Loading...
CC Minutes 1997 10 13CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1997 Mayor Mancino called the meeting to order at 6:35 p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag. COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Mancino, Councilman Berquist, Councilman Engel, Councilman Mason, and Councilman Senn STAFF PRESENT: Roger Knutson, Todd Gerhardt, Bob Generous, Todd Hoffman, Don Ashworth and Dave Hempel. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Berquist seconded to approve the agenda with the following addition under Council Presentations: Councilman Mason wanted to discuss shrubs along Minnewashta Parkway. All voted in favor and the motion carried. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: Councilman Mason announced the first snowfall of the season. CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Engel moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the following Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations:_ Amendment to City Code, Chapter 20, Article XXX, Towers and Antennas to Allow for Temporary Mobile Towers, Final Reading and Approval of Summary Ordinance for Publication Purposes. c. Resolution/t97-80: Approval of a Gambling Permit to Conduct a Raffle, Chanhassen Rotary Club. Approve Addendum "A" to Development Contract/PUD Agreement to Expand Grading Limits for Springfield 1st Addition, Project 97-14. Approve Development Contract and Construction Plans and Specifications for Sewer and Water Extension to Lot 5, Block 1, Sun Ridge, Project 97-19. g. Approve Additional Local Transportation Study Services Agreement with SRF. Resolution/t97-81: Approve Release of Right of Access to MnDot along the North Side of Trunk Highway 5 Adjacent to Lake Ann Park. i. Resolution/t97-82: Accept Street and Storm Sewer Improvements in Melody Hill, Project 96-14. Approve Reassignment of Development Contract/PUD Agreement for Autumn Ridge 1st and 2nd Additions to D.R. Horton. m. Approval of Bills. City Council Minutes dated September 15, 1997 City Council Minutes dated September 22, 1997 City Council Minutes dated September 29, 1997 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 Planning Commission Minutes dated September 17, 1997 Park & Recreation Commission Minutes dated September 23, 1997 All voted in favor and the motion carried. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: SCHOOL DISTRICT 112 OPERATING LEVY REFERENDUM PRESENTATION. School Board Representative: Your Honor, I heard the message to be short. Members of the Council, Don Ashworth. Thank you for inviting us this evening. I'd like to move over to the overhead with your permission. We have with us this evening members of the School Board. Gino Businaro is here and we expect Brad Johnson also to be coming. Also we have a citizen. One of our parents, Lou...who's the Chair of the Parents Committee for the referendum, who's here this evening. What we have in front of us is a mandate more or less from the State of Minnesota to fund our School Districts with additional operating levy referendum dollars if there is a need in the district for additional revenue. We are an entity of the State of Minnesota. We follow the Statutes very closely. What we do is pretty much prescribed by law. The vast majority, as this impact of the pie graph shows, is in the blue area. The blue area is 73% of our expenditures on any given year. That's called the General Fund. The General Fund is the fund that funds the activity and schools and classrooms and learning experiences for our children. The other areas are things such as community service, capital outlay, debt service, transportation and food service. What we're looking at in our referendum this November 4th is strictly related to that blue area of the pie graph. The operating levy. We operate strictly under a State formula that went into affect in 1971. School District 112 is the red line. When you look at our contemporary surrounding school districts, the State formula itself, based on the characteristics of our school district, provides slightly less than the average per pupil unit. What does this mean to us? It means that as we provide programs, open space in our community for our children, if we offer programs that are similar to our neighbors, we have a very tight financial situation. 281 of the districts in the State of Minnesota have gone to what's called an operating levy referendum to fuel their need for classroom activity. The surrounding districts that I just had on the wall. When you look at what they have in place for operating levy, you can just see the visual impact of what ours is. We have $365.00 a pupil unit and an operating levy that was passed in 1988 and '89. It's far below the average of our contemporary surrounding school districts. The average of our school districts in our area is around $900.00. The high end of it is $1,400.00. If we have the operating levy, for instance some of our neighboring districts. In Minnetonka, here in the City of Chaska, today we'd have an additional $7 million that we'd be spending for 1997-98. So our school district has a relative low, in the State of Minnesota and especially compared to our surrounding districts, operating levy referendum. If you put the operating levy referendums in place today along with the State foundation aid formula, and all of this data is from the House of Representatives. They're the key source of financial data for the school district. When you put those two together you can see the visual impact still of our district being at the low end of the funding formula. In 1995 we went to the public and asked for a $2 million referendum. We've learned some lessons since then. We learned that we needed to be more specific about what would happen if it didn't pass. We also learned very, very solidly that taxes and the impact to homeowners is extremely important. We pared down this referendum. It's about 31% less tax impact than if the referendum had passed in '95. Why do we need to come back to the public again? Well, to stay even with our contemporary districts in funding, if we're going to have like programs, we're going to need somewhat similar funding. But the biggest driving issue is our growth. There are 360 districts, as I mentioned. Only 20 of them are fast growth. Last year we were the second fastest growing school district by percent in the State of Minnesota. This year we're still in the top 20. Until we get more data on how students are coming in, we can't be sure what our percentage ranking is. That ranking doesn't mean anything. We know City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 though that really means something is that we're 10 classrooms short every single year. We've got 300 kids coming in from our growing school district. We're targeted under the Metropolitan Council as a growth area. As you're all well familiar with. Those same growth issues of infrastructure affect us the same as it does you. When we open spaces we need to fund it. We need to fund the opening of space to deal with these additional students without cutting programs that we have in place. What we're looking at is the Board in August has said all 9 of our existing buildings must open the Fall of 1998. That means the West Middle School needs to open. We need to get on with the program that had been designed in '92 and we have 300 students coming in on top of us. To open that ninth building, we need to pass a referendum for $1.25 million. If we don't pass the referendum, we will be cutting $1.25 million out of our operating expenses. The cuts that are going into a place, if the referendum would fail, and remember this is something that has been very difficult to do. This is a really painful process to start taking apart something that you really cherish and the parents want. I'm talking about programs for kids that are in place today. We have learned from 1995 that if we don't tell the public what's going to happen, we get a very negative reaction. People want to know so there's been a lot of time and thought put together in this. This was voted on September 25th. This is what will happen on November 5th, going into affect the Fall of '98. We'll be cutting $150,000.00 out of the co-curricular. We'll be eliminating all grades 7, 8 and 9 co- curricular activity. We be doubling and in many cases tripling the participation fees so they'll be going from about $50.00 to $150.00 in some cases. $70.00 to $210.00 in others, but we'll be generating a cut in a $500,000.00 program. We'll be cutting because most of that blue area that we looked at is classroom activity. 