Loading...
CC Minutes 1996 11 25CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 25, 1996 Acting Mayor Dockendorf called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag. COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Acting Mayor Dockendorf, Councilman Berquist, and Councilman Senn. Councilman Mason arrived after the Consent Agenda. COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: Mayor Chmiel STAFF PRESENT: Don Ashworth, Roger Knutson, Steve Kirchman, Charles Folch, Todd Gerhardt, Todd Hoffman, Bob Generous, and Sharmin A1-Jaff APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Berquist seconded to approve the agenda with the following changes and additions: Acting Mayor Dockendorf stated that due to Mayor Chmiel being absent and Councilman Mason being late, items 2 and 3 will be moved to the end of the agenda after item 9. Councilman Senn wanted to discuss under Council Presentations about the matter in the Administrative packet regarding Southwest Transit. Don Ashworth wanted to discuss meeting dates under Administrative Presentations. All voted in favor of the agenda as amended. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None. CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Berquist moved, Councilman Senn seconded to approve the following Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations: a. Resolution #96-102: Accept Street and Drainage Improvements in Trotters Ridge, Project 93-18. 1) Approve Loan Agreement with MCES for Residential Sump Pump Inspection Loan/Grant. 2) Approve Contractual Agreement with Buchen Environmental Services, Inc. for Residential Sump Pump Improvement Project. c. Resolution #96-103: Approve Change Order No. 2 for Lyman Boulevard Project No. 93-32B. d. Approve Addendum "A" to Development Contract for Lotus Lake Woods, Project 95-15. e. Approve 1997 Prosecution Contract with Carver County. f. Approve Joint Assessing Agreement with Carver County. g. Approval of Bills. City Council Minutes dated November 12, 1996 City Council Minutes dated November 18, 1996 Planning Commission Minutes dated November 6, 1996 Environmental Committee Minutes dated November 7, 1996 All voted in favor, except Councilman Mason who was not present to vote, and the motion carried. City Council Meeting - November 25, 1996 VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: Acting Mayor Dockendorf: I understand we do, Bob did you want to speak this evening? I'd ask you, we've got a really full agenda this evening so if you could limit it to 5 minutes, I'd appreciate it. Bill Kemble: Quick as I can. My name is Bill Kemble. I live at 1782 Valley Ridge Trail North and although we're not on the official agenda tonight, my neighbor, Bob Beduhn and I just wanted to speak for a couple minutes regarding the U.S. Postal Service Carrier Annex that's currently under construction right behind our neighborhood. The neighbors continue to be frustrated by the slow response of the Postal Service to our requests and now the official request of the City, and I understand that there was a letter received today by the City in response to Mayor Chmiel's November 15th letter of four conditions to the Postal Service. I was faxed a copy of that this afternoon. I had a brief opportunity to review it real quickly. I think once you get a chance to see it, you'll see that there really hasn't been any progress made in the last four weeks. They agreed, the Postal Service agreed at the neighborhood meeting that we had with them almost 4 weeks ago that they would work with us to develop a berm and landscaping and a fence, and they really haven't committed to anything further than that, and it just continues to frustrate the neighbors. One of the things that the post office has been asked to do is to provide information regarding a sound consultant study, and while we're still awaiting input from the post office on a bunch of questions that the City has asked, the neighbors feel that we've already got the answer to those questions. At least 95% of them and we'd like the study to proceed as quickly as possible. We're frustrated because the post office continues to delay and we don't really have any time frame for coming to any decisions or having any conclusions from the post office or getting any commitments out of them. So we've got a couple of things here. A letter that Bob and I drafted to Mayor Chmiel. It's signed by a number of our neighbors and it points out all the things that were asked for of the post office regarding in the sound consultant's study. The City's got a number of these pieces of information and we're also going to supply you with a videotape of the neighborhood meeting that we had with the post office which will give you the answers to the rest of the questions. And we'd really like the sound consultant to begin his work as soon as possible. The post office is just dragging their feet. Stalling. Their responses are very, very carefully timed and orchestrated. I'm sure they were well aware that there was a Council meeting today. Tonight so they didn't respond at all until today and didn't give anybody any time to prepare for any sort of conversation on the subject at this meeting. So now we've got to wait another 2 weeks and our fear in the neighborhood is that there's a lot of construction that can happen in the space of 2 weeks and if there's any changes that are going to be made, either as a result of the sound consultant's input and recommendations, or anything else that the City requests that the post office do, those may be further delayed or made impossible in the post office's mind in the next 2 weeks because of construction schedules that they're speeding ahead with. So we are going to leave this, I should leave it with Sharmin? Okay. And there was one condition that was made by the Planning Commission that was not included in Mayor Chmiel's letter to the postal service and we'd like a fifth condition to be requested and that's that they still pursue or analyze moving the loading docks because regardless of what kind of berm is constructed, I'm not convinced that that's going to take care of all our problems. So we'd like to have that included as a fifth condition to the post office. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Sharmin if I could. Could you give us, you haven't heard anything today from the post office? Sharmin A1-Jaff: Not today. Friday I spoke to their architect in regards to the landscape plan that they have submitted. And in response to the letter that we received from them, I basically said in the letter that we cannot accept their landscape plan unless the sound consultant has analyzed the plan, and it was an answer that the plan will work in the postal service building. Councilman Senn: Where is the sound consultant? I mean he's already started? He hasn't started then yet? Sharmin A1-Jaff: No. We're waiting for the information from the postal service. I have been ordered to forward it to a sound consultant. Somebody from the audience asked a question. City Council Meeting - November 25, 1996 Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Any information from the postal service about the configuration of the building. Councilman Senn: So that hasn't come in? Sharmin A1-Jaff: It should any day. Bill Kemble: Then it's our opinion that all that information is either, already within the City or on the videotape and he can get started right away because. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: We'll have to take a look at it. Bill Kemble: Yeah, I mean we're just spinning our wheels with this and it's going to get too late for anything to be done. Bob Beduhn: Can I just make one quick comment? Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Could you please come to the podium. Bob Beduhn: My name's Bob Beduhn. I live at 1798 Valley Ridge Trail North in Chanhassen, in the Bluff Creek Estates neighborhood. I also, I had written the post office a letter asking some specific questions and one of them was in regards to the hours of operation and the noise assessment and some of the things with the environmental assessment and there's just a couple things I'd just like to point out in their response to me. One of the items, one of the questions I asked was why they did not go through the site review process as they had indicated in the Environmental Assessment. And essentially what they have done, and I'll provide you a copy of this letter tomorrow, is that they've put the blame or the impetus back on the City again and said we submitted plans to the City and to the planning department and so we're going into this back and forth between, you know why didn't we do something so now they're putting the onus back on the City again in regards to who should have taken the initiative to go through the site plan review process. The other thing is they did talk about the noise mitigation measures and the conclusion of the letter, it states the postal service writes. If the results of the noise analysis indicates the potential need for additional mitigation measures, other than the berm and landscaping, the postal service will consider their feasibility and reasonableness and issue an addendum to the original environmental assessment. And I guess that points to our concern on the speed of getting this assessment done and seeing what impacts this building really is going to have because as soon as something's built, a block's put I place, more footings are poured, that just means it's not as reasonable to make a change. And so the more they delay it, the more it works in their favor to build the building as they see fit and then we can't get any changes made if the noise consultant does come up with something. So I just want to reiterate the need for pursuing this and getting this process moving. Thanks. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Is there anyone else here this evening for a visitor presentation? Seeing that, I'll move on. As I said at the beginning of the meeting, we're moving items 2 and 3 until we have a fourth Council member. That brings us to unfinished business, which is item number 4. CONSIDER HOUSE MOVING PERMIT, 6726 LOTUS TRAIL, TOM BYRNE. Public Present: Name Address Betsy & Brett Discher Todd Frostad Michael Reeves Tom Byrne Andrea Reeves Paula & Mike Wegler 6728 Lotus Trail Bloomington 5917 Quebec Avenue W, Crystal 6726 Lotus Trail 8820 Lake Riley Blvd. El02 6630 Mohawk Drive City Council Meeting - November 25, 1996 Steve Kirchman: Good evening Council. On November 12th the Council considered and tabled the application for house moving permit for Tom Byrne. And asked that in order for someone to have time to submit information concerning the value of the house, value of the neighboring houses, to try to make a determination if this would negatively impact values of the houses in that area. I'll just read through the analysis. Section 17-31 (3) of the City Code states that all buildings moved into the city must comply with Chapter 20. The planning department reviewed the house moving permit and the grading plan and found them to be in compliance with all applicable zoning regulations, including setback requirements. The proposed home also meets the conditions of approval for Subdivision #91-4, which included this lot and the existing home located on 6724 Lotus Trail. The proposed home is a 1 ½ story single family home with a tuck under garage. The home is well situated on the lot given the steep topography and mature trees. If a modern home was constructed on this lot with an attached 2 or 3 car garage, this site would have to be substantially altered, resulting in significant tree removal. Further, when Council approved the subdivision in '91 with lot area variances, it was known that the reduced lot size would result in the construction and/or placement of a smaller home. Conditions of approval for this subdivision required tree preservation, drainage easements, shared driveway, and limited grading. All of these factors further limit the size of any future home on the property. Section 17-31(4) statesthat the building will not materially depreciate surrounding property values. This standard is also a requirement of all conditional uses and variance applications. Whereas a change in the use of property often results in a perceived depreciation in value by neighbors, a material or irrefutable depreciation generally does not occur when locating a single family home next to other single family homes. Property values vary drastically in Carver Beach. Staff obtained estimated market values from the Carver County Assessor's office for properties located on Lotus Trail and the two streets located to the west, Mohawk Drive and Carver Beach Road. The average estimated market value for '96 for these properties was $87,483.00. Typically properties are assessed approximately 10% below actual market value. Adding 10% to the $87,483.00 would result in an actual average market value of $96,231.00. The appraisal of the subject property with the proposed home is $129,900.00. The ordinance states that the building will not materially depreciate surrounding property values, and not only the properties immediately adjacent. Based on these figures it appears that the subject property is of comparable value, if not higher, than surrounding properties located on Carver Beach. I also attached a copy of some other information we received during the week. The results of a petition and survey, which we received from Mr. Loren Veltkamp. And a copy of a letter entitled, The 2 Dollar House, which was unsigned, and then today we received a letter from Mr. Johannson, who is a neighbor, and I passed that around before the meeting. Based on all this, staff is recommending that our recommendations remain unchanged from the November 12th meeting. Questions? Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Council have any questions? I have one .... were to put a different home on there, if it didn't have the same footprint as the proposed home, the current topography is such that they would have to take out additional trees? The configuration of the tuck under garage is probably.., good? Steve Kirchman: It's definitely the best configuration for that lot. Of course the tuck under is about, well it's on the low side so they're actually taking 400 to 600 feet less footprint area than if the garage were beside the house. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Does the applicant have anything to add that was not said at the meeting a couple weeks ago? Tom Byrne: No. