreciate the comments though. '
Boyt: It's my understanding in talking to Don on this thing that you can' t
get into the system. That once that night line is set up, unless you know
how to turn the night line off, they couldn' t pick up the phone and talk to I
you.
Wenzlaff: Well clearly somebody did.
Boyt: Well I don't know. I 've been up there when the phone rings.
Audience: You can by-pass it. Only if it was dialed 1901. . .it rings back
there and if somebody' s here, again it's hard to say.
Boyt: Well is that what you did, dial 1901?
Wenzlaff: No, but I just happened to hit it when 1900 was busy. The first
number was busy. I apparently called, from your explanation, I know what
happened because I know phone systems. The 1900 line was busy so when I
called it came in on 1901 which is the same affect. It rings down the
line.
Mayor Chmiel : I think I was here the night that your P hone call came
through because I did see somebody pick it up and put it back down.
Wenzlaff: Well it happened about a couple of times and I know exactly what
happened because you could hear background noise. Of course you heard the
phone receiver click and it was clear what had happened so if it's so II irritating to whoever is here, and I presumed it was the deputy .bu�i don' t
39 '
IIPublic Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 40
1
know who the deputy was or that in fact it was them.
1 Chaffee: I doubt if it was a deputy because it wouldn' t be ringin g back in
their office .
IWenzlaff: Okay. Well in any case, if that's an annoyance, we should
figure out a way to have a recording come on right away that says you can' t
get through. I don' t have an answer but you're aware of the problem and
Ithat's all I wanted to accomplish. Okay, Bill had a second comment and
Bill I' ll let you lead off on the Minutes.
Boyt: Well, I don't know. I didn't really intend to get into the Minutes.
I ' ll say .I think we ought to look at the issue. We either should get, the
City Council either should get them more currently or maybe that's your
"$5,000.00 for your truck there. I guess I question if it's worth the ti
money.
Wenzlaff: I ' ll address the delay and leave the money issue on the side.
If we can't received them promptly, you know they have time value just like
anything else and if we can' t receive them promptly, I would agree with
Bill. I think it's a waste of money. When I get the Minutes with the
Ipacket and read through those , frankly most of the time I put them aside
because I say I was there. I 'm going to go back and look at them and
sometimes I do. Sometimes I don' t. Certainly the whole idea of, when I
Iwas out of town as unfortunately business forces me to be once in a while,
it's very valuable to come back and read those Minutes. I very much like
that. But if I get it on Wednesday night or Tuesday night before the
meeting and there's something in there that I'd like to ask Barb about and
II don't happen to catch her at work or at home the next day, it's a moot
point. I 've only got a limited opportunity to do that. I don' t know what
the pressure is on you and the department and the people who are trying to
get it done but I 'd sure like to see those come out in a matter of days
after this meeting.
Chaffee : We' ll try. Let us see what happens after this meeting and we' ll
Iget with Nann and Carol and we' ll try to get these out real fast. It helps
us too if we can have the Minutes and attach them like Park and Rec and
like Planning does to the issues that go to City Council. It would also
Ihelp if we could keep the meeting shorter and I think the Mayor could
attest to that.
' Wenzlaff : Are there any other items to be covered?
Bernhjelm: Yes, the police study committee here.
Klick: And I have one quick question. I think this is an excellent letter.
that Deb Rand sent. . .to the parents about the safety for children. Who was
it send to?
IChaffee : Schools wasn' t it?
• Klick: Was it just given out at school?
40
Public Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 41
Harr : Yes, through the schools.
Klick: It was an excellent letter. It was very nice.
Wenzlaff: Yes, my daughter brought it home. I'm sorry, yes. Thank you
for bringing that up. I had a note here and missed it. Back to item A.
Jim we by-passed that hoping that you would be back in time that we could
discuss that so would you please kick that one off.