88% of everything we do in terms of spending money is for people basically in the classroom. The biggest area of our activity is the labor intensive classroom activity. That's where most of our cuts will occur. Basically in a prorate spread across the entire budget but we'll be cutting 19 licensed teaching positions. That will increase class size by at least 2. It will be cutting out electives in the sixth grade. Phy ed, art, music in the elementary. Gifted talented, K through 12 will be reduced and the elective classes at the Middle School and at the High School will be reduced. The other part of the cut that will go into affect is administrative will be cut, para-professional, clerical and some custodial. For another $250,000.00. Transportation we'll cut another $80,000.00 out of that. Basically you do that by meeting the State mandate and people gulp when they hear this but the State law is Kindergarten through Grade 12, it's mandatory that we transport after 2 miles. Well in this day and age and traffic and all the other types of things, you know most districts have come right down, for instance kindergarten you pick them up basically at their doorstep. The funding for all that changed in 1995. The State tighten it's financial package. We now have to have our transportation competing directly with classroom expenditure. In doing that then every dollar we save here is a dollar that we save in the classroom. So we're going to have kids walking further. Basically all grades 7 through 12 students will be required to walk 2 miles. What that really means is parents will be required, under the law, to bring their children in to school. It's not the government's obligation to bring children to the school. Only to get within the first 2 miles. That totals $1.25 million worth of cuts. That's question number one of the referendum. The other thing that we have done with our financial advisors and in-house experts and working with parents, staff, is we've put together a budget for 1998-99. We took all of the revenues that we know we'll be receiving and we took all the expenditures. And in that expenditure is opening the West Middle School. To open that West Middle School, for heat, lights, all the core expense for maintenance and operation, plus hiring about 18 people. Brand new people coming in to deal with the safety, with the discipline, with the health concerns, with the issues of the children, social work. That core staff, when you put that into this projection we are $1.28 coming up short. That's also a cross text of question number one on the referendum. The referendum came in, that's on the ballot, at $1.25 million. That is an 8 year referendum question. Each year the Board in power can vote in December whether they're actually going to levy it or not, but the authority will be there. And surely, based on everything we know, it will be certified by the current and future school boards. The impact of that is shown here. We have a lot of data we can show you. If you have a personal City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 interest in a piece of property, we can have our financial people look at that and actually... This is all based on 1997 referendum market value. We expect about a 16% increase in that. Some of the cities here just got their information today. We haven't had it yet from the auditor but if the referendum market value, which includes all of our TIF districts that are taxed under this plan. Under this statute, the impact here will go down and if that occurs we'll be coming out with PR as soon as possible this week or next with the new impact statement. The second question in summary is the technology question. We have a need to have our networks in place. Technology is being used as a teaching tool. It's also a skill that students need in this day and age. We have a plan for maintaining the current computers in place and replacing them for $200,000.00 a year. We have four technicians that will go into buildings and keep our networks operating. And we have a $75,000.00 a year training package. That about equates to $100.00 per employee. We have a lot of software that needs to be mandated by the District and the State. We'd have to have people trained on that. That's what those are for. That's also an 8 year question. The impact of that can be shown here. The technology question, since it is a high priority but not the first priority, cannot pass if question number one does not. It didn't make any sense in the collective wisdom of the Board to have the technology plan pass, but yet cut the rest of the programs in order to open enough classroom space to take care of all of our growing students. So the second question can only pass if the first one does. The polling is on November 4th. Absentee ballots are available now. There's a hotline number that can be called. I have some handouts that I will leave for you that gives you other telephone numbers, including all of our School Board members who are working on this, and by the way their vote was unanimous on this package. They stand by to answer questions. We have an information clinic tomorrow night that starts at 6:00, 5:30, here at the Chaska Rec Center. We're all going to be there. Mayor Mancino: At the Chanhassen. Chanhassen Rec Center. School Board Representative: Chanhassen Rec Center. Okay, thank you. The next one coming up is on the 23rd so I'm rolling forward already. That one's at the Chanhassen Rec Center, right here attached to the Bluff Creek Elementary building. I'd like to pass these out. The ballot question itself is a very stuffy looking, legalistic ballot. This is by law what we have to put out. It's basically question number one, as we outlined it. Question number two for technology as we outlined it. The first question is for $176.45 per pupil unit for 8 years. The second question is for $56.47 per pupil over 8 years. That's statutorily the way the ballots are written. I've given to you a real thumb nail sketch of this election. I know your time tonight is precious and we appreciate being put on at short notice. We have Lou Whack who would like to say a few words and then we're open for any questions. Thank you. Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Lou Whack: Good evening. I appreciate the chance to be here. I am literally going to take about two minutes of your time. David can present the statistics. He can't really give much of a plea due to his position. I'm here to give the plea. I think this is a modest referendum. I think we heard what the voters said the last time about the referendum. We've tried to keep it reasonable in terms of what we're attempting to do with the money. We are going to face some significant cuts if it doesn't pass. One thing I do want to clear up. Tomorrow night is at the Chanhassen Rec Center at 7:00 p.m. The clinic. So tomorrow night at 7:00 at the Chan Rec Center. Audience: 5:30. Lou Whack: To 7:00, okay. I guess the last thing I want to say, or request is that this has been endorsed by the Chamber of Commerce at both Chanhassen and Chaska. It's also been endorsed by Chaska and City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 Victoria City Councils and I respectfully request that you consider a formal endorsement of the referendum also. Thank you very much. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Just one question. Voting on November 4th. Do all the Chanhassen District 112 residents vote at the Chanhassen Rec Center? Lou Whack: Yes. Mayor Mancino: That's the only place where they vote? They don't vote in the other three locations that you gave? Lou Whack: No. Just at the Rec Center. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Lou Whack: And another thing about the voting. One of the issues last time that we got some feedback on was people had to wait quite a while. We have tried to add enough election judges to guarantee that there will be no more than a 10 minute wait when you go into vote on the referendum. Mayor Mancino: Do you have any way if, what day is November 4th? IS that a Tuesday? Thank you. If parents have kids in tow, is there anyway to take care of the kids during the election time? I mean during the voting time. Lou Whack: I don't think we've made plans for that at this point but it's a good idea and we will bring it up. But the committee is meeting weekly so it's an issue we can discuss Thursday night. Councilman Senn: What are the polling hours? I've heard a number of people ask that question. Mayor Mancino: 7:00 in the morning until 8:00 at night on November 4th at the Chan Rec Center. Lou Whack: All right, thank you very much. Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Thank you very much for the presentation. Is there anyone here tonight that would like to ask any questions on the referendum? The information that we just received on the presentation or would like to make any comments. Nobody? Don Ashworth: Mayor? Steve Peterson, a local resident, did stop in earlier stating he would not be present but he did want the City Council to know that he did in favor the Council endorsing this referendum. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Well I would like to, on behalf of the entire City Council, I'd like to read this general statement on the upcoming School District 112 operating levy referendum. And I also invite Council members to make any individual remarks at the close of our joint statement. On November 4th the residents of Chanhassen who live in School District 112 will have the opportunity to vote on an education funding referendum. School District 112 is asking voters to approve the funding required to keep pace with ever increasing number of students. The District has stated it will be forced to make drastic cuts to the quality of the educational program if this referendum is not passed. There is no question that Chanhassen residents already shoulder a high property tax burden, and that this funding need comes at a point when many people want to see taxes go down. Not up. However, education is something most City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 people in Chanhassen value and feel is important. We, the City Council of Chanhassen urge voters to read up on the facts of this referendum. We want you to understand what District 112 is asking for and then make your decision and vote on November 4th. Remarks from individual Council members. Councilman Berquist: I have a few and I'm going to, I'm not going to read fast but when we began to look at endorsement of the referendum there was a lack of commitment personally that I felt with the statement that was just read so I put my own together and it's strong worded but from where I come from it's okay. When I vote on November 4th I'll be casting a yes vote for both of the issues. Yes, I am in favor of District 112's request for $176.00 per student per year. And yes, I am in favor of an additional $56.00 per student per year for technology improvements. For me the decision is very straight forward. District 112 averages well below our surrounding districts in investment per student per year. The quality of education and the opportunities available through our school districts are investments that pay compound dividends and I feel the responsibility to provide the best I possibly can. My wife and I have two children who are now through the public school process. Our kids received great opportunities and a wonderful education at Chan Elementary, Chaska Middle School and the High School. They're both in college and doing very well. We're proud of them and I'm grateful to those who came before us to help us shoulder the burden of their education. I have a son who's 11 who is in St. Hubert's. He's there because my wife and I feel that the spiritual teachings that the St. Hubert's education process provides is important to him. In my opinion, oh! And having that aspect, spiritual education is outside of the context of public education. In my opinion, the results of the November 4th referendum will set the tone for education in Chanhassen, Chaska, Victoria and Carver for many years to come and I truly want this community to commit to educational excellence and not accept educational mediocrity. The betterment of our community is served directly by public education and nothing should inhibit our desire or our financial commitment to provide excellent educational environments for our children. I personally urge all District 112 residents to vote yes for our children, our children's children and our neighbor's children and our entire community. Thank you. Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Any other comments from Council members? Councilman Mason: Yeah. I live, just so everyone knows, I live in the Minnetonka School District. I teach in Eden Prairie so I clearly have a stake in public education. The referendum last year was turned down. I think education, on the District 112's side of Chanhassen is clearly at a cross roads here. I don't like increased property taxes any more than anyone else does. I think there comes a time that we need to look at the value of what that property tax will get us. I understand the workings of the financial positions. I, fortunately or unfortunately understood just about everything you said which I'm not sure sometimes from my viewpoint what that means. Minneapolis is 100 teachers short. Class size, as a classroom teacher, in an elementary classroom at any rate, an increase of 2 kids does not seem like much to someone that's never been inside a classroom for more than 5 minutes at a time. Depending on who or what that child may be, that increase is monumental. I quite honestly admire Steve for what he just said, knowing that he's had children go through both the public and the private aspect of education. Obviously as a public educator I'm a very staunch supporter of education but I also clearly realize that there are needs for people to have their children in private situations and it's their choice. It is a free country. I do hope that everyone that votes on this referendum, whether they have kids in public education or private education, understands the ramifications for voting whether they have children in this education setting or not. Many people are not able to choose and do need to send their kids to public education. The long and the short of it is, 112, because of the reasons stated, has not been able to keep up with Minnetonka. With the Minnetonka's or the Eden Prairie's and while as it may not show this year or next year, as Steve said earlier, it will show up in generations to come. I clearly support this and I hope the other side of