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Would anyone else like to address this issue? Please come forward and state your name and your address. Betsy Discher: My name's Betsy Discher. As you know from last time, I'm one of the owners of 6728 Lotus Trail. Directly south of the property where the building move is contemplated. As you also are aware, my husband and I completed negotiations with a buyer for our property and signed a purchase agreement to that effect on October 6th. I'm a real estate agent and acted on our behalf in that transaction. When the buyer observed the cutting and excavation activities that began the weekend of October 18th and 19th and 20th on this property, he became upset and asked for my assistance in obtaining information about Mr. Byrne's plans for his property, and City Council Meeting - November 25, 1996 also expressed concerns about his purchase of our property. I initiated inquiries at city offices and requested information from the planning department and the engineering department in a good faith attempt to address his concerns. In the meantime he stopped payment of his earnest money check and instructed his attorney to serve us with a cancellation alleging among other things that we had failed to disclose pending activities on the adjacent property. At that time I found myself in a pretty difficult position. As an agent and as an owner my best interest and fiduciary responsibility is to protect the viability of a potential transaction. Serious concerns were raised by our buyer, as well as myself as to various aspects of this project. I shared those concerns with you at the last meeting and I asked you to make a decision. Either allow the permit to move the building or deny it. The Council chose to table this matter pending further review. That lack of action has resulted in additional hardship and financial loss for Mr. Byrne and for us. In the ensuing discussion last time we learned several things. First of all the representative from the planning department rather casually and summarily dismissed a time lapse condition with respect to construction activity that was written in the subdivision variance of this property a irrelevant, standard verbiage. Construction variances are granted all the time in Carver Beach due to the size of the lots and the eclectic nature of the neighborhoods by approval or disapproval of the neighbors. Of course their oversight and failure to require Mr. Byrne to make reapplication with respect to pending excavation and construction activity wouldn't have had anything to do with that characterization, would it? Secondly the Council found the planning and engineering departments in violation of one provision of the city ordinance with respect to notification to the neighbors when moving a building is proposed. It was interesting to note that the city's representatives response when asked by the Council why residents had to initiate the notification and hearing process themselves, was inconclusive. Along the lines of we've always done it this way, and that ordinance was so long ago we just disregard it. This response would leave the casual observer to wonder what other activities are occurring within the confines of this building. I was told by Mr. Rask of the planning department that more than 700 building permits are issued by the City each year and that his file on this matter was in perfect order. I was told by Mr. Hempel of the engineering department that he saw no reason why this permit to move shouldn't proceed and that his file was in order. That's interesting. In an effort to assure my buyer I raised the issue of environmental threats at the last meeting. I found it very interesting that no one spent too much time on these concerns. I was told by Mr. Hempel that there were no encroachments on the drainage easements written in as part of the subdivision variance after he made a special trip out to inspect the site and review it. That was reassuring. However, when I raised the question of silt fencing, which is normally required and which was not present at this excavation, no one responded. I also asked for clarification and assurances at the last meeting with respect to watershed and environmental protection agency issues, particularly with respect to the potential of hazardous material threats to Lotus Lake. No one responded. I don't think I need to remind anyone about what a mess things can become when Federal and State agencies enter into any situation. And I find it curious that the Council chose not to be proactive in preventing this potentiality. The Council spent a lot of time on the provision of the ordinance that deals with non detrimental value effect to surrounding properties. There seemed to be some confusion in the discussion as to what type of valuation we were looking for. Essentially as a real estate professional I can tell you, and your legal counsel will concur, there are three types of valuations one can give to a property. Assessed value is used for taxation purposes. It rarely matches appraised or market values. At one point Ms. Dockendorf suggested that the Assessor make the determination on the City's behalf. It was humorous to see her suggestion eliminated when we raised the issue of requesting tax relief from the potential devaluation. Market value is used when positioning properties on the market. Price points are arrived at when the status of comparable properties are evaluated within a specific time frame and are confirmed when a sale is made. Appraised value is arrived at in conjunction with a pending transaction or refinance to insure that the lender's loan to value requirements are met. In most cases comparables used by appraisers and real estate professionals are the same when preparing market analysis for appraisals. In the case of our log home, an exact comparable does not exist. Comps are found throughout the State of Minnesota because of the unique characteristics of this house. In addition, comps from the surrounding Lotus Lake area have been used when we have refinanced and made improvements to our property. In all three cases, as your Council informed you two weeks ago, and as my appraiser, who has specific experience with log homes and lake properties concurred when I consulted him, properties appraise on their own merits. Your counsel gave you the benefit of his legal research last time on a very similar matter. Two other attorneys I consulted reiterated his conclusions. Mr. Byrne provided you last time with an appraisal confirming the valuation of his property when the planned improvements are completed, which was done in conjunction with financing. Yet inexplicably the Council tabled this matter and required adjacent property owners to obtain appraisals at their own expense, to assure the Council that the City was in compliance with it's own ordinance. Placing that burden of proof on City Council Meeting - November 25, 1996 property owners is ludicrous. I hope anybody who paid for an appraisal of his or her property in this interim presents the bill to you for reimbursement. We seemed to be stuck last time on this whole issue of perception and devaluation. Let me simplify things for you from the perspective of the ones who are most directly affected from your lack of action, aside from Mr. Byrne himself. What we have at work here, as Mr. Mason alluded to in his comments last time, are attitudes. It is my opinion that a lot of the concern over this project resulted from the simple fact that there are people who just don't want to look at other people. The actions of our buyer would indicate that he thinks he has the right to look at Mr. Byrne's property with no house on it, despite the fact that only one small window of our house is even in view of Mr. Byrne's land. In his mind, he thought he was buying that ravine even though it's not part of our parcel. He has used this situation and it's ramifications as the basis for an attempt to extort a lower purchase price from us stating that he now feels the need to landscape out his view of Mr. Byrne's dwelling. Obviously my husband and I can deal with that situation on our own after you folks get your act together. Mr. Veltkamp, the neighbor to the north, has stated he doesn't want to look at Mr. Byrne's property either. In addition, Mr. Veltkamp has misrepresented our position in his 35 point treatise with respect to this matter in an attempt to further his own interest. You will note our signatures are conspicuously absent from Mr. Veltkamp's petition. Mr. Veltkamp's house is oriented toward the lake. At best he'll just be driving by, like the rest of the neighborhood. The fear that this project won't be completed and the fears regarding overall safety and environmental threats are however very real concerns. I asked you two weeks ago if you were inclined to grant this permit, to require a performance bond from Mr. Byrne. This would underline his time table and assure concerned parties that completion of the project will be done on a timely basis in compliance with city codes and ordinances, and with respect to health, safety and environmental issues. No one responded to that request. Yet it appears it would be the simplest way to address and alleviate the numerous concerns that everyone seems to have. My husband and I have incurred financial and emotional hardship from the city's failure to observe it's own process requirements and comply with it's own ordinances. You delayed things even further when you tabled this matter, which in turn caused greater financial burdens upon us and upon Mr. Byrne. We've had to hire attorneys to represent us with respect to answering the allegations of this buyer regarding failure to disclose a situation we knew nothing about. Also with respect to breach of contract from this buyer over this issue, and with respect to making assurances to this individual's concern, which I'm required to do as an agent. In addition I told you last time we have incurred a breakdown on a friendly relationship which we have enjoyed with Mr. Byrne and his family over the past 12 years because of the position I am in as an agent. Our financial losses are quantifiable. They consist of attorney fees and our loss of equity and my income from the transaction should it fail. If you were us, what would you be thinking of doing? If you were Mr. Byrne, two weeks later with 7 inches of snow on the ground, what would you be thinking of doing? Please make a decision this evening and allow us all to get on with our lives. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Thank you Ms. Discher. Would anyone else like to address this issue? Seeing none, I'll bring it back to Council. Steve. Comments. Councilman Berquist: Wonderful presentation. I've got a couple of questions that perhaps I should ask... I do have a couple of questions for the applicant. Could you come up to the front? Since we met two weeks ago I've been out to look at the house. I wasn't able to get there... I have been out there since. Tom Byrne: The house or the lot? Councilman Berquist: The house. Tom Byrne: Okay. Councilman Berquist: I had been out to the lot previously. So I was somewhat familiar with that. I'm curious as to, you showed us an appraisal for $129,000.00 last week done by Town and Country Appraisal Network. What type of work was going to be done, is going to be done to the building to have an appraisal... ? Tom Byrne: Basically it's going to, how do I put it. It's going to be restored to the condition it was in previously in Excelsior. There will be a new roof. Windows. Egress windows. All the city mandated upgrading and with the basement. City Council Meeting - November 25, 1996 Councilman Berquist: New basement. New garage. New roof, and HVAC updates? Tom Byrne: Yep. And electrical updates. Councilman Berquist: Windows? Tom Byrne: Windows. Egress windows, yeah. Councilman Berquist: Egress windows as well as new windows? Tom Byrne: Most of them, yeah. Councilman Berquist: It's fair to say windows throughout? Tom Byrne: Yeah. There's only going to be about three that wouldn't have to come out anyway due to cutting it up so. Councilman Berquist: Siding? Tom Byrne: Siding's on the list too. It wasn't part of the appraisal however, but it is going to. Councilman Berquist: Siding was not part of the $129,900.00 but new roof? Tom Byrne: Right. The new roof is, yeah. Councilman Berquist: What's your time frame for making these completion's? Including the siding. Tom Byrne: Oh, including the siding? Well my loan runs out in April as of now. Councilman Berquist: Construction loan expires in April? Tom Byrne: Right. So it has to be mortgagable by then, unless that gets pushed out. I might have to try to get the extra month I've lost. Then I'd be looking at May. Councilman Berquist: That's everything but the siding? The siding you're going to do as cash flow... I think that's all I've got for now. Tom Byrne: Okay, thanks. Councilman Berquist: Well I knew, frankly I knew going in last, two weeks ago that.., and I don't remember if I motioned it or whether I just brought it up and voted yes on it. Tabling action to permit the adjoining landowners to provide some sort of documentation that the moving of the structure onto the property would adversely affect their values. But I knew two weeks ago when that discussion occurred that that would be a very difficult time frame from which to obtain any documentation, as evidenced by obvious anger towards that tabling motion... The inclination was to try and protect the adjoining landowners and the fears that they had. Insofar as the moving that house onto that site would depreciate their land values. So I understand the difficulties which were created. I don't think I could honestly say we created. But I understand the difficulties that were created for both Mr. Byrne, Mr. Veltkamp, Mr. And Mrs. Discher, and anyone else within the area because of the delay. But be that as it may. My inclination up until this point has been to permit it to happen. It meets the ordinances that the City of Chanhassen has in place. As long as the owner of the property brings the structure up to the current codes, save the energy code, there's nothing that would dictate that it cannot happen. I have every reason to believe that the property was, has been deeded out as a buildable lot for more than a couple of years and the accusation that somehow the City of Chanhassen is responsible for construction occurring coincidental to a purchase agreement City Council Meeting - November 25, 1996 being signed, is lost on me. I'm inclined to require that Mr. Byrne furnish some proof or something that guarantees or warranties that the work that the house needs be done in a timely fashion. I'm not certain how to do that yet but that's the recommendation. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Thanks. Mike. Councilman Mason: My viewpoint certainly hasn't changed over the last two weeks...but I certainly don't see any reason why Mr. Byrne should be denied to move his house there. Roger, I guess my comment to you is. First of all I'm opposed to the second part of Councilman Berquist said. I think we're, do we have any legal ground to do that Roger? Roger Knutson: Under Section 17-44 of the code. You can condition approval upon satisfactory to you that he has the financing available to do the work for example. You could do that. You could say, you represented to us that you have a loan commitment for, I don't know what the amount is, to do this work. Let's see your loan commitment. Your construction statement so you'll have the funds to do what you plan on doing, and you can attach a time table. A reasonable time table for doing the work. Councilman Mason: I guess my concern with that would be, I'm not quite sure under what basis Council would be holding Tom to that. I mean we've heard a whole lot of stuff about what is and what isn't going to get done and I'm, yeah I have. But I guess I'm not sure why, based on what other people have said. I mean do you think you'd want that action regardless of what was happening here? I mean had the neighborhood not been in such an uproar, do you think? I'm curious. I'm trying to figure this out in my own mind. Councilman Berquist: If that were my lot, if my house were next to that lot, I would. Councilman Mason: And what if it was your house going in there? Councilman Berquist: I would probably be smart enough to expect some sorts of, I would be smart enough to expect that there'd be some stipulation that the house... Councilman Mason: Which is, okay. All right. Well for now I'll just let it rest with saying that I would certainly hope Council would move to approve this tonight. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Mark. Councilman Senn: Over the last two weeks, I revisited the house and also revisited the lot. And I think when you sift through everything from the meeting last time, essentially what it comes down to is there's a concern by the neighbors...what is the end product? What can guarantee them the end product that is said to be the end product. I think that's a legitimate concern by the neighbors. Especially given the current condition of the structure. Given the ordinance and items 2 and 4 in the ordinance which say the building is well maintained and in a good state of repair and also that the building will not depreciate surrounding property values, I think both of those points... themselves effectively to guaranteeing the neighbors that effectively what is done will be completed and be completed in... manner. I was really disappointed when we got our packet and got the cover page to an appraisal. ... any appraisal coming up with this value...to create this value. Basically called a pre-construction agreement... With all of that information back in here, which makes this very difficult to deal with and Mike your question... At this point, from my perspective, I think that he should get that information from the appraisal. That does not need to delay action but I think effectively what the City should require is two things. One is the option of either a letter of credit or proof of equity and mortgage financing coming up to a total amount. $129,000.00 less the land value. Basically the improvement value then. And also.., and I understand that letters of credit sometimes... Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Well I thought it was very helpful that in our packet we did get the appraisal values of surrounding properties, and it does demonstrate that, I mean it ranges from $45,500.00 up to $144 but the over whelming majority are under $100,000.00 in valuation, which I think goes to prove that this property fits in with that scheme of things. And you know I'm really struggling with what all the neighbors concerns were because City Council Meeting - November 25, 1996 we're hearing a different story. Not different stories but different concerns and diminished property value issue kind of goes towards, you know should we tear down the $45,000.00 home because we don't like that? The process insofar as there is concern that the neighbors had no input on the house building, and I guess I would respond that there was no more, no less on whether Mr. Byrne had chose to build from the ground up. And there was, albeit tacit approval, when the subdivision was done several years ago. That went through a public meeting process. The environmental impacts, I think we've had several of our staff out there to take a look at it, and as I pointedly asked the question, this house paid and this house style probably has the least impact on the land. There seems to be also some concern about the homeowner himself, which is a really specious argument. I mean if we could only decide who our neighbors or family could be, this would be a different world. So I guess it gets to the issue that Steve and Mark did bring up about how we can get some guarantees, and my only concern and I think I share it with you Mike, is that are we putting a greater onus on this builder than we would... Councilman Senn made a comment which wasn't picked up by the microphone. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: I'm not so much concerned about the financing. I'm concerned about, more about the time table. I'm saying if I were a neighbor. Councilman Senn: The applicant said he'd have to have it done by April to get this loan... Acting Mayor Dockendorf: And Roger, you're saying we do have a legal basis to request a letter of credit? Roger Knutson: Yes. Or proof of construction financing and a construction statement that would show that the items that you need to do to bring it up to what the appraised value will be. Frankly a letter of credit for most individuals, is nye on to impossible. It's very difficult. And that's understating it. For most individuals, unless you have extraordinary means, if you walk into a bank and say I want a letter of credit, they will be happy to give it to you but they'll want it backed by cash. You'll put up a CD for the amount in the letter of credit essentially. Construction financing and a construction statement shows... Any construction loan I've ever participated in, that's the only way they're done so I assume there is a construction statement. How else could you get a construction loan? You've got to have it. Councilman Senn: There is or there isn't? Roger Knutson: I don't know. I haven't seen... Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Well Tom, is there? You have a construction statement? Are you getting a loan for the financing? Tom Byrne: I'm looking right now. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Okay, but you have one. That's my question. Tom Byrne: Yes. Councilman Senn: He doesn't have a construction loan? Roger Knutson: I think he's looking for it in his file. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Well regardless, that shouldn't hold up our action this evening, and I'm not going to delay this any further. Councilman Senn: Well I'll try one. I'll move approval of the permit with the following two conditions. One is that the applicant will use as a basis his appraisal and the improvements called for in this appraisal. That the applicant show proof of financing and/or equity on those improvements. And/or a letter of credit. Secondly, that the improvements be accomplished.., period of time. City Council Meeting - November 25, 1996 Acting Mayor Dockendorf: The improvements that were called out in his appraisal? Councilman Senn: Right. Basically we're being, what I've seen thrown around a lot is $129,000.00, cover letter to an appraisal and the back-up to that appraisal... I think let's use that as the basis...and basically effectively hold the applicant to that. I think if that's done, I can't imagine why any of the neighbors would... Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Would you go for a 10% leeway on either side of that appraisal? This appraisal is dated whenever, and plans change. Councilman Senn: 10/10/96. That's pretty, that's not even a month old. Or about a month old. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Well regardless, would you go? Councilman Senn: Yeah I think I don't see a problem with that. In terms of that. I mean again what I'm saying is, you've got the land value first. We're not really talking about a number of $129,000.00. The appraisal, whatever the 129 is. Deduct out the land value that the appraisal calls forward basically the improvements. At that point you're down to a dollar standpoint, you're down... Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Is anyone willing to second this motion before we have discussion? Let's ask the applicant. Tom Byrne: I don't know... What was the motion? Acting Mayor Dockendorf: The motion on the floor is that we have proof of financing and 6 months limit in order to do those improvements. Tom Byrne: That's... as far as proof of financing... Councilman Senn: I think construction financing loan or a permanent mortgage. Anything like that. Anything that would equal.., something that would match up, yeah. With your construction value after effectively deducting the land from... Tom Byrne's statement from the audience was not picked up by the microphones. Councilman Senn: Correct. And we're using your appraisal and the work items and improvement list in your appraisal is the basis, okay .... Well, we're starting from a basis that there's an appraisal of 129. We're going to deduct land value from it and then there's going to be an improvement. What we're saying is, in 6 months he has to do the improvements called out in his appraisal to produce the value of the $129 less the land value. Tom Byrne: Right. Councilman Senn: So the neighbors are assured effectively at that point that what will be there in 6 months will be a completed structure with mortgage on it that will have a value of $130,000.00. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: I'd still ask a friendly amendment for...either side of that $130. Councilman Senn: Well again, the 130 isn't the number. It's going to be less than 100 so I mean, I'd ask you to do a 5% and I think... Acting Mayor Dockendorf asked a question of the City Attorney. Roger Knutson: There are two ways of doing it. 10 City Council Meeting - November 25, 1996 Acting Mayor Dockendorf: We can discard his first one? Roger Knutson: If you want to follow Robert's, there are no such things as a friendly amendment. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Oh! Do we ever follow Robert's? Roger Knutson: No. Councilman Senn: I will include that in my motion. Original motion, how's that? Acting Mayor Dockendorf: All right, fine. Any other discussion? Councilman Mason: The second still stands Steve? Councilman Berquist: I also agree with the second. Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Berquist seconded to approve a moving permit for Tom Byrne to move in a 1 ½ story, 920 square foot dwelling onto 6726 Lotus Trail conditioned upon the following: The applicant shall notify the Public Safety Director at least 48 hours in advance of the anticipated moving date. The applicant shall reimburse the City for inspection of and monitoring of the moving operation. The applicant shall escrow $500.00 with the City to guarantee reimbursement of monitoring or inspection fees. A $2,000.00 surety bond shall also be provided to the City by the applicant and/or contractor to guarantee any street repairs resulting from the moving operation. The applicant shall conform with local street weight restrictions. A weight distribution diagram shall be supplied to the City Engineer for review and approval or the City may also weigh the apparatus to ensure weight restrictions are being maintained. The applicant shall provide a proof of construction loan financing to ensure that the improvements outlined in the appraisal will be completed and that the finished value is within 5% of the appraised value of $129,900.00. 5. The work shall be completed within a 6 month time frame. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Councilman Senn: Steve, you need to get that information on the appraisal and stuff before issuance of the permit please. Steve Kirchman: Will do. APPROVAL OF POLICIES FOR THE RECREATION CENTER. Todd Hoffman: Members of the City Council. Tonight you have on your agenda approval of policies for the Chanhassen Recreation Center and my response to questions raised at your last meeting. If you'd like me to go through each one of those questions, I'd do that. If Councilman Senn is satisfied or has additional questions, I'd be happy to discuss those. How much time do you want to invest in this? Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Are there any questions on his report? Councilman Senn: He's answered the questions I've had so I don't have any additional ones at this point. 11 City Council Meeting - November 25, 1996 Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Okay. I'd accept a motion. Councilman Berquist: Move approval. Councilman Mason: Second. Councilman Senn: How about discussion? Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Discussion. Go ahead. Councilman Senn: On the motion. Todd, I understand what the Commission has done effectively to create the rental structure but the, you know looking at your list which has been provided now since the last meeting. We have some, I would say pretty extensive or heavy use by outside organizations called, you know in our non-charged categories. Okay. You know the only thing that bothers me about the policy is it creates effectively an unlimited basis of use at no charge and I'm not sure that's really to our benefit, especially given you know effectively we have established a budget and goals in terms of revenue on this facility but effectively by this policy we create a mechanism to effectively undo our own budget and projections, because there is no limitation on that. So I don't know how you'd feel about that or how Council feels about that but I think it's definitely in order for us to put some type of limitation on these organizations where they get so many hours of use, you know in the no charge category and after that they start paying it. That allows you to meet budget, and us to meet projections and also basically keep some type of a check effectively on this type of use. Because quite frankly they're our biggest users. Our biggest users are the no charges. Todd Hoffman: Our freebie's total. Councilman Senn: Hours of use. Todd Hoffman: Well yeah. They total $10,000.00 and are charging. Councilman Senn: I'm not talking dollars now. We don't charge them. I'm saying in hours of use, our biggest users are our freebie's. Todd Hoffman: No. Councilman Senn: They are not? Todd Hoffman: No. They wouldn't be in total hours. The discrepancy there between the $10,000.00 in value and the free one's and $80,000.00 on the value of the paid customers, there is a difference in the pricing between those two but not that large a difference. Councilman Senn: I'm talking total. I'm talking about individual organizations. I'm saying as your biggest user organizations, individually are all non-charged. Todd Hoffman: Sure. The CAA and the School. Yep, and the City. Councilman Senn: So it seems to me we should put some type of a cap or limitation on them.., effectively we're throwing our other goals or budgets...we're trying to achieve revenue wise. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Is that an administrative headache? Todd Hoffman: Councilman Senn raises questions which we discussed at length. During the day the school district is a prime user. They come over to the building and utilize the space, and that really is not to our jeopardy. Our paid users come on the weekends and the evenings. It's the don't bite the hand that feeds you scenario. The 12 City Council Meeting - November 25, 1996 big fish and the little fish in the big pond. We are the little fish. We start trying to push the School District around, where they have 20 or 30 times the capacity that we have in their facilities which we are invited to use free of charge, as long as they're available, we start to set ourselves up for a fall. The policy allows limitations based on our discretion. And the policy also has been changed from it's initiation date to include some minimums. In the conference room, eight participants need to be there to hold a free meeting. And in the conference rooms, 15 participants have to be there. We had teachers who would call us up for a conference and four people would walk down the hall. Schedule out a room and hold a conference, which they could do in their classroom or their office and we wanted to get around that. We considered putting a limit on it. In fact Patty proposed 16 hours per week free time. Administratively that would be a headache, and long term policy, I think we'd be setting ourselves up for more of a detriment. We could end up in the long run paying more as an agency than we would be saving our customers. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Any other discussion? Seeing none, I will call the question. Councilman Berquist moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the Chanhassen Recreation Center Rental Policy as presented by Patty Dexter, Recreation Supervisor in her memorandum of October 25, 1996, with the noted amendment in Group I omitting the word "professional". All voted in favor, except Councilman Senn who opposed, and the motion carried $ to 1. CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 16 OF THE CITY CODE CREATING RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTING FOR WASTE COLLECTION AND TRUCK WEIGHT RESTRICTIONS, FIRST READING. Public Present: Name Address Gary Lano Tom Workman 731 Victoria Drive AW Disposal Bob Generous: Thank you Council members. This is an ordinance that's very simple. The first section of the ordinance establishes that the City will establish residential solid waste collection districts for the haulers. In these, each district there would be an open system so residential hauling in the city could... Second section of the ordinance is just to establish a maximum vehicle weight of 7 tons per axle. The 7 tons per axle is recommended by staff because that's what our local... We're recommending approval... Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Thank you. Does Council have any questions? Councilman Berquist: I just want to make sure. The 7 ton weight limit, there was something in the staff report that led me to believe that currently their vehicles are set up at roughly that tonnage? And there was something also within there that led me to believe that mini packers could exceed that? Bob Generous: By axle... Councilman Berquist: There are two axles on a mini packer... So the 7 ton per axle was something that the haulers could live with? Bob Generous: Not really. Their preference would be 9 ton. Councilman Berquist: So that seems to fly exactly contrary to...Thank you. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Mike, any questions? Councilman Mason: Not now, no. 13 City Council Meeting - November 25, 1996 Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Mark. Councilman Senn: No. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Nor do I. Would anyone like to address this issue? Lots of familiar faces out there. Gary Lano: My name's Gary, Chaska Sanitation. I don't know where to start. We've had three public hearings on this over the last 3 ½ years. I guess my honest opinion is, I don't know if you as representatives of the City are really accomplishing what we set out to do here .... which I don't really have a problem with that. I guess that these certain districts you're starting, to me it's judging what company's, you know to do a good job in certain areas they're litter free. You've got five companies coming into a neighborhood in one given day. It can be a maximum of 15 trucks. Or a minimum of 15 trucks per day. And you know with the safety involved with the City that the residents in the City. You have 15 trucks bringing in one neighborhood on a given day versus spread out during the course of a week, I foresee that future problems. For us, for my company alone, it's obviously going to have some major impacts...my entire business. We've serviced the City of Chanhassen for over 30 years and it's a smaller company. It's a little harder to adjust to things as far as labor force and equipment to adapt to the changes. Our company has enjoyed servicing Chanhassen over the last 30 years and the loyalty from our customers has been very good, and it's well appreciative. With all the price cutting and gouging and everything that's been going on to gather market share in the last 3 ½ years, I guess I'd really like to say thank you to my customers at this time. Our company is in no position for a price war and I guess that this is all heading, I foresee it and I'd have to respect the residents of Chanhassen in a given neighborhood. Having 15 trucks come into your neighborhood, you'd want it organized within yourselves somehow. But at this time, I'm not really in a position for that. As I'm pretty sure most of you know right now, one nationwide company has left the city in the last couple months and one family owned company has sold out within the last few months and basically hopefully that's not the course you know or the path that the City wants to take. I didn't want to repetitive of what I had said over the last 2 or 3 public hearings so I think most of you pretty much know how I feel. Thank you. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Anyone else? I'm sure you've always got a word Tom, no? Tom Workman: Thank you. Who is the Acting Mayor? Are you Colleen? Madam Acting Mayor, and Council members. Tom Workman. AW Disposal. I don't know if there's a neighborhood that has all five haulers in it. Waste Management got out because of this action. They only had 200 stops so they got out. I was under the understanding that the City was on a licensing moratorium and then I read in your memo that Knutson was now here. So I don't know if you're trying to keep things in or out or other, I do have that question. So there really aren't 15 trucks in any given neighborhood. I think that's stretching it a little bit. I wasn't able to make the last work session. Maybe even two. I don't know where the 9 ton came from. The 7 ton is something we can more work with. The definition of a mini packer is a little bit elusive and so we are, and the city is moving to a system that is less efficient and in the memo there's debate about 3 days or 5 days or how many days should you divide the city up. I would suggest 5 because the city's going to get bigger and I thought that we had sort of agreed on 5. Another hauler, I'm not sure who suggested 3. And let me tell you, well number one. The city growth is going to dictate you're going to get more and more and that leaves more and more for the hauler to do within those 3 days. Right now our company does all of our accounts in your city in 3 days with two efficient trucks, one load each. So if you're now telling us, and we're going to abide by the smaller trucks, which are less efficient, and now you want us to do it in 3 days. That means a lot more trucks, or longer days or something has to give. And so we'd just as soon stretch this special equipment that we're going to have to get to operate in Chanhassen throughout the week rather than in the 3 days. We're here now in 3 days with efficient trucks and if we have to do it in 3 it's going to mean more people. More trucks. Doing different sections of the city so if I can maybe pitch for that. The yard waste question, Gary mentioned 15 trucks. That's with 5 haulers, that would technically be 5 garbage trucks, 5 recycling trucks, and 5 compost trucks. We talked, Bob and I, about this composting dilemma. There isn't really such a thing as a mini packer compost truck. There are people that have 40 bags of grass and leaves out and you're going to fill up a little mini packer very quickly. We had talked about perhaps a ban on, and this again will cause a dilemma, is a ban on compost pick-up until after the seasonal road postings in mid-May. Now, my experience is that people have compost at the end of April so, April and the first two weeks of May is a dilemma 14 City Council Meeting - November 25, 1996 but that's where the traffic's coming. The State said you can't put compost in the landfill so you've got an extra truck, and I was on the Council when we did curbside recycling. That's another truck. I think that's about all I had. I don't know if you have any questions but I'll be here available. Thanks. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Would anyone else like to address this issue? Bring it back to Council. Councilman Berquist: ...equitable resolution for anyone. On the one hand you look at it and you try to make a determination as to what works best for the City of Chanhassen and all of it's residents and try and make some improvements. On the other hand, I don't find myself all that convinced that the status quo is bad. And I'm chagrin by the packer's inability, or the folks that haul the trash in the city of Chanhassen also believe that the system isn't broken. Any organized collection that we attempt to implement now hopefully will be with us for a long time... It won't be amended. At some point I firmly believe that we will necessarily have changes within the collection policies that we currently have. Having said that though I'm not all that convinced that what we currently have is broken .... made the motion regarding the mini packers and the days having the pick up. It seems to me that part of the reason for my making that motion was an attempt to bring some closure to the discussions that had been taking place over the course of three years. There's been a lot of work done on this ordinance. I don't know what I'm...hear what the rest of you have to say. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Well if you'll indulge me I'd like to go next. I was one of the original participants in the issue when it was brought before the recycling committee and part says I don't want to see this die. Yet I'm looking at an ordinance that's so, I'm trying to think of what our original goals were and this ordinance isn't achieving that. Only the least of our concerns and it seems like we're putting an onus on the haulers that is just making them jump through hoops and not achieving anything in the long run. And to be honest, I see that as a failure on my part. I was an original participant and I wanted to see something come of it, and as Steve said, we're going to need this. Eventually. Bob, we currently don't have an ordinance that is... on the number of haulers? And to be honest, I'm not even convinced that I want to go that route either. I mean there's obviously something to be said for competition. It's a darn shame but I think I'd have to go the route of educating the public. Having them organize on their own. I know that I've tried it in my neighborhood and for cripes sake, getting 37 people to decide on a day and a price and everything else, I couldn't achieve it so I'm not certain how successful that effort will be. But it will need to be done, either through ordinance by the City or by neighborhoods individually. Maybe it's just not the time. Councilman Mason: Well, when this all started out I will admit to thinking, by gosh we've got to move ahead with this and the City's got to be cut up five different ways till Sunday and boom. One hauler can work there and one hauler can work there. After all is said and done I, (a) realize that it was nowhere near that easy. I'm not sure that the community, let me back track. As long as we're all rambling a little bit here. My original feelings were that this is one of those issues that you know, even though the public may not think this is a good idea, this is something we need to do and by gosh, we're just going to have to step forward and do it. I will freely admit to changing my mind a number of times on this. As more information has come out, I've realized how complex this is and I've realized how strong some citizens feelings are about who carries their trash. And that's good. I'm not convinced that it works right now but I'm painfully coming to the feeling that if it ain't broke, don't fix it. And I know our City Engineer thinks that it will break and it should be fixed and I'm sympathetic to that. My inclination right now is to essentially go along with what I think Steve is saying. Is that something may have to be done. I don't think the ordinance in front of us now addresses the issue of what we wanted to do originally. I do think that since, the good thing that has happened out of, I think a number of good things that have happened out of this. I think the streets are cleaner than before. I think the haulers are paying more attention to what's going on in the neighborhoods than they were before, and I know certainly in my neighborhood there aren't five haulers working in the neighborhood so, I don't know that I said anything worth while but this is an issue that I'm not, I quit. Sorry. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Mark, your thoughts. Councilman Senn: Well, I don't know. I opposed Councilman Berquist's motion which led to this ordinance before us tonight. The reason I did that is I feel it's a shame that the rest of this Council is abandoning organized 15 City Council Meeting - November 25, 1996 collection. I think we need it. I think we need it badly. The people that I've talked to, and the neighborhoods I've heard from, their driving desire was real simple. They wanted a couple trucks in the neighborhood one day a week for safety, as well as other reasons .... they wanted one trash truck and they wanted one recycle truck and the issue also, the streets and the breakdown of the streets and street maintenance, I think that's a legitimate issue. And is an issue I think that's shared by not only our engineering staff but also knowledgeable public.., don't understand that element on the issue. I think basically what's before us tonight is nothing more than more government for no purpose at all because I can't see any purpose. It doesn't accomplish any of the goals that we originally set out. Effectively I don't plan on supporting it, as I didn't before. I'd still like to see us go back to a discussion and an action of an organized collection ordinance. Councilman Berquist: Well we sure have a lot of information for future use. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Well and you know, it's something for the rest of you guys to talk about at the beginning of the year as to whether you want to pursue a different tact here. Or drop it altogether. Councilman Mason: Well my only comment is, Councilman Senn talks about all the people that are, that have been calling him up talking for organized collection. Quite honestly, I've had more comments from people saying they don't have a problem with the way things are going. So I get a little tired of that argument in that I, those aren't the people that, I guess what I'm saying is, the people that have called me and talked with me about it are saying well yeah. Maybe it's not the best thing in the world but I don't see a driving need to work with organized collection either. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Again, that's an issue for the Council to discuss in the coming years, to whether you want to pursue it. Right now I'd like a motion to deny. Is that it? Roger Knutson: If you want to take this offyour agenda and kill it so to speak, then the motion not to adopt would be in order. Otherwise this would be a first reading. If you want to continue this, then you would have to just move first reading. Those would be your two choices. Councilman Senn: And if you kill the issue, then you effectively have to go back and start all over again...process, correct? Roger Knutson: Yes. Councilman Mason: Well the beginning, not the beginning of this 60 day. Roger Knutson: If you terminated the process, then you'd have to start over again. Councilman Mason: But how we would determine to restart the process would not have to be the way the process was started on this originally. Is that correct? Roger Knutson: It wouldn't take 2 years or 3 years, whatever it is. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: No. It was like a notification period of 3 months or something. Roger Knutson: It isn't, yeah. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: I think you want to deal with it... Councilman Mason: I agree. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Well then I would offer the motion to not adopt. Would someone like to second it? Councilman Mason: Second. 16 City Council Meeting - November 25, 1996 Acting Mayor Dockendorf moved, Councilman Mason seconded that the City Council not adopt the proposed Amendment to Chapter 16 of the City Code Creating Residential Districting for Waste Collection and Truck Weight Restrictions. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: I'd like to thank all the haulers and other citizens for their involvement in this issue. Councilman Berquist: Sometimes the best deal is no deal. LAKE ANN BALLFIELD LIGHTING PROJECT~ APPROVE CHANGE ORDER NO. 1. Todd Hoffman: Members of the City Council, there is three questions in this item. And to preface my comments I'd like to say that anytime that I coordinate a capital improvement project, we work with the consultants to try to perform the work at the most economical fashion and efficient fashion that we can. But then I'm not afraid to bring back some changes if need be. The first change talks about a wiring configuration and the easiest way to understand it is to... Ballfields 4 and 5 are being lit. They sit side by side. Each field gets lighting.., start this project sometime in early October. Rain and wet field conditions prohibited us from doing.., and trench underneath the fence in these locations... When it became apparent that we would not be working in October due to those wet fields. If we put the trencher out there, we'd be doing more damage than it was worth. We waited for frost to come in. It becomes much more difficult to repair those trenches. We'd have to wait until the spring to get back out there and repair our irrigation lines. The trenches would not be compacted properly for the start of our softball season in the end of April. And so a lot of things came to light that said, it would make some common sense to go around the outside of these ballfields. The contractor indicated some interest in doing that. We asked for a price and the price which is attached in your packet was given. To be quite honest, it seemed high when I first received it. I requested Mark Holden of Holden and Associates, our electrical engineer. I requested an analysis of that price and his statement in his analysis is that it's well within the margins of the marketplace as a per lineal foot charge on those wiring plans. So the consultants, we analyzed that. Staff analyzed that. We knew what we were getting into. It is going to cost us a little bit more money but at this stage of the construction process, I feel it's merited. The second issue regarding the ID ground conductors. That's a call on the part of the State Inspector. You know why spend the $500.00 if we don't absolutely need to. But they can make that call and the State Electrical Inspector indeed did say, you're going to put those in. I think they're a good idea. I want you to spend the $500.00. With that, it's recommended that the City Council approve Change Order No. 1 in the amount of $4,350.00 for the Lake Ann Park ballfield lighting project. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Thank you. Any questions? Councilman Berquist: Well Todd I apologize. I was a little, I was confused, which happens quite often. I didn't realize the weather had had anything to do with it. I thought the decision was made predicated on the... Todd Hoffman: Yeah, digging up the field. Councilman Berquist: Tell me what these ID conductors are though? I want to understand this. I end up wrestling with a lot of inspectors over code interpretation. Todd Hoffman: Yeah, I don't understand what they are exactly either. They go on the lines and they can or can't be required. I called back to Holden and Associates to get a further explanation the first time around and he told me what they were but I couldn't tell you this evening so. And if it was $5,000.00 1 would have taken notes but for $500.00 1 said okay, great. Thanks. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Well I had plenty of questions for Todd but I got them answered this morning. He drew me a little picture in his office. Anybody else? Would anybody like to move this? Councilman Mason: I would move approval of Lake Ann Park ballfield lighting project, Change Order No. 1. 17 City Council Meeting - November 25, 1996 Councilman Berquist: Second. Resolution #96-104: Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Berquist seconded to approve Change Order No. 1 for Lake Ann Park Ballfield Lighting Project in the amount of $4,350.00. All voted in favor and the motion carried. SITE PLAN REVIEW AND A SETBACK AND HARD SURFACE COVERAGE VARIANCE REQUEST FOR A 2~031 SQ. FT. ADDITION TO ADD A McDonald's PLAYPLACE AND FREEZER/COOLER ADDITION, 90 LAKE DRIVE EAST~ MCDONALD'S RESTAURANT. Public Present: Name Address Tom Kotsonas Tom Drews Gene Borg 8001 Cheyenne Avenue 1810 Hampshire Lane, Golden Valley 6897 Chaparral Lane Sharmin A1-Jaff: This is a very simple site plan application review. The applicant for McDonald's are requesting to put on an addition of 2,031 square feet. The site is located on the intersection of Dakota Avenue, Lake Drive East and Highway 5. The additions are proposed to be located along the north and south of the existing building. They will be located on existing hard surface areas with additional landscape islands being added, which eventually will decrease the percentage of impervious surface. Materials on the proposed additions, which are shown on the panel right down there, will match the materials used on the existing building. They consist of brick and metal roofing. The playplace located along the south of the existing building is shown with a flat roof. This addition is approximately 19 feet tall. Adding a pitched roof to this addition will give it an increased height. Therefore staff was recommending that a flat roof be kept on the playplace section of the building. As far as the hard surface coverage goes on this site, when Highway 5 improvements took place, we acquired additional right-of- way from the McDonald's site. The ordinance requires a 65% hard surface coverage. They have 70%. With this expansion they're adding a total of 326 square feet of additional green space. Although it is negligible, it's still an improvement to the existing situation. The Planning Commission reviewed this item on November 6th. Two main issues were discussed in detail. The first one was, level of light transmitted from the playplace to the neighbors to the south. They directed staff and the applicant to work out the solution. The applicant will utilize an interior mechanical screening system along the south elevation. This screen will be activated and set in the down position no later than 30 minutes after sunset each evening, and will remain so until the beginning of the next business day. This should eliminate any light to the south. The second issue dealt with additional year round screening and landscaping along the south addition. Keep in mind that this area has only 7 feet in width so we had to be very careful with the type of materials that we would put in there. The applicant is proposing to add 12 junipers in that area. With that we are recommending approval of this application with conditions outlined in the staff report. Thank you. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Steve, do you have any questions of staff? Councilman Berquist: The question I had Sharmin. I'm trying to find the statement here. The neighbors and Planning Commission update. One of the neighbors requested landscaping be installed south of Lake Drive East. Isn't that corner? Sharmin A1-Jaff: Zoned commercial. Councilman Berquist: That corner is zoned commercial? With a residence on it now? Sharmin A1-Jaff: Actually the site that the neighbor was requesting, he lives right here. Councilman Berquist: That's the piece that I missed then when I drove through there. 18 City Council Meeting - November 25, 1996 Acting Mayor Dockendorf: It's not a buildable commercial piece. It's just. Sharmin A1-Jaff: It's a buildable commercial piece. It's a very small piece and I think. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Put a Photomat on it or what? Sharmin A1-Jaff: One of the reasons why it hasn't been built on yet is because it's extremely small. You'd have to be very careful how you place a building on the lot. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: I have a couple questions. You stated that the shade would eliminate completely the light, or decrease? Sharmin A1-Jaff: Well, it will be brought down 30 minutes after, no later than 30 minutes after. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: But it's an actual like fabric shade? It's not a tint? Sharmin A1-Jaff: It's not a tint. It's an actual shade that will actually come down. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Why is it 19 feet tall? Or is that a question for the applicant? Sharmin A1-Jaff: Yeah, maybe the applicant could answer that. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: The last question is, what's always struck me about this building is you know, the exposed, the HVAC stuff on the roof. It's extremely visible and evident. You see dollar signs when you see that stuff. My question is, would this site plan have passed if it had been built... ? Sharmin A1-Jaff: We would have asked for, it meets the minimum requirements of the... Acting Mayor Dockendorf: I'm talking just in terms of...would be exposed. Sharmin A1-Jaff: ... or if they couldn't screen it because of elevations, then at least paint to fade into the building. Councilman Berquist: McDonald's designs their buildings with parapets. In essence they're self screening and their roofs are confined in, at least the old style they've got. Their roofs are confined enough so that there is not enough, you couldn't put screening in there and, the parapets actually come to within about 3 ½ or 4 feet of the units themselves. But they do, McDonald's really in their design, in elevations, do a much better job of screening than most free standing. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Well this one has always just struck me... Mike, do you have any questions? Councilman Mason: Not at this time. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Mark. Councilman Senn: I don't have any questions at this point. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Would the applicant like to make a presentation? Tom Drews: Good evening. My name is Tom Drews. I live at 1810 Hampshire Lane in Golden Valley. I'm a project construction manager for McDonald's Corporation and I'm assisting Mr. Borg in building his addition to this facility. As we've proposed, we're putting a playland on the front and a storage addition in the rear. It's something that Gene needs. He needs the storage facility. You know his business is growing and he needs a larger cooler and freezer space. On the front we need the playland addition. You know that's just part of growing the 19 City Council Meeting - November 25, 1996 business. We've done a lot of studies with these playlands in terms of the demographics and who comes to them and who doesn't and things like that. Some locations, it's not worth it. This particular location is a very, very good location for us to be in and to have a playland like this. I think this is a great addition to the community as well because it gives you a nice, an indoor place for parents to bring their parents to be able to have a dinner and be able to have a warm place, especially on a night like tonight, to be able to have their children out and get them to burn off some of that energy. So I'll be glad to entertain any questions you have and... Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Could you explain why the height of it, and is that integral to part of what you've got in there? Tom Drews: Yes. The height of the playland is integral to the size of the toy that goes in there. We call it the toy. You know it's the slides, the ball pit and all these things that are in there. And we've gone through quite an evolution with these over the past several years. In fact the Minneapolis region, which is where I'm from, we're the original designers of the playland. All the other regions started kind of, hey. That's a good idea. So we've been, you know this has been an evolution process for several years and this is the best, what we've come up with thus far. We've tried different configurations and things like that and for a variety of reasons, different designs just don't work quite as well. This is pretty much a standard box that we put out in front. Most all of our new stores, again where the demographics allow it. This is something that, this is a little more economical to build. It is attractive. It allows people to see yes. There's a playland. There's some places you can go by and you'd never know there was a playland there. I've driving by several that, in the early stages they're almost hidden and the size of the toy becomes pretty diminutive and it's just, they' re harder to clean. Harder to light. This comes off as, okay here's a playland. You know this McDonald's. It kind of advertises it. This is a playland. Come bring your kids. Customers like seeing the glass and being able to see in and see the activity. It presents a clean image and a clean picture. Customers like that. It's an easier to maintain facility that way. The roof top units that will be supplying the air conditioning and heating to that will be remaining on the restaurant portion of that to kind of address I think some concerns you may be having. We're not going to have you know rooftop units on top of that playland, because that would be, yeah. And you're right that the McDonald's for years has incorporated a mansard around the top of all their sources. It's part of their trade dress. And the whole original thinking behind it was to help hide all the rooftop equipment that we have up there. So you know these rooftop units that will supply air to that will be still within that, and when you stand on the roof, that top, that mansard wall is about 4 feet tall. So it does effectively screen much, if not most of your rooftop equipment. Now if you're on a highway that's of much higher elevation then you know that's going to be reduced. But not... But the height of the glass, of the playland, that's in a role just to make it a success. Councilman Berquist: I've got a question... In your work with all the different restaurants, I'm sure you have different configurations. Unit playlands that go on the front, as you call it, and also have one that goes on the side. Tom Drews: Yeah. On some of our new stores we put them on, spin offto the side. Again, largely what determines that is site. How's the site configured and a lot of times there's restrictions to that. To put a side playland on this particular site wouldn't work. We don't have the, we'd be eating up parking spaces, which is. We're eating up a few. We're only losing just those few spaces whereas on the side, it would be eating up a lot more as well as disrupting the traffic pattern. Right now the cars can come in. If we were to put a side playland, you know you'd be looking at something protruding out to the side here. To the east, which would be pretty significantly interrupting your traffic pattern. Right now the traffic pattern comes in for a drive thru. Councilman Berquist: All of your playlands are 25 x 36 regardless of what location they're in? Tom Drews: Actually they're a little bit bigger, most of them. This is actually a smaller one. Because he's installing most of his seating for the playland, he's using what's currently inside the restaurant. He's going to build a divider wall within the restaurant. Existing restaurant right now and that will be counted towards the playland seating. Whereas typically in a new restaurant we build, it is 12 feet larger so that has a section of seating within the playland as well. So this is a 12 foot section smaller in length and it's the same width as the existing building. 20 City Council Meeting - November 25, 1996 Councilman Berquist: The quick question I had was relative to the letter that was in our packet from...that you acquiesce to Planning Commission's request... That won't be reached by the... Tom Drews: No. What I'm proposing, and I'll discuss this with staff some more but what I would propose, if I can get to this. I would propose that the shading come down to cover the first, the upper two tiers of window panes and stop at approximately the top of the lowest one, because the lowest one's going to have, you're going to have landscaping and screening going on. So a lot of that's going to be screened anyway through landscaping. Audience: What size windows...? Tom Drews: 4 by 4's I believe they are. So it will be roughly this tall. So it'd be fairly difficult for the smaller children to get to it. And this would have, right now I'm talking to a firm out of California that manufacturers a lot of these. They're pretty simple in their design. Pretty full proof and we're working with them to develop a mechanized version so that it really comes down to just pushing a button and these things would just come down. Councilman Berquist: ...built adjacent to residential previously? Tom Drews: I have not. As a corporation, I'm sure we have. I'd have to look into that but I'd be fairly certain we have. I'd have to look into that. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Thank you very much. Tom Drews: Thank you very much and I appreciate your consideration on this and your approval. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Would anyone else like to address this issue? Tom Kotsonas: I'm Tom Kotsonas and I live at 8001 Cheyenne and I'm the neighbor directly to the south of development and I've talked to Sharmin recently about the drapes. I thought that the Planning Commission had asked to have the windows tinted in addition to some drapes, but I may be incorrect on that. Obviously my concern is the opposite of, they want to bring more business and more traffic into that area and my concern is living on the edge of that is just an opposite. I would like not to see more traffic. The business part doesn't bother me but it's the amount of traffic on that corner coming and going and I would like it to be as subtle or as hidden as possible. And I realize it's probably coming in so I would like to see it, my house and the residence next door as protected as possible. And those across the street to the west a little bit. I also realize there are only a few of us, 4 or 5 or 6 houses affected so, but I'm asking for your consideration on what this, each development does to that strip of residential properties. Thank you very much. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Mark, do you want to address this first? Councilman Senn: What's additional landscaping... ? The drive thru coming out there. Sharmin A1-Jaff: All of this is being added. Councilman Senn: But what about the strip out beyond the drive thru right in there? Sharmin A1-Jaff: The drive thru is...the applicant intends to put some flowering materials in that area. So they're not adding anything. They're just changing materials within. Councilman Senn: How about to the very south there? Sharmin A1-Jaff: Right now they're just adding planting within it and that's where the 12 junipers are going to provide some screening. 21 City Council Meeting - November 25, 1996 Councilman Senn: All 12 are going in that area then? So that will provide a lot of screening basically. Different from what's there now basically for all the traffic coming through the drive thru. Sharmin A1-Jaff: No, the applicant originally intended to stretch the junipers into the corner as well. Our ordinance prohibits planting within sight triangles so we spoke to the applicant and requested that they keep them outside of the sight triangle. Councilman Senn: So that was the shift you're talking about? Okay. I don't know. I guess generally I remain to be very...on this area as it relates to the residents back there. I don't know. The action that was taken expanding business hours down there.., not with the original agreement. Now you've got the car wash going in and all that sort of stuff, I don't know. We're getting a lot more than anticipated or... Granted it's not a lot of, it's not a big number to worry about but at the same time they've been very consistent all through all of these projects to come out individually and request their concerns. I haven't seen much really to provide them a lot of relief. I'm not sure how we can do that but... It seems like you're going to go ahead with the expansion, you know if the best is being made out of the situation. Lighting and landscaping. Again I think the major concern is that overall traffic. It'd kind of a double edge sword I guess. I don't know. McDonald's is the one business that's been there forever... intensification that's occurred there... Councilman Berquist: ...there's nothing that's going to happen tonight that's going to remove your cynicism I'm afraid. The issue of having a business along a stretch of Highway 5 abutting a neighborhood.., from a practical point of view it makes sense.., strip malls, apartment buildings, some sort of buffering mechanism that shields single families fromthe major artery. Although I understand, I canbe empathetic...it's not goingtobe changed now .... McDonald's playland is as unobtrusive to the neighborhood as possible. As we should have with Goodyear and.., and Abra and the car wash with the bright red car wash sign. The question that I have, in reading through the Planning Commission Minutes, a number of commissioners referenced tinting or shades. Did you reject tinting out of hand? And if so, what's more effective? And I don't expect, I'm sure you won't give me the standard, it's cheaper to screen it. Tom Drews: Actually the screening is more effective. In fact take your statement and turn it 180 degrees around is more along the lines. The tinting is highly expensive and not as effective and the screening is less expensive and much more effective. The windows will have in fact a form of tinting on them just to meet energy codes. I talked with my architect this morning and he was saying well, we're going to have to go up some on it. The grade that we're going to be going up to is extremely expensive but to get the kind of shading that the neighbors are requesting, starts multiplying in huge numbers. It gets very expensive to get a really effective shading on the windows. Not shading. The tinting on the windows to get the effect that they're desiring. It gets very expensive. The shading, the roll down shades that we're providing along with a limited amount of tinting that is on the windows, just to meet energy codes, we feel is probably the most optimum. For them as well as for us. You've got a confused look on your face. I'm sorry. Councilman Berquist: Because on the one hand I'm hearing that in order to achieve the neighbors' goals from a shading perspective you have to spend an inordinate amount of money on the glass. Tom Drews: To accomplish it solely by means of tinting the glass. To get to that level would be extraordinarily expensive. There's different gradients of tinting you can get. And they have different solar values and all that stuff. The roll down shades, you know which the concern, bear in mind the concern is to keep the light at nighttime from emitting out. And the tinted glass just doesn't, even at the highest levels, is not a very effective means of, great for keeping sunlight coming in but not a very effective means of keeping light from the inside going out. So we are having to meet, and some of the energy codes we are having to have a level of tinting that will be on the glass. That alone would not be satisfactory I don't think to anybody here. So really what we're proposing is a level of tinting that is needed to meet all the energy codes and then in addition to that we are proposing on the south elevation putting these shades that will be lowered at night time. This is one of those weave type shades. It will be straight. I'm trying to think of a good example. I wish I had some material with me. You can kind of see through it but it's not like rolling down those plastic things. 22 City Council Meeting - November 25, 1996 Councilman Berquist: You've done this on hundreds of other buildings? Tom Drews: No. No, I have experience with this particular manufacturer through a previous employer and they have used these pretty extensively and found to be very effective. Councilman Berquist: They're working with you to put a prototype together in essence. Tom Drews: Well, the company that I'm working with on this, they have done mechanized versions at other locations. Not necessarily specifically for McDonald's but they have, I mean they've been in business for a number of years and they've, so this is nothing. No surprise. No real hardship for them. It's just a matter of cost. And to have a mechanized version versus someone going out there and rolling on the chain a little bit, yeah it's going to cost more for a mechanized version and I've discussed that with Mr. Borg and he would rather go ahead and spend the extra money to have just a mechanized version because it's more consistent. Less likely to really have problems. You know he wants to be able just to walk out there, push a button, you know... And in the morning come up, push a button, they go back up. And this particular manufacturer, Roll-a-Shade it's called, I've found them to be very, very simple in their design which is very easy. Councilman Berquist: I'm going to change the subject just a little bit regarding the traffic. There's, and perhaps this is... There really is nothing else that...parcel that would lessen the impact... Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Charles, I have a question for you. Wake up. Is this intersection, has it been a problem in the past? Have we ever considered making that a four way? Charles Folch: We haven't received any complaints to this point in time, to my knowledge. If we do receive complaints or if concerns are raised, we certainly can take the necessary steps to go out and monitor the levels of traffic and determine what appropriate measures should be taken but to date we haven't been notified of any specific problems other than the two way controlled stop. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: It just seems with the intensification of... Well I don't have any additional comments to add so I guess I'd ask for a motion. Councilman Berquist: I move that we adopt Site Plan Review for McDonald's and the conditions as detailed in the staff report. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Is there a second? Councilman Mason: Second. Roger Knutson: Does that include a variance? Councilman Berquist: Yes. Councilman Berquist moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve Site Plan Review #95-12 as shown on the site plan dated Received November 20, 1996, subject to the following conditions: The applicant provide the city with clarification on ground cover to be used in the landscaped area to the rear of the building. 2. The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to erecting any signage on site. The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City and provide the necessary financial securities as required. 23 City Council Meeting - November 25, 1996 Consult with Inspections Division plan reviewer about accessibility requirements for existing building before permit application. The applicant will utilize an interior mechanical screening system a long the south elevation. This screening system will be activated and set in the "down" position no later than 30 minutes after sunset each evening and will remain so until the beginning of the next business day. All voted in favor and the motion carried. CONSIDER REQUEST FOR EXTENDED WORK HOURS~ VILLAGES ON THE PONDS/ST. HUBERT'S CHURCH~ PROJECT NO. 96-13. Public Present: Name Address Gary Disch Steve L. 8170 Marsh Drive 8180 Marsh Drive Charles Folch: Thank you. As indicated in the staff report, the contractor doing the grading work for the church site, well the entire Villages on the Pond development has made a request for extended work hours on Saturdays through the month, the remaining month of November and December. Notices have been sent out accordingly to area residents regarding this request. We received approximately a half dozen responses via telephone from residents. Most of the calls indicated that they would prefer not to see a start any earlier than 8:00 a.m. on Saturday. One caller did report to call in and request that the time extension not be granted. Staff would feel comfortable, based on this information, staff would feel comfortable recommending a one hour earlier start to 8:00 a.m. on Saturdays to be allowed with this request. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Does Council have any questions of Charles? Would anyone like to address this issue? Please come forward and state your name and address. Your concern. Gary Disch: Gary Disch, 8170 Marsh Drive. I'd like to voice my same concern. I'd like to leave it at 9:00. It's not broke. Let's not fix it. It's there for a reason. I'd like to just keep it at 9:00. We've got a long process. It's going to go through a lot of construction on this site and I'd just as soon not listen to it in the early morning hours, like we're going to listen to it all day so I'd like to keep it at 9:00. Thank you. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Thank you very much. Anyone else? Steve: Good evening. I'm Steve .... 8180 Marsh Drive. Contrary to, I forgot his name already but I live next to Gary, 8180 Marsh Drive. I did not receive notification from the City. I spoke with Todd at 4:40 today and he stopped by at 5:00 with a letter that was mailed out November 14th. So I just want to make that concern brought up. There was, he went through a list of who was given letters and there were three neighbors directly across from me that were not on the list either so the list is not complete with all the neighbors. I question why this needs to be done. 2 hours, and even though 1 hour. But looking at the sunset and sunrise table, January 1st, it's 7:52 sunrise. He's asking to work in the dark. A lot of us sleep. I work nights so I come home at 7:00 in the morning. I like to go to sleep right away and I don't need to be bothered by the construction noise. So I'm just asking that the Council not approve this request for the extended work hours. Thanks. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Anyone else? Mike. Councilman Mason: Well, I certainly wouldn't want that starting up at 8:00 in the morning. I wonder if, I certainly don't go along with starting at 7:00. I think that's totally out of the question as far as I'm concerned. I don't know. There's something to be said for the, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. I mean if they really need some 24 City Council Meeting - November 25, 1996 extra time, I can maybe see going until 6:00 on Saturdays maybe but leaving it at 9:00. I don't know. There certainly is something to be said for that not having to start any earlier. Councilman Senn: Well my opinion is we've set the hours for a reason.., somebody objects to the set hours. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Steve. Councilman Berquist: I wish we could accommodate them... Acting Mayor Dockendorf: It appears we have a consensus. Would someone like to make it official? Councilman Berquist: I move denial. Councilman Senn: Second. Councilman Berquist moved, Councilman Senn seconded to deny the request for extended work hours for Villages on the Ponds, St. Hubert's Church, Project No. 96-13. All voted in favor and the motion carried. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A PURCHASE AGREEMENT WITH CHANHASSEN/CHASKA HOCKEY ASSOCIATION, LOTS 5 AND 6, CHANHASSEN LAKES BUSINESS PARK 5TM ADDITION. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Next item, I don't have a packet for it. Did anyone else get one? Councilman Senn: I didn't get a packet on it either. Don Ashworth: It's simply a typo. You've already acted on this item. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Oh, item 9? All right. Let's go back to item number 2. Councilman Senn: I thought this item was supposed to come back to us after Roger wrapped up some stuff. Don Ashworth: Right, but we don't have that. This was just a carry over from the last agenda. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Let's move back to item number 2. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER VACATION OF A PORTION OF BUTTERCUP ROAD IN OUTLOT A, MCGLYNN PARK SECOND ADDITION. CharlesFolch: Thankyou. At first approach to this, staff thought it looked relatively straight forward. Unfortunately in the last couple days leading up to this Council item, some minor details have come up that need some time to actually be clarified. Staff has had some discussions late today with the applicant and we don't see any problem getting these matters resolved. It's just a matter if they're going to take some time. So what the applicant has supported with staff is to recommend that we hold a public hearing tonight. Take any public comment that might be here tonight and then basically table action on this item until we come back with the I's dotted and T's crossed for you. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Is anyone here to address this issue? This is a public hearing. If not, I'd like a motion to close the public hearing. Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Senn seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Comments or questions from the Council. 25 City Council Meeting - November 25, 1996 Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to table the vacation of a portion of Buttercup Road in Outlot A, McGlynn Park Second Addition. All voted in favor and the motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING: LOTUS LAKE WOODS 2~r° ADDITION, JOHN KLINGELHUTZ: PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT REQUEST TO REPLAT/RECONFIGURE THREE SINGLE FAMILY LOTS LOCATED IN LOTUS LAKE WOODS ADDITION, LOCATED EAST OF DEL RIO DRIVE. VACATION OF DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS LOCATED IN LOTUS LAKE WOODS ADDITION. Sharmin A1-Jaff: ... subdivision. Typically we would process it administratively, but that would require a metes and bounds description. The applicant wanted a clean description which forced us to bring this before you. The original lines that are drawn in blue, I'm sorry. Yeah, in blue would have accommodated a house with a two car garage. The applicant wanted three car garage houses which basically, shifting the lot lines 10 feet clockwise on three lots .... original subdivision. There are conservation easements. Existing conservation easements so basically the trees are not being impacted with this subdivision. With the original subdivision you approved a 25 foot front yard setback. That variance is still part of this application. We are recommending approval with conditions outlined in the staff report. The other part of this request is existing utility and drainage easements. These are typical drainage and utility easements that are along existing property lines. As we shift the property lines, we're going to have drainage and utility easements.., are being dedicated so we are recommending approval of the vacation as well. Thank you. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Thank you. Questions. Okey dokey. This is a public hearing. I'll open that. Would anyone like to address this issue? If not, may I have a motion to close the public hearing? Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Comments Steve. Councilman Senn: Move approval. Councilman Mason: Second. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: I assume you're moving both items (a) and (b)? Councilman Senn: Yes. Resolution #96-105: Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve Preliminary and Final Plat #93-10 SUB to replat $ lots into $ lots, and vacation of Utility and Drainage Easements, Lotus Lake Woods 2nd Addition, as shown in the plans Received October 23, 1996, with the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall enter into an amended Development Contract. The existing drainage and utility easements in Lotus Lake Woods, specifically Lots 1, 2 and 3 shall be vacated and replaced by those shown on the plat of Lotus Lake Woods 2nd Addition. 3. Park and trail fees shall be paid in lieu of land in accordance with City Ordinances. All areas disturbed during site grading shall be immediately restored with seed and disc-mulched or wood fiber blanket within two weeks of completing site grading unless the City's (BMPH) planting dates dictate 26 City Council Meeting - November 25, 1996 otherwise. All areas disturbed with slopes of 3:1 or greater shall be restored with sod or seed and wood fiber blanket. 5. The front yard setback shall be reduced to 25 feet. All voted in favor and the motion carried. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS: HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Mike, could you make a report from the HRA? Councilman Mason: I sure could. When we last met we approved the 1997 budget, which is $1,607,000.00, which is down about $300,000.00 from the year before. Public hearing regarding the sale of land to Chaska/Chan Hockey Association. We directed staff to prepare the purchase agreement. For considering the approval of the agreement for authorizing excess levy, we've all been through that. We approved that with the caveat, as Council did, that the monies must be available for the City to spend that. Debt analysis was presented. We're still in the black. We've got, we reviewed the '96-'97 goals and objectives. I've got copies of both the debt analysis and the goals if anyone would like them. These things were in the HRA packet that I believe everyone gets, but if you'd like to go through the debt analysis, I do have them. Next meeting is January 9, 1996. That would be 1997. Thank you so much. SOUTHWEST METRO TRANSIT. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Thank you. I'll take the Southwest Metro. A couple of items. With the local levy option, the changes on people's tax statements. I have not received mine. Proposed tax statement. I'm not certain if anyone else in Chanhassen has either, which is unfortunate because we timed our communication based on when the Council was going to send them out. But regardless, the residents in Eden Prairie and Chaska have received theirs and we have received to date three calls into our office regarding it. Which either means that we communicated it well or people just aren't looking at their tax statements. The other major issue is, we need an appointment from the City Council of Chanhassen for a commissioner starting for 1997. It's a three year term. Something for everyone to think about and I guess that's it. Steve, do you want to take Bluff Creek? BLUFF CREEK CORRIDOR AND PARK TASK FORCE. Councilman Berquist: The process is proceeding. I think Planning Commission looked at it... at the end of their last meeting. And it's making it's way through the public hearing process. Park task force. Some members of... put together the survey information and we did some discussions about.., efforts by which the surveys would be conducted. Hope to have it, Nancy had put together a time line. That's in your packet. We had hoped to have the survey together so that Council could review it in the next meeting in December. However, December 9th. However, I will be out of town that night... We're going to try to do it the next meeting after that which is... We're progressing. It's going to happen. We're going to see what citizens think about... Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Mark, you had a couple items. Councilman Senn: In our administrative packets there is an item relating to...raised by Carl Jullie...of Eden Prairie. Basically points out that effectively under the new set up for transit, opt out transit basically, other change other than...to the local levy is the taxes... Government units are, cities involved I should say, are now responsible for any short falls. If that in fact is the case, I think that cities are effectively responsible, first of all within the city.., approval authority over operation budgets so as to...basically determine their own destiny and not be surprised by potential dollar needs. 27 City Council Meeting - November 25, 1996 Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Well the cities do have, you will be reviewing the budget. The levy is determined by Council. Even though the city levies it, the rate is determined by the Met Council. I guess I'm not sure what you're asking for in addition to what... Councilman Senn: Well under the current set-up, there's no requirement that we approve the budget. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Correct. You appoint... Councilman Senn: The City appoints one... Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Actually Chanhassen currently has... There's a floating rider representative. Councilman Senn: What I'm saying is, each city other than the fact that.., representatives, under this new set-up... If that's the case, then they should have effectively a veto power over whether... Acting Mayor Dockendorf: ...joint powers agreement. Party to the joint powers has veto authority. Councilman Senn: Effectively any joint powers agreement...their separate operating entities.., falls back to a third party. Those third parties have... Acting Mayor Dockendorf: If an HRA...ultimately be responsible? Roger Knutson: That is a separate legal entity so unless there was some separate arrangement over a certain project or something, no. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: But it's not the same configuration? Roger Knutson: No. Don Ashworth: To the best of my knowledge, all of the things they're talking about, financial responsibility of, were in the original legislation. None of this is new as far as if there's a shortfall. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: That's correct. Don Ashworth: Yeah. That's been that way for... 10 years. Councilman Senn: But it isn't something we can levy to. And I'm sorry, I never understood that. Now this thing was sold as it coming as an opt out, was to stand on it's own. Now when that turns around and says the cities will have to put in additional dollars you can't basically turn around and make part of this levy, that's not standing on it's own. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Well that's not saying that if we experience a shortfall we'll come back to the city. I mean we have the option of cutting service. We have the option, or investigate the option of borrowing. There's lots of other options before we come back to the city. Councilman Senn: Well Colleen I understand that but...for example could decide to go borrow and incur more debt. Effectively could just dig the hole deeper for the city in terms of it's ultimate responsibility. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: But we wouldn't receive. Councilman Senn: You don't have to ask the city's approval on any of that is what I'm saying. On this set up. It ought to be required to come back to the city. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: But we wouldn't get any financing if we didn't have... 28 City Council Meeting - November 25, 1996 Councilman Senn: Well effectively under this it is. Because if you borrow money and can't pay it back... Acting Mayor Dockendorf: As a final. Councilman Senn: As the final. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: There are other options to look at. Councilman Senn: Well I understand that but as the final, ultimately responsibility falls with the city. The city ought to have effectively absolute right to say yes or no up front to that. Whether they want to take that risk or don't want to take that risk or want to operate at that level versus funding or whatever. And again, if you were the HRA and had effectively your own funding source, and...that's fine if you can find out how to make up...that's fine but this isn't that way. Effectively you're held accountable for paying the bottom line, should be the people who effectively.., decision on whether, what you spend and what you don't spend... Acting Mayor Dockendorf made a statement that was not picked up by the microphone. Councilman Senn: But I don't see it that way. Effectively you could have other cities making that determination for you and some cities are in different percentages than other cities. Everybody doesn't fit into... CouncilmanBerquist: ...the same language as the new legislation. So if in fact Southwest Metro had. . . if Southwest Metro had experienced a financial shortfall... Councilman Senn: Except previously everything that Southwest did went to Met Council for review and approval and came under effectively some outside review and approval before it was kicked back in relationship to a levy amount. Basically dollar amounts coming back from them to fund it. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: You still have to get approval. Southwest Metro still needs approval from the Met Council. Councilman Senn: ... now it's flowing through the city. Different arrangement than existed .... go through them. They have the review and approval power before. Roger Knutson: Mayor. To accomplish that, and I have not looked at the joint powers agreement setting up that organization for a long, long time. But I might be mistaken but I believe to accomplish that it will require an amendment to the joint powers agreement. Councilman Berquist: What direction, to what end was Carl asking the question? Acting Mayor Dockendorf: He just wanted, curiosity. He was concerned that suddenly it's the city's responsibility to levy. He wanted to know... Don Ashworth: You may want to consider tabling this item. Let me discuss this with the city auditors. Maybe back with the City Attorney. As it deals with the HRA, even though it's an entirely separate agency, still include them in the city's audit process. They go through and pull up records.., you may want to have me explore with them the possibility... Or simply having their auditors, your's auditors for Southwest... make that presentation to the City Council. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Well and that would be fine. I mean currently there is an independent auditor of the agency and the Met Council also reserves the right to... Councilman Senn: Again, it's an item in the administrative packet and... Yeah, Don I asked Pam a couple weeks back to kind of give me a list. There's all this stuff coming through on the payables list, I was getting quite 29 City Council Meeting - November 25, 1996 honestly real confused because there was Southwest Transit. Southwest Coalition. Southwest Transportation Coalition I think. I don't know. I mean there's so many of these things, it was getting real muddled as to what was what. What I asked her to do is basically go through and identify effectively each one of those entities to me, as well as basically invoices and also, I don't know what the word to be would be, the contract agreement or whatever, which effectively forms the basis. Whatever... What Pam sent me back was basically two items. One relating to...basically just the bus bills we get for the senior citizens from Southwest Transit, which effectively are our only contribution to Southwest Transit, at least under the current set up. And the second one was some invoices as it relates to the joint powers agreement on the Southwest... Coalition. And so she was going to follow up and try to get the agreement or contract...for the basis for that but I haven't got that yet. And basically that's all there was. Then I got a little confused again because tonight in the administrative packet now, it appears we've been paying a contribution to Southwest Corridor Transportation, which you haven't yet paid for '96. Being requested to pay for '96 and budget for '97. That stuffwas incomplete or not, the input Pam gave me... Don Ashworth: I don't know. I can go back and see if I can find...when that group had started to form and they had talked about potential budgets as it related to Eden Prairie, Chaska, Chanhassen, Carver County and Hennepin County. Those were the primary ones. And then...funding this coalition, lobbying efforts. So I should be able to find that for you. There is the Southwest Planning Group. That's an older one. That should be a separate agreement. Councilman Senn: Yeah, that's the ones that she gave me the invoices for. Don Ashworth: There again, I'll probably be able to find a lot of correspondence but I don't know, I'm pretty sure that in getting the thing down to, okay here's the way we should go and it should be a small group of cities. And then John Boland submitted a proposal as to what you would charge... (There was a tape change at this point in the discussion.) ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: HOUSING GOALS UPDATE, PLANNING DIRECTOR. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: So I take it you're sitting in for the Housing Goals? Bob Generous: We are making progress, as you can see from the... Last year was the first time we had more multi-family permits than single family permits in Chanhassen. This year our building permit activity is about 44% lower than last year. Councilman Berquist: How much? Bob Generous: 44%. Councilman Berquist: Lower? Bob Generous: Lower. For residential. And even though our commercial, industrial permits are up. We think that will rebound again next year. We have some multi-family projects that will be coming on line. Right now, for '96 we estimate that it would be a 80/20 split, with 80% multi-family. Last year it was 45% single family... We are looking at amendments to the comprehensive plan. As part of the Livable Communities Act, one of the things... Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Nobody has any questions I'll assume. All right, thanks Bob. Don, you wanted to talk about meeting dates. Don Ashworth: Steve's already taken care of it for me. It's just a recognition that Mayor Chmiel is going to be the only one in town on December 9th, which is what we had set for our regular meeting date in December. I already picked out December 16th for completion of the Truth in Taxation Hearing, if that's necessary so we're just taking... 30 City Council Meeting - November 25, 1996 Acting Mayor Dockendorf: No, we had the 16th... Councilman Senn: No, we had Truth in Taxation, first hearing was the 4th and the second one was the 12th. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: I thought it was on the 16th. Councilman Berquist: I have the 12th. Councilman Senn: I had the 16th was a City Council work session I had down. Don Ashworth: That should be the adoption date. Probably, I'll have to go back and look. I think we set three dates, did we not? Didn't we have to set the first date, the Truth in Taxation. Then a continuation day if necessary, and then an adoption date. Councilman Senn: But the 16th was not a normal Council meeting under the calendar. The 9th was. Don Ashworth: Right. But now it has to be. Councilman Senn: I understand, because we won't be meeting the 9th. But as far as this Truth in Taxation notice is going, and have you talked to Orlin. Are they going to get out or not? Don Ashworth: I will give him a call. I just do not understand... Councilman Senn: Well but I mean if they're not out, all we can do on the 4th is kind of like adjourn the meeting and wait until the 12th, right? Don Ashworth: Well, those folks who somehow found out about December 4th, I think... Councilman Senn: No, but I'm just saying. Whoever shows up can talk but I'm saying practically speaking, we'd have to effectively go to the 12th. And be published or whatever but if we are able to go ahead on the 4th, we should probably be able to finish it that night, which is fine. So then we could do our last budget work session or whatever on the 12th then instead of the second Truth in Taxation hearing? Don Ashworth: That'd be a possibility. I don't think... Councilman Senn: Will you be here on the 12th? Councilman Berquist: I'll be, yeah. I will be here the 12th. Councilman Senn: Do you want to do that? Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Has the 12th been noticed? Don Ashworth: I'll have to check with Pam. As I recall, you did have to set up three dates. And I think all three appeared... Councilman Senn: We have to adopt the budget on the 16th then? Don Ashworth: No. You tentatively set that date. Whether or not you feel that you've got the work complete and you're ready to adopt is up to you. Councilman Senn: So are we doing anything on the 2nd? 31 City Council Meeting - November 25, 1996 Don Ashworth: December 2nd? Councilman Senn: Next Monday. Don Ashworth: No. I don't have anything down. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Don, did you get a chance to talk... Don Ashworth: No I didn't but the thing, I did go through the budget. We're going to go over for 1996. I'm having Pam make that adjustment... And to add three additional members is just cost prohibitive at this late date. You pay twice for registration fees. Twice the airfare. Councilman Senn: Are you talking about new people going? Acting Mayor Dockendorf: There is a request by one of the new Council elect to go. Don Ashworth: Mayor elect. Councilman Senn: Okay, but you still can get the cheap airfare. Don Ashworth: No. Councilman Senn: The airfares are still there. In fact I saw them in the paper on Sunday. Don Ashworth: Karen had called and was looking for those specific dates. She got a quote back from them of $560.00... Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Anyway, as a policy. Councilman Senn: What's happened in the past? Don Ashworth: No Council elect has ever gone. Acting Mayor Dockendorf: Unless anyone wants to go into Tuesday, I move to adjourn. Councilman Senn: Second. Acting Mayor I)ockendorf moved, Councilman Senn seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 10:12 p.m. Submitted by Don Ashworth City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim 32