A. CONSIDER RECOMMENDATIONS TO ESTABLISH A POLICE STUDY COMMITTEE.
Chaffee: I' ll take credit for this idea because it's all mine. It's
something that I 've thought about for a long time. The various discussions
that have occurred both with this commission and with others outside the I
commission. Sheriff Wallin and I were supposed to do something to develop
a study. It was suggested that we do this back in January. We just quite
frankly haven' t had the time. Other issues have cropped up. I just
thought it might be better if we could get a committee together made up of II
myself, Sheriff Wallin, Scott Harr , Jim Castleberry, a member of the Public
Safety Commission and I think it was 2 citizens at large to sit down and
come up with a proposal to present to the City Council for police services II
for the City of Chanhassen. A 5 year plan, a 10 year plan. Something long
range where we can avoid any of the controversy that has occurred in the
past. I think if it's done right and it's well thought out and it's
presented in such a manner where it's feasible, I think it will certainly
help. It's just a recommendation I 've got. I 've run this by Sheriff
Wallin. I think you're in agreement with it Al?
Al Wallin: Yes.
Chaffee: That it would just help us and we set some specific timeframes
now where we can come back to the City Council with whatever plan that we
develop.
Al Wallin: . . .I don' t know if you'd want to delay this a month. It 's my '
understanding that Chief Young is doing some work that was prompted by a
mayor in his city to look at policing needs in Chanhassen. I guess it
probably behooves us to wait until he gets this done because he has called
me and said that it's just about completed . He does want to meet with me
and so forth and go over some things. Get some information and I guess
what I 'm saying is, why reinvent the wheel . If everything' s there, we can
look at it and I guess one month delay won't make much difference to see
what' s going to happen with that.
Klick: Who is Chief Young? I
Wenzlaff : Yeah, I was going to ask the same question.
Al Wallin: Chief Young from South Lake Minnetonka.
Klick: He' s conducting a study for Chanhassen?
41 1
IIPublic Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 42
I
I Wenzlaff : Would somebody like to explain this?
Klick: Where did that come from?
IChaffee: I talked to Chief Young today. Al , I don' t know if you knew
that. He has completed a preliminary draft of that report. I don' t think
it's going to help us in this case. It certainly would help us as
Isomething as a resource.
Audience. I think they're asking why. . .
IWenzlaff: Yeah, where'd this all come from? This is news.
Chaffee: It's a good question.
Boyt: Why don't we discuss this after the meeting.
Wing : Why would we do that Bill?
Wenzlaff: I think it's pertinent.
Boyt: I would refer you to the third paragraph of Jim's memo and suggest
that we don' t need to talk about this. If you personally want some
background , I 'd say that' s an excellent idea but I think for the Public
ISafety Commission, it's a mistake.
Wenzlaff: I 'm sorry. I 'm missing. I don' t know what we don't need
IIinformation on or what's a mistake. I'm missing something.
Wing: Let's back up Wayne. I don' t know what we're talking about.
IWenzlaff: I don't either. I 'm sorry.
Boyt: I don' t think South Lake' s interest in Chanhassen is, and our police
' services, is a particularly good topic for the Public Safety Commission to
talk about. I think if you're interested in it as an individual , fine. I
think we're better off leaving these issues somewhere else. This is like
Ideciding that you want to go out for a Sunday walk through a landmine field
and I 'm just encouarging you to not go on that walk.
Klick: Are you talking about this or the South Lake?
IBoyt: No. I 'm talking about the South Lake study. I think this is fine
to talk about.
IWenzlaff: I guess I don' t know anything about the South Lake study and
since it was brought up, could it be summarized in a sentence?
IChaffee : I can . I don' t know where it came from. It came from Mayor
Haugan directed, as part of the South Lake committee, group of people who
oversee that contract system, directed Chief Young to propose a study.
IIThat' s it.
11 47
Public Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 43
Wenzlaff: With a view maybe that they could provide some services?
Chaffee: I would assume so. That's all I know where it came from. -
Al Wallin: That's right. I 'd have to side with Jim here. We don' t know
what it's all about. That's the whole thing.
Wenzlaff: That's all I need to know right now. I just was curious as to, 1
we were getting a South Lake name brought up that had never been mentioned
before.
Wing: So you don' t want me to ask why would another mayor from another
city prompt their police chief to do a police study regarding Chanhassen?
_Is that right? I mean it's just sort of news . I'm sort of sitting here,
Al, what are your feelings on this? I
Al Wallin: I don' t know. I don' t know what prompted it or anything . Like
I said, Chief Young and I are going to meet very shortly here. '
Wenzlaff: So apparently Chief Young contacted you or contacted Jim or both
of you and said, we'd like to talk to you about police services to
Chanhassen? Is that it in a nutshell?
Al Wallin: I don' t know if it's police services in Chanhassen or just to
do a study on Chanhassen. In other words, are we providing enough service. II
I don't know what he's doing. I think that's what the meeting will be all
about so I don't want you to get off on the wrong track here to think that
they're going to come in and do your policing or whatever it is. I don' t
know.
Wenzlaff: It would sound to me like, whatever that issue is, if it
involves public safety, a study that Jim is suggesting here is certainly
appropriate regardless . Would anybody disagree with that statement?
Klick: This is excellent. '
Bernhjelm: Jim, why did you recommend 2 citizens at large rather than more
representation from the Commission? Was there a reason?
Chaffee: Well there is a reason. I guess I had somebody in mind. I was
thinking of Clark Horn to be honest with you and it's up to the Mayor I
guess to appoint the 2 people at large. I mean it' s a brainstorm I had and II
I don't even know how we want to develop this but it's just a suggestion.
Bernhjelm: I was just wondering. I
Wenzlaff: How do you feel Mr . Mayor about being asked to appoint those 2
citizens? Are you comfortable with that?
Mayor Chmiel 's answer couldn' t be heard on the tape.
Boyt: I think one of the things to think about is why does the Public
Safety Commission exist . I thought you were all citizens at large-myself
41 1
II Public Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 44
and happened to be reasonably well informed about the issues . I 've got
Isome questions about the public safety, whatever it is, the traffic thing.
Whatever we ' re calling that group of people. They have a citizen at large.
That's a public safety issue. Why isn't that citizen somebody off this
commission? I 'm not sure that it' s a good idea or a bad idea but when I
see, I just think that's what the Public Safety Commission is. It's
citizens out there and you've taken the time to become informed about this.
' Klick: Let's start with how much time you think would be involved outside
of our regular commission meetings and how many people are interested.
Maybe we'd start with that.
IIChaffee: My own opinion is that' s going to take at least one meeting a
month, if we want to set a goal of next July of a presentation to the
Council . Certainly Sheriff Wallin and myself along with Scott and Jim
Icould do a lot of the legwork and during the meetings when we meet is
present you with the information and the alternatives. The data that you
would seek.
Klick: What does the Commission think?
Wing: I support Jim's recommendation.
' Wenzlaff: I tend to side with Bill . I think that adding a citizen in
there is a nice touch probably from the standpoint of the fact that all of
us are more intimately involved. Some of us are members of public safety
and other areas, fire, police, whatever or have been in the past but I
think if that citizen were really interested in becoming involved with it,
Iit would be a citizen who might also be interested in becoming a member of
this commission. I would encourage them to seek that membership if they
.opportunity arises . I think it can be dealt with certainly the people
IIinvolved from the agencies are appropriate and 2 or 3 members from the
Public Safety Commission might be a better choice than bringing in another
citizen. At least we have the knowledge. All of us have been here, most
of a year or more and have the knowledge of some of the issues we deal
Iwith. It's educational at least to have gone through the controversy that
some of us have gone through with issues. You know Sheriff' s department
versus police department and I think we' re all sensitized to the issue that
Iwe get defocused from time to time but we' re all interested in the public
safety needs of Chanhassen. By all I mean the Sheriff' s department is Chan
Public Safety and this group is and we probably would bring a better
demeanor to the table having been embroiled in that controversy before and
approach it from a more professional viewpoint of yes, we know this has
11
been an issue before and we don' t have to dredge up old things. We need to
look at where we go in the future. Everybody has at least agreed that
IChanhassen is going to need more public safety as time goes on. There' s no
argument from any quarter on that. The only question is how that gets
provided and in what manner, if there's going to be a change over and what
Imanner that change over takes place. I agree with Bill , I think that's
better addressed by this group of citizens than by anybody else we could
bring in from the outside.
11 44
Public Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 45
I
Wing : I couldn' t disagree more. I think that you hit it right on the head
Wayne when you said we've been embroiled in controversy and that's taken 11
away some of the objectivity. I think one member from this commission, a
knowledgeable member of this commission. Someone familiar with what's
occurred. The history that's a professional in the field, whatever the
case is. I think we're talking pure facts. Pure objectivity and I think
that can best be handled by the group as presented by Mr. Chaffee and I ' ll
call for a motion at this time that we simply go along with Mr. Chaffee' s
recommendation for the committee make-up.
Chaffee: Mr. Chairman, may I make one point too. In fairness to Candy,
she did call me this evening and she indicated her support for my memo.
Again, this is just a suggestion. What I 'm telling you is what Candy told
me. She also indicated that it would be her desire to have somebody
totally foreign to the police issue, that knew nothing about it. A totally I
objective citizen from the community who did not have any prior background
and those were her thoughts to me before the meeting tonight.
Wenzlaff: So would that not rule out Clark Horn? Oh, okay, I 'm sorry. We I
have a motion on the floor. Do we have a second? -
Klick: Can we have more discussion on it or does there have to be a
second?
Hoyt : Well the motion dies for lack of a second so you' re welcome to
discuss.
Klick: I just want to restate my question again. For the amount of time,
I think we can go round and round about what's best. I think that the
actual getting together of this committee is the most important thing and
the members are kind of secondary, although that's an important piece. How
many people here are interested in putting that much time forward? I 'd be
interested in just seeing first of all if we have more than one person
from Public Safety who'd be interested.
Wenzlaff: Would or could. '
Klick: Would. Who would make the commitment to come another day a month
starting December thru July? '
Bernhjelm: I could probably do it with some flexibility. I ' ll be on night
shift the next 6 months. I will have days essentially free so I could do
some of the legwork also.
Wing: It sounds like this is a far cry from the original police study in
that there's so much professional staff involved in doing the research and
then getting the findings. I dare say you could meet very often if you
chose to.
Wenzlaff : Did I hear that you'd be interested or available?
Wing: If there was a need, I 'm always available. I 'm not necessarily
volunteering . . . necessarily
45 i
Public Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 46 -
I
IKlick: Wouldn' t the commission be drawn in along the way as you see this
plan or would it just be these people that went about collecting data
and. . . Would the commission be privy to this along the way or not? Do you
see the plan just starting out there and ending up with a presentation"to
' us of your facts and findings?
Chaffee: I guess I haven' t thought it that thoroughly thru yet but it can
Ibe worked either way. I mean my intention was to have this. Get it done.
Present it like we would anything else, through the Public Safety
Commission and then to the City Council but certainly we can tell you how
Iwe're doing as we go along. We' re still going to be having our monthly
meetings and we can give you whatever we have. I 'm not sure it would be
anything .
I Boyt: Well I would like to see it be made up of a subcommittee of members
of the Public Safety Commission. And that as part of that there would be
periodic reports back to the Public Safety Commission for other commission
' input as to what's happening. If we have 2 people that have an interest,
I 'd sure like to see those 2 people be on this.
I Wenzlaff:
Would you care to try that in the form of a motion?
Boyt: Well maybe there's interest in discussing it anyway. I would
recommend that this committee be recommended to the Mayor and that it
Iconsist of Sheriff Wallin, Jim Castleberry, Scott Harr and Jim Chaffee and
2 members of the Public Safety Commission.
' Bernhjelm: I ' ll second that.
Klick: So no one outside? Just the 4 public safety officials and 2 people
from the commission. Is that it?
Boyt: Yeah. That's what I proposed . I think there would certainly be a
need and plenty of opportunity hopefully for public input into this as it
hits a stage where they've got something to have input about. What I would
I see this group being is a group that is researching and creating a working
document so people could respond to it.
IWenzlaff: I agree. I see this as a professional group and I use the word
professional to mean people who have a knowledge of the situation and can
make informed decisions. I think having someone involved from the outside,
Iunless they bring some professional value to this group, doesn' t add
anything. Bringing an uninvolved citizen in because they are uninvolved
and have never been embroiled in the controversy, doesn' t help us get a
plan done down the road as to how this is going to happen. I think the
people who are most able to put a plan together that's workable are the
people mentioned and the value of the people on the Public Safety
ICommission is that they are not involved in it. We' re not involved in it
full time. We aren't the officers on the street. We aren' t the people who
get our pay checks from the County or from the City and have to be
cognizant of those details. I think Bill I agree with your point. I think
it's exactly the right use of this group.
111 46
•
Public Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 47
Harr : I think you're seeing some attempts by Jim and I was part of the
discussion of this just to try to keep the calm that I think has finally
come to the situation but frankly I agree with you 100%. I think they're
good comments.
Wenzlaff: I think we've got the 4 professional people who are involved on
a day to day basis who need to give the most direction you people, and I
would include Jim although he had to leave, Castleberry here. You have the I
ability from the computer and the data and the history to make the most
informed decisions and the only controversy I see coming up in that is
where we have a disagreement that is going to get dealt with I would hope
and have every reason to expect on a professional level . That' s where the I
members of the commission I think can be valuable. Where we don' t get our
pay checks from the City of Chanhassen nor one from the County and we can
perhaps bring a different perspective to it. Everyone here has a '
background in public safety or involvement in the city in some method .
We've been involved in the medical side or the fire side or the police,
sheriff side and I question whether any citizen without. . . Any further
discussion?
Wing: Jim, obviously I'm not going to go anywhere with this. I just want
you to know that I think it's a very good recommendation and Scott I think,
as far as myself is concerned, keeping the calm would never have been an
issue. I'm very accepting to what would occur in the people that would
have been involved or I would have trusted them to be very objective and
very honest and I think perform this duty perhaps better than any of us
could just because of our background and our involvement. I can' t see us
being as objective. That's my opinion. That' s the end of my statement. '
Wenzlaff: Further discussion?
Boyt moved, Wenzlaff seconded that the Public Safety Commission recommend
that a Police Study Committee be recommended to the Mayor and that it
consist of Sheriff Wallin, Jim Castleberry, Scott Harr and Jim Chaffee and I
2 members of the Public Safety Commission. All voted in favor except Dick
Wing who opposed and the motion carried.
Wenzlaff: And unless anyone has anything else, I believe that's the end of
our agenda.
Wing: Before we close, I'm just curious where you' re going to go with
these minutes. Bill you brought that up and it' s old business. It was
discussed a year and a half ago and a couple times we've mentioned the
Minutes and you mentioned it again tonight and I think they've been
unwieldy. They're difficult to read. City Council has commented on them
being difficult to handle and looking at a couple other cities, it' s not
uncommon to not do it that way. That they record the Minutes and there' s a II
tape available for anybody who cares to spend the time listening to it or
if there's an issue they wish to pull out but the general , the motions and
the status of the meeting is in a more concise, readable manner . What' s
your intention Bill with these Minutes?
47 1
I . Public Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 48
Boyt: Well I think a tape would be a
p good idea.
Wing: Well, that' s assumed.
Boyt: I don' t know. We've tried it that way and I 'm just saying I find it
' somewhat frustrating and I question it's value.
Wing : But didn' t you and the Council , aren' t you the ones that instigated
Ithis and wanted this and suggested this, etc. , etc.?
Wenzlaff: The Mayor' s shaking his head yes.
IBoyt: I 've been on both sides of this issue as maybe you recall .
Bernhjelm: And strongly both ways.
IBoyt: I initially was quite opposed to it. I saw some value in it. I
think that Jim and Scott wanted it and so I eventually ended up reversing
Imy position and introducing it at the City Council so I 've literally been
on both ends and now I 'm simply saying that having looked at it, I just
wonder if it's really worth $5,000.00 a year to do it. In the last Council
budget meeting, I remember arguing for it. I think it's a good topic for
Ithe Commission to just ask itself, do you guys think it's worth this kind
of money.
Chaffee : If I could just make a comment. I agree with Wayne that it has
been unwieldy. It has been frustrating. It's a new baby though and
sometimes they also can be unwieldy and frustrating . However, I don' t
think we' re going to get through that because we' re the last kid to move
IIinto the block, we' re going to be last. Planning Commission and Park and
Rec Commission and Council' s going to take precedence with Nann's time to
get these Minutes out. I 'm flexible.
Bernhjelm: Is there a way you could summarize them? In other words, do
like an executive summary for the Council of what the meeting , what
Ioccurred I mean in terms of like take the agenda and say, this is what they
did about that. This is what they did about that and maybe not transcribe
them unless there' s a question or unless there's an important issue that
they want to see the discussion.
IBoyt: Public hearing or something?
' Bernhjelm: Public hearing or something like that.
Chaffee : We can certainly do that. Carol can take down the notes and do
Ian executive summary. We can continue taping them. If there is a
question, we can like you said transcribe that portion of them. We can
certainly do that.
IWenzlaff: Would anybody object to trying that with the Minutes from this
meeting?
' Klick: Would the money go back into your budget? Your general budget. . .
' 48
Public Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 49
Chaffee: No. The money will still pay for Carol ' s time. That' s where '
we' re seeing the money. Now our portion of Nann's time would not be
counted and I think it's like $800.00. That would not come out of our
budget and that would go somewhere else or just be eliminated altogether ,
that expense.
Boyt: $800.00 a year?
Chaffee: We didn' t do the allocations. That' s what was there. Tom
Chaffee I believe did the allocation.
Boyt: So you put down $4,500.00. I believe was the figure for Public' Safety I
Commission Minutes but what you're really telling me is that was Carolf' s
salary? '
Chaffee: No. I don' t think we put $4, 500.00 for the Minutes .
Boyt: I'm sure you did. '
Chaffee: I think that was the total budget Bill but we can go look at that
after the meeting here. And again, the $800. 00 for Nann's portion was just I
pointed out to us yesterday. We have no control over that.
Wing: I 'd like to send to the City Council Bill, as the representative
from the Commission, I 'd just like the Council has chosen to request
verbatim Minutes and I think this is their choice and I would just like you
to key it at the next meeting. I think we should carry it through this
month and possibly to the first of the year but I think that prior to the
first of the year , like I to see a reading from the Council on what their
choice is. Expense wise and what's practical for them and would an
executive summary be more practical in this case. So if you would present I
that at the next Council meeting or the Council meeting of your choice.
Boyt: Well there's a budget meeting coming up. When is that one? Soon.
Wing: Is it a budget issue or an issue of being able to read and utilize
the Commission Minutes.
Boyt: Next Monday's a regular meeting isn' t it? I 'm so confused . The
13th? Okay, whatever. Sure. If that's the sense of the Public Safety
Commission. ,
Klick: As long as they're on tapes so if something does come up, we could
retrieve the information.
Wenzlaff: That leaves the question too then, we need to know the
difference between taping it and doing an executive summary and having it
actually verbatim done. If we' re going to save $200.00 a year , it may not
be worth messing with. If we're going to save $2,000. 00, it's certainly
worth looking at.
49 '
II Public Safety Commission Meeting
November 9, 1989 - Page 50
Wing : Well the issue is, the useability of the Council and our getting
Ithem quicker more than, I 'm not thinking of the money necessarily as much
as I 'm thinking of the Council ' s ability to use these Minutes to be
readable. I don' t think it's practical the way it is and I don' t know if
they get read and the motions get lost . I remember when we did, I 'm not
Igoing to say that my synopsis were necessarily good. For 8 years they were
never complained about but motions were right there in bold print on a
front page with only 2 pages total to read and you couldn' t miss it. When
Iwe make a motion, I've got to go through it 3 times to find it because it' s
not highlighted and it's. . .
IWenzlaff: Mr. Mayor, when you're not present at your meetings, I know you
try to make most of them but when you' re not, do you read the verbatim
Minutes?
1 Mayor Chmiel : Yes.
Wenzlaff: Do you find them useful?
IMayor Chmiel : Yes.
Wenzlaff : Okay. I 'd like to make a comment. I've been gone more this
' year from meetings than I 'd like to but business has dictated that and I
certainly find it extremely useful to come back and get the verbatim
Minutes.
. Chaffee : I just did some quick calculations here and at 4 hours of
overtime, and that's what we' re talking about, at 12 times a year and
Ithat' s 48 hours and assuming, I just picked $20. 00 and I think it' s
somewhat less than that. That' s only $960. 00. And if you guessed $960.00,
if you take the $800.00 that Nann does for the typing, that' s approximately
$1,800. 00.
Wenzlaff: I think the issue for me certainly is the delay. They become a
great deal less valuable when we get them 2 days before the next meeting
Itakes place. If we could get them within a week.
Klick: Not so much for us but more for Council .
IChaffee : We can get them quicker but it' s going to cost more because then
Carol 's going to, but we talked about this too. Now if we take Carol and
don' t put her here and Scott and I can run that equipment over there and
Ijust have Carol type the Minutes, it would cost us the same and we'd get
them quicker I think wouldn' t we Carol?
' Wenzlaff: I 'd vote for that. Let' s try that. Let' s try it one time
unless anybody objects . Try it at the next meeting . Have somebody else
run that equipment and let's use Carol's time to get them transcribed so
we've got them in a hurry. Any somebody else right. Then we' ll find out if
we can get it recorded. Move that thing up here. I can push the button.
Okay, any other discussion?
1
' 50
Public Safety Commission Meeting '
November 9, 1989 - Page 51
Chaffee: I wanted to quick inform the Commission about some activities
that we are gearing up for for the first week of December. Mayor Chmiel
has spearheaded a drive to I guess pass a resolution to make December 3rd
thru December 9th, City's Fight Back Against Drugs Week and this is
coordinated through the National League of Cities. Mayor Chmiel has asked
that myself and Scott Harr be the coordinators behind this effort which
would include certain media events. It would include literature drops to
the schools. It would include working with the Sheriff Al Wallin and his
people with the DARE program. It would include working with the drug task I
force but all of these activities would occur during the week of December
3rd through December 9th. We would start out the week potentially right
now on December 4th with a ribbon cutting ceremony at the Chanhassen I
Elementary School with the kids and Sheriff Wallin and the DARE people and
the City Council and whoever else would want to participate as community
leaders where we discussed maybe even jointly doing this with the City of
Chaska. We have letters to the Mayor of Chaska. We' ve met with Chief Greg 1
Cole of the Chaska Police and it looks like there's a lot of excited people
about this. .We've also gotten interest from the contract communities that
we provide animal control for to also participate in this. It seems like
it's, I think it's well worth the effort. Our efforts anyway of
coordinating it and thanks to Mayor Chmiel and his efforts and his support
of the Druge Awareness and Drug Enforcement in the community and the County
that I think it should be successful . Don, do you have anything you want
to say? -
Mayor Chmiel : No, I think you've covered it. '
Wing moved, Bernhjelm seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor
and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 9: 45 p.m. .
Submitted by Jim Chaffee
Public Safety Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim
51 '