Chanhassen will too. City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 Mayor Mancino: Thank you for your remarks. Thank you. Moving on to public hearings. PUBLIC HEARING: ASSESSMENT HEARING FOR COULTER BOULEVARD~ PHASE II, PROJECT 93-26B. Public Present: Name Address Liv Homeland Larry VanDeVeire 8804 Knollwood Drive 4980 County Road 10 East, Chaska Dave Hempel: Thank you Your Honor, members of the Council. This is an assessment hearing for the Coulter Boulevard, Phase II road and utility improvement project 93-26B. The primary project elements consisted of construction of the remaining portion of Coulter Boulevard between Audubon Road and Galpin Boulevard. Improvements include a trunk sanitary sewer, watermain, storm sewer, ponding, trail, street lights and landscaping. The project also included construction of the pedestrian arch underpass of which 80% of the cost is being paid from a federal ISTEA grant. The feasibility report, the project cost of approximately $2.18 million. Final project costs are coming in at slightly under $2.11 million. Accordingly the assessment rates for trunk sanitary sewer, watermain and streets have remained relatively the same. As of printing of this City Council packet no written objections have been received to this assessment roll. However, staff has been contacted by one property owner, Mr. And Mrs. VanDeVeire, who's map reference number 1 on your assessment roll map. The VanDeVeire's have raised a few concerns with regards to this property and the proposed assessments. First of all the property is in green acres. Therefore any assessments levied against the property are not reflected until the green acre status is removed. However, during the time period of green acres, interest on any levied assessments continue to accumulate. Their second concern involves development timing of their property. A good share of the northern portion of their property will be encumbered by the future north frontage road, which is proposed to be constructed under MnDot's contract in conjunction with the upgrade of Trunk Highway 5. The VanDeVeire's are concerned that it may be difficult to develop the property until the actual frontage road is constructed. Finally there's some concern for the designated land use of the property. The City's current comprehensive plan use map indicates this property is to be zoned as medium density residential. However the VanDeVeire's contend the Trunk Highway 5 corridor study has recommended the guided use of commercial. In any case, the proposed assessment schedule is based on the number of units of the lower density zoning. If the City Council so chooses, one option to deal with some of the uncertainties surrounding the property at this time would be to assess one unit for trunk sanitary sewer and water now with the remaining units to be collected as trunk hook-up charges upon the time of the development occurs. The rate of the hook-up charges in the future would be that current year's rate and the future in which the connection is being made. It should also be noted that if this or any other properties on the assessment roll develop more intensely or generate more residential equivalency units, then the additional trunk hook-up charges would be collected at time of building permits. At the close of the public hearing if there is no further relevant questions, comments or concerns which would require future investigation, it would be staff's recommendation that the final assessment roll for Coulter Boulevard Phase II improvement project 93-26B dated October 3, 1997 be approved at a term of 8 years at an interest rate of 8%. The Project Engineer, Mr. Phil Gravel from Bonestroo and Associates is available this evening for any comments, questions or additional information. Thank you. City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 Mayor Mancino: Thank you Dave. And you also would like us to make sure that we vote on the VanDeVeire's and how to do that? Dave Hempel: Correct. Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Any questions for staff at this time? Then I'd like to open it for a public hearing. Is there anyone here wishing to address the City Council on this issue? Please come forward. State your name and address. I think I know who you are. Larry VanDeVeire: Hi. I'm Larry VanDeVeire. I own the property at the northeast comer of TH 5 and Galpin. I have a letter here just indicating that I'm requesting that you approve staff's recommendation on the one unit. Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you. Yes, if you could give it to Mr. Hempel. Appreciate it Larry. Any questions for Mr. VanDeVeire. I just wanted to see if Council had any questions for you but I think it's pretty, I don't think anybody does so. Appreciate it. Comments from Council. Any? Councilman Senn? Councilman Senn: Do you want to close the public hearing? Mayor Mancino: Yes, I will close the public. Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed. Mayor Mancino: And can we talk a little bit about the VanDeVeire option. To go ahead with staff's recommendation. Okay. Then may I please have a motion? Councilman Senn: Move approval with the acceptance of staff's recommendation on the treatment... Councilman Mason: Second. Resolution #97-83: Councilman Senn: moved, Councilman Mason: seconded to approve the final assessment roll for the Coulter Boulevard, Phase ll Improvement Project No. 93-26B dated October 3, 1997 at a term of eight years and an interest rate of 8%. All voted in favor and the motion carried. AWARD OF BIDS: 1997 SWMP WATER QUALITY PROJECTS. Bob Generous: Thank you Madam Mayor, Council members. The City requested bids for storm water management program projects in the City. These bids were opened and tabulated came out approximately $65,000.00 greater than the engineer's estimate. Staff is recommending that these bids be rejected... The bids were set up so that you could pull out the individual projects if the City wanted to go forward with them. There is one that I'd like to discuss.., storm water project at Market Boulevard and Highway 5. This is an entrance to the City and you had suggested that possibly you wanted to... The difference in the estimate and what the low bidder came in with was the excavating charges at $7.75 per cubic yard. That's the different... With that we would wait for Council direction. Thank you. Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you. Any questions for staff'? City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 Councilman Berquist: Can we pick and choose through the items on this bid sheet? For instance the clearing and grubbing. Councilman Mason: If you want to do the clearing and grubbing. Councilman Berquist: No, I don't want to do them but I would like. Councilman Senn: This Saturday is work day. Just show up. Councilman Berquist: I would like to see that area cleared if possible. I mean the pond excavation, I understand that we need to wait on that until we can find a suitable place to get rid of the muck and I'm in agreement with waiting on that but is it possible to do that? Bob Generous: I don't believe we can break it out that far. Councilman Berquist: Well, I'll move to reject all the bids and, but I would like staff to see as to whether or not it would be possible to clear the overgrowth that's occurred in that area to include sight lines to the properties. Mayor Mancino: You know the overgrowth will die back in the winter. Councilman Berquist: It may. Well yeah, it will die back in the winter but if we're going to cut it down anyway, we might as well clear it out. If it's possible, good. If it's not, that's okay too but. Mayor Mancino: So that's part of your motion. Is there a second? Councilman Engel: Second. Mayor Mancino: All those in favor signify by saying aye. Councilman Senn: Question. Mayor Mancino: Okay, question. Councilman Senn: Discussion. I'm a little, I guess I'm a little uncertain with the expression is it possible. Well of course it's possible. Councilman Berquist: Well I mean practical. To clear the area of the brush and the debris, the growing debris that is currently on site. Councilman Senn: By sending our crews out there? By you know, hiring outside crews at any cost or what? I mean. Councilman Mason: No. Councilman Senn: Right. Mayor Mancino: The other side is with the snow it's all going to be under snow anyway. That's kind of my point. So do we want to waste time and money. City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 Councilman Berquist: Well if not, I mean if it's a silly suggestion and everything's going to look the same over the course of the winter, then disregard what I said and we reject all the bids. If on the other hand there can be improvement made to the site at staff's discretion, let's do it. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Is there a second to that motion? Councilman Mason: Yes. Resolution #97-84: Councilman Berquist moved, Councilman Mason seconded to reject the bids for the 1997 SWMP Water Quality Projects. All voted in favor and the motion carried. CONSIDER REQUEST FOR A DONATION, CHASKA COMMUNITY HOCKEY ASSOCIATION. Public Present: Name Address Kevin McShane Matt Thompson Susie, Patrick & Kerry Blake Barbara & Aaron Larson Randy & Eric Imker Brian Nicholson Randy Mueller Frederick R. Whitney 180 South Shore Court Mtka Youth Hockey 8040 Hidden Circle 8470 Pelican Court 8163 Marsh Drive 7280 Cactus Curve CCHA Hockey Chaska Mayor Mancino: And just to give you a little bit of background and a little bit of information, and again very skeletal here. On September 12th the hockey community. Chaska, excuse me. Community Hockey Association made a visitor presentation to the City Council requesting that the City of Chanhassen make an annual donation of $40,000.00 for three years for a total of $120,000.00 to the City of Chaska for a proposed ice arena facility being buik in Chaska as an addition to the Chaska Recreation Center. According to the City of Chaska, the first right to schedule prime time ice hours will be given to School District 112, the Chaska Community Hockey Association, the Chaska Figure Skating Club and the City of Chaska activities. And for City of Chaska activities. In addition the Minnetonka Youth Hockey Association will have the right to purchase prime time ice prior to other outside groups. On September 29th at a work session the City Council, Chanhassen City Council discussed the request for this donation and tonight we have put it on the City Council's agenda for public comment. So anyone wishing to address the City Council on this issue may do so now. Just please come forward to the podium. State your name and address and give us your comments. Kevin McShane: Good evening. Kevin McShane at 180 South Shore Court. Also 600 West 78th Street is where my business is so I both live and work in Chanhassen. Good evening again Mayor Mancino and Council members. We did make our presentation a couple of weeks ago and there were a few issues that I believe were still being discussed after that, and I don't know to what extent you've resolved some of those. I know with a facility in another community was a concern. How it might affect special interest groups, and to that point I just want to comment that I think we need to keep in mind here, we're here as a capital 10 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 campaign and looking for a facility that's going to last us probably 30 years. 25 to 30 years so I think the investment, you could probably amortize that over a longer period of time in terms of what value it will have for our residents. And it is a community ice arena, although hockey is a big part of that in terms of what the association has committed to and the number of hours they'll rent each year. District 112, as we're all aware, is in. We've got a $250,000.00 Mighty Grant. We've gone over all these things but those are all key elements to get this project done. And the number of children and families that will benefit from this I think are pretty substantial. We have probably 250 families in the hockey association. Another 50 in figure skating. Just in the Chaska Community Hockey Association. Also the Minnetonka Association has a number of children and the President of their association is here and will probably make a few comments in a minute. In addition, the phy ed pods serve about 1,600 kids and a large majority of those are Chanhassen children as well so the numbers get to be fairly substantial I think when we look at who's going to benefit from this. And it seems the, the numbers came in at about $2.2 million. Actually the bids were a little bit less than the $2,250,000.00 and the City of Chaska is deciding on that tonight I believe at their meeting in terms of accepting those bids. So we're moving along at a rather rapid pace. We've contacted all of our members. All the high school and JV players families and we're getting ready later this month to go to our community campaign and the business community and I think we talked about that. That will kick off later this month so timing is important as we've discussed before and we hope that you'll give this every consideration and as you look at that, that or any other number, think of it in terms of a long term investment versus three years. And in fact if a 5 year schedule would work better, I'm certain that we could get that worked out with all the other parties involved. 3 year versus 5. Our campaign is a 3 year campaign but if 5 works better, we'd certainly entertain that and I've talked to people within our group and I don't think that that would be a problem at all. Randy Mueller is here as well and may want to make a few comments. He's one of the tri-chairs of our campaign. Randy Mueller: Thank you Kevin. Mayor, Council. One thing Kevin mentioned and I really want to emphasize it to the Council that we probably did do as good a job the last time we were here explaining all the stake holders in this project and Kevin briefly touched on it. The School District is going to use this ice arena as a physical education pod during the daytime. It's going to benefit the kids in School District 112, grade 7 through 9. That's a total population of about 1,600 students that during the day will use that facility for broomball, ice skating or other physical education activities. And if you look at the population of Chanhassen, kids that attend School District 112, we can comfortably say that at least a third of that population, if not more, are Chanhassen students. So again, this facility is going to be used from the beginning of school hours until 10:00 at night. And I wanted to really make sure the Council was aware of that. That there are a lot more kids that are benefiting from this ice arena than just the youth hockey programs and the figure skating club. So hopefully that point has come across then. I just wanted to re- emphasize that. Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Kevin McShane: Matt Thompson from the Minnetonka Association, President of that Association is here as well tonight. Matt Thompson: Hi. I understand that one of the issues for you is to know whether or not the Chanhassen skaters that reside or go to the Minnetonka Youth Hockey Association would benefit from this rink. If I understand the arrangement Chaska is offering, that would be the case. Just to give you some facts. We have about 120 Chanhassen skaters registered in Minnetonka Youth Hockey this year. Up about 10 skaters from last year. That's about 20% of our total association. We on average give each skater about 3 hours of ice a year, and we could certainly use that and more. We, as an association, not just Chanhassen 11 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 but as an association need more ice. We're short on indoor ice. Let me also add that thank you for the outdoor ice that we get from Chanhassen. We can not only use the ice but guarantee that we can use the ice so that it would not be quote, unquote, a wasted investment on your part. I don't see that our numbers will be decreasing. If anything they'll stay level or grow. The only comment I would add in closing is that the arrangement that Chaska's offered makes Minnetonka Youth Hockey and consequently 120 of your skaters a first priority after everybody else gets their share, or gets what they want. I would think it would make sense if you go forward with this that you try to build in some sort of a minimal guarantee, whatever it might be, the numbers can be worked out later, that they would offer to Minnetonka Youth Hockey over a reasonable period of years. If you've got any questions. Mayor Mancino: Matt, could you please state that again? What would you like? A guarantee of what? Matt Thompson: Well, as I see it Chaska's offering Minnetonka Youth Hockey first priority after they've taken care of the School District and Chaska and everything else. I don't know where their numbers are going for the Chaska Youth Hockey Association so my only comment is if you're going to make that investment, half of which is, or well some of which is representing Chanhassen kids in Minnetonka, that you try to work in some sort of a minimal level of hours that would be guaranteed available to Minnetonka Youth Hockey. Mayor Mancino: And Chaska right now is 1,000 hours of prime time a year. And is that something that Minnetonka could buy? Matt Thompson: Oh, buy 1,000 hours from them? Well no. I wouldn't ask for that. That's a lot but with 120 skaters using 3 hours of ice each on average, that would represent 300 to 400 hours. That may be too much but if you could guarantee at least a couple hundred to make sure that that investment is well returned for those skaters, I think that would make sense. Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Kevin McShane: To that point I believe the City of Chaska is already looking at that and trying to come up with some numbers for them on the number of hours. They're well aware of that. The only final note is it's probably a good omen. As I came in it was snowing rather heavily so this seems to be a good time to be talking about ice so thank you very much. Mayor Mancino: You're welcome. A good omen for some. Is there anyone else wishing to address the Council on this? Susie Blake: My name is Susie Blake and I live at 8040 Hidden Circle. We've lived in Chanhassen for two years and I have a 7 year old son who is very excited about hockey and being a parent in the association I see this as a crossroads. We've got a new hockey coach who has some very good credentials at the High School level and we have an opportunity here to build a very strong program and a second sheet of ice is critical for us to be successful. And it would be nice to say that the communities of Victoria, Chanhassen and Chaska could work together to make this a power house hockey in the next 10 years. Thank you. Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Anyone else wishing to address the Council? Okay, seeing none I'll bring this back to Council. 12 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 Councilman Senn: I would move that, in that we've now had the presentation from the Association and the public input, that we table this and ask staff to prepare a response that can be presented before Council and the public next meeting. Mayor Mancino: Okay. And that would be when? On October 27th? IS that our next meeting? Councilman Senn: I think that's our next regular meeting, isn't it? Mayor Mancino: At the next regular meeting. Don Ashworth: That would be the next regular, yes. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Any discussion on that? Councilman Berquist: That's absolutely fine with me. I'm frankly amazed at one person speaking, except for the two of the three tri-chairs and the Minnetonka gentleman in favor of it. I really expected more people to speak to it. Mayor Mancino: Is there a second to the motion? Councilman Berquist: I'll second the motion to table. Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Berquist seconded to table the request for a donation to the Chaska Community Hockey Association and direct staff to prepare a response that can be presented before Council and the public next meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Mayor Mancino: The motion carries. It will be tabled and we will have a written decision at our next Council meeting October 27th. Thank you. Thank you for coming. VILLAGES ON THE PONDS DEVELOPMENT, NORTHEAST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 5 AND GREAT PLAINS BLVD: CONSIDER ACQUISITION OF eUTLeT L (2.2 ACRES). FINAL PLAT/REPLAT OF eUTLeT C INTO TWO LOTS. APPROVE ADDENDUM A TO DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT. Don Ashworth: During the development of Villages on the Pond there's been a number of questions as to what really transpired with Outlot L. St. Hubert's Church would like the City Council to consider actually purchasing that. I believe that through the process the City and Council has considered this as an area that should fall under conservation easement. In fact went so far as to require that the developer include that as a part of another document that was entered into between the developer and the City. Staff really was unclear as to what the City Council's intent was and accordingly have returned the item to the City Council to tell us whether or not it is to be continued to be looked at as a conservation easement or are we to move ahead with some form of attempt to in fact acquire that parcel. Mayor Mancino: Any questions at this time? Comments from Council members on this. Which way we would like to see it go. It has been stated in the wetland alteration permit that was taken out for the Villages on the Pond PUD, that Outlot L be set aside as a conservation easement. It has also been stated in 13 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 the conditions of approval for site plan for St. Hubert's church that this be a conservation easement. Councilman Senn. Councilman Senn: As I understand it, and I guess that's what I want to clarify. The only action that would be necessary is if we were going to take an action to change our minds as to what we've already said, correct? Don Ashworth: I believe that is correct. Councilman Senn: Okay. So effectively if we take no action we are effectively keeping our position which is reflected I believe in a couple of city documents already saying that it will be a conservation easement and will not be paid for. Don Ashworth: Do you concur? Councilman Senn: Okay. That would be my opinion. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Do we need to make that into a motion? Roger Knutson: No action is necessary if you don't want to do anything other than what you've already done. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Then we will leave it as is. (There was a tape change at this point in the discussion.) Bob Generous: ... approval and from the addendum A to the development contract. Staff is recommending approval of the final plat. Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you. Any questions? Is the applicant here tonight, and would you like to address the City Council? Okay. The applicant is not here tonight. Then let us take action. Are there any comments first from any Council members? Councilman Senn: Move approval. Councilman Mason: I second it. Mayor Mancino: Excuse me. Would you clarify. Are you including number 1 or are you deleting condition number 1 ? It certainly doesn't hurt us to be redundant, does it? Roger Knutson: No. Councilman Senn: Leave it. Councilman Mason: Yeah. Mayor Mancino: Leave it, okay. So just to make clear, it would be all 8 conditions. 14 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 Councilman Mason: As stated in the staff report. Councilman Senn: Yep. Yeah, as per staff's recommendations. Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve Villages on the Ponds Second Addition final plat, PUD 95-2, subject to the following conditions: The developer shall grant to the City of Chanhassen a conservation easement over Outlot L, Villages on the Ponds as described in the conditions of approval for the Villages on the Ponds. Provide cross access easements and maintenance agreements which shall be dedicated over Lots 1 and 2, Villages on the Ponds 2nd Addition for access and utility purposes. The appropriate drainage and utility easements will need to be dedicated on the plat over the stormwater basins and wetlands on the property. Drainage and utility easements shall be dedicated on the final plat for the stormwater basin and wetland up to the 100 year flood elevation. The applicant shall enter into an addendum to the development contract/PUD agreement for Villages on the Ponds. The applicant shall pay the City GIS fees in accordance with City fees at time of recording the final plat. The proposed commercial development of 2.13 net developable acres is responsible for a water quantity fee of $9,287. This fee is due payable to the City prior to the City filing the final plat. All utility improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Upon completion of the utility improvements, the applicant or their successors shall supply the City with a mylar set of as-built construction plans. All utilities installed within the plat shall be owned and maintained by the property owners and not the City. 8. The developer shall pay full park and trail fees pursuant to City Code. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Mayor Mancino: 6C. Approve Addendum A to Development Contract. Staff report please. Dave Hempel: Mayor, City Council members. The replat of Villages on the Ponds Phase 1, which is Villages on the Pond Second Addition results in the necessity to amend the original development contract to include this new plat. No additional public utility or street improvements will be necessary in conjunction with this replat. The attached Addendum A extends the conditions of approval from Phase 1 to also apply to the Second Addition. It is therefore recommended that the City Council approve Addendum A to the development contract for Villages on the Ponds conditions upon the developer supply the City with administration and recording fees. One other point I'd like to raise is I did have three additional conditions to add to this particular development contract to bring it up to our current development contract standards. One of them has to do with construction hours. To make it uniform with other development contracts. Noise amplification and development signs. 15 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Any questions for staff at this time? Any comments from Council members? May I have a motion. Councilman Senn: Move approval with the three new conditions added. Councilman Engel: Second. Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Engel seconded to approve Addendum A to the development contract for Villages on the Ponds conditioned upon the following conditions: The developer supplying the City with an administration and recording fees in the amount of $100.00 2. Construction hours consistent with other development contracts. 3. Noise amplification consistent with other development contracts. 4. Development signs standards consistent with other development contracts. All voted in favor and the motion carried. POSTAL SERVICE UPDATE: Mayor Mancino: Moving right along. The next item on the agenda is item number 7, Postal Service update. Mr. City Manager please. Don Ashworth: The City has received bids for the trail, the landscaping and the fence. I think it's fair to say that we do have a budgetary problem that we're going to need to discuss and work out in terms of how do we stay within the $32,000.00 limitation, potentially using additional materials from the City's tree farm to reduce the materials, etc. However, all of those discussions are really moot until such time as the Postal Service grades the south side of that berm, the 2:1 slope that they agreed to in writing between the City and the Postal Service earlier this year. That has not been completed. We're basically presenting this item so as to allow the City Attorney to inform the City Council as to how we might pursue getting them in compliance. With that I guess I would ask the City Attorney to speak. Roger Knutson: Mayor, members of the Council. We have been, I'll be blunt about it. We've been beating them over a head about once a week with repeated phone calls to their architect saying, when are you coming? It's snowing out there. We didn't tell them that because it just started now. We have been beating them. And unfortunately I have to report to you what they tell me is, they don't know. Why don't you know? Because they haven't gotten the job done. They should have gotten the job done and we will keep beating on them until, I'm convinced, well they know they have to do it and they will do it because they signed a contract with us saying they will do it. This is not a matter of negotiations anymore. It's a done deal. It's just a matter of getting them out there and doing it and we will continue to beat on them. At some point I suppose if worse comes to worse, we'd have to recommend we start a lawsuit against the post office. I'm not recommending that tonight because a lawsuit would take a lot longer hopefully than it will take them to finish the darn job. They've just got to get at it. Councilman Mason: Square one. 16 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 Roger Knutson: We're in a much better position than square one. We've got a contract now. So we will continue beating on them and I will inform them and inform not only the architect but the post office with the fact that you're not at all pleased with what's going on out there. They are slow. Councilman Senn: I'll do it if I can borrow somebody's bobcat. Mayor Mancino: Everybody please stop sending mail at the post office. Have we contacted the local executives at the new building? Roger Knutson: No. It's my strong impression that nothing can happen locally. We've got to deal with people in Kansas City and Chicago but the person we've been dealing with principally on this issue is their architect who is managing the project and we're beating on them and we will beat harder. Mayor Mancino: So let me understand this completely and that is that the berm needs to be finished on the south side. Therefore we can't really put up fencing or put in plant materials until that is completed. Roger Knutson: That's correct. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Does it also affect the trail that needs to be rerouted? I would think it does to some degree. So everything has ceased until they finish the berming. Roger Knutson: We can't put plants up and a fence up until we've got a berm to put them on. Councilman Senn: And we per chance don't have the authority under the contract to go do it and bill them back since they haven't done it in a reasonable time, do we? Roger Knutson: No. Ultimately if we had to we could start a lawsuit again, which I'm not recommending, and get that authority. But it's their job. They're supposed to hire the contractors. Presumably they already have. As far as I know they have. It's their job and we'll make sure they get it done. Councilman Engel: Can they provide in a letter detailing who the contractor is and when they intend to start the work? Roger Knutson: I think we know, I don't have the name with me. We know the contractor. They're not site now. We'll call the contractor directly. Councilman Engel: Can we get that? Roger Knutson: I'm sure we can. Councilman Engel: Something. That would say what the plan is. If there is no plan, then at least we'll know. Roger Knutson: Then we'll start calling Kansas City and Chicago and every other city and location we have to. 17 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 Councilman Senn: I think after they get done with the IRS hearings and the dismantling of the IRS, that we could then recommend that they move onto the Post Office. Roger Knutson: I'll second that. Mayor Mancino: Okay. If we could Don have a report next week just to kind of get a weekly update as to what's happening, I'd appreciate it. COUNTY ROAD 17 (POWERS BOULEVARD) IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 93-29: A. REVIEW TIF ASSISTANCE FOR EMPAK AND INSTANT WEB COMPANIES. B. APPROVE ASSESSMENT ROLL. Dave Hempel: Mayor, City Council members. This item was last tabled to resolve or verify remaining TIF dollars for one of the property owners along the street. Todd Gerhardt, Assistant City Manager has prepared a memo on that and I'll leave that to him to address. Todd Gerhardt: Honorable Mayor, City Council members. Included in your packet is a TIF analysis for both Instant Web Companies and Empak. Through my research I found that Empak has collected increment in the years 1991, 1992 and 1993, totally $616,869.25. From those years they received special assessment in land write down of $553,450.00 leaving $63,419.50 that could potentially be used to write down their assessments against County Road 17. On the Instant Web side of the ledger, Instant Web Companies in 1991 paid taxes of $244,970.94. If you take that by the EDA or HRA's formula at that time of 3 years, they would have incentives of $734,000.00. United Mailing, $197,000.00 over 3 years would give them $593,000.00. Victory Envelope, $207,000.00 over 3 years. $622,000.00, giving it a grand total of $1,950,000.00 of available increment based on the HRA's special assessment reduction program. From my research and checking our assessment cards I can only find that the City picked up $181,484.40 in special assessment assistance and no land write down for Instant Web Companies. Based on these findings, staff would say that Instant Web Companies are eligible for $1.7 million based on our special assessment reduction program and Empak on credit remaining of $63,419.50. The City Council should feel to grant this assessment agreement with the four parties involved. Staff would recommend that you have staff prepare the necessary assessment agreements and private redevelopment agreements establishing minimum market values as outlined in the staff report. I'd also like to at this time, through discussions with the Instant Web Companies attorney, Jules Smith, did show me a document that the HRA did execute with United Mailing back in 1986 that stated that any increment created after 1986 from United Mailing could be used to write down any future assessments on the outlot that is located across from Instant Web Companies. So my recommendation of not providing assistance for the vacant lot would no longer exist based on that agreement, and I apologize for not making that available to you but Jules and I were looking at it approximately 20 minutes ago. Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you. Todd Gerhardt: It's pretty specific in saying that assistance should be granted. Mayor Mancino: Questions at this time? I have a couple. On these HRA special assessment reduction programs. Don't we have a written contract? I mean are there written contracts on the special assessment reduction programs? I mean why are we looking at Minutes and not contracts that are signed by both the City and the company? 18 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 Todd Gerhardt: The Minutes that I included in your packet show intent of what the City Council was going to do in 1992. However, that City Council decided at that time they did not want to move ahead with the County Road 17 project but were willing to provide the assistance. I think it was later in that meeting or the next meeting that the City Council made the decision not to do the improvements at that time. Mayor Mancino: Okay. No, I understand that but I'd like to see the contract that we have about the special assessment reduction program so that we know that we're all looking at and we've all agreed on the same thing. For instance my question is, on the special reduction programs, is it just for the next 3 years or is it any time in the future that a company can go ahead and use the write down? And where is that written? Todd Gerhardt: Well there's only one agreement right now and that would be the one that Jules Smith showed me 20 minutes ago and it pertains solely to United Mailing and the vacant lot. And that any future assessments for either one of those parcels, the City would grant any assistance to those two. Mayor Mancino: So we have nothing else in writing that explains what both parties, the City and the companies have agreed to in the special assessment program? Todd Gerhardt: That's correct. There are no contracts. Mayor Mancino: Okay, any other questions from staff. I mean from Council members. Councilman Senn: Todd. The letter you're referencing in 1986. I believe that's 1987. Okay. First of all it'd be nice to get a copy of that so we can all look at it. Secondly, now that just pertains to the outlot or it pertains to the main building and the outlot? Todd Gerhardt: It pertains to United Mailings. Jules Smith: Victory Envelope and United Mailings... Councilman Senn: Victory Envelope and United Mailings, and that's when what? But then how does United Mailing enter into it? They're separate legal entities. Well, okay. Mayor Mancino: Just a minute Jules. I'll give you, yeah. He'll go over that. Councilman Senn: Okay. The, if I'm understanding what you're suggesting on Empak is that you effectively go beyond what our agreement already said in terms of giving them the first three years and now whatever excess balance was created effectively by additional value or you know one way or another translating to higher tax payments that we refunded him via this $63,000.00? Todd Gerhardt: Empak, what I'm taking is that they receive basically 2 ~ worth of years and those 1991- ~92 and '93. In those years we picked up all the special assessments associated with Lake Drive and land write down for the property. There was a remaining credit of $63,000,00 to get the full three years worth of increment in '91, '92 and '93. I am not taking current dollars. I'm going back and taking past dollars. So to stay within the full 3 years, that $63,000.00 credit. 19 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 Councilman Senn: Did you, I mean does that cover our normal cost? I mean normally when we do a TIF district, you also take off City costs and administrative fees and all that. I mean is that all covered in what you're figuring? So the $63,000.00 is in excess to all that? Todd Gerhardt: Correct. Councilman Senn: Okay. Mayor, that I guess. Mayor, you know as far as just the basic I guess I'm going to say or smaller questions that I have I guess for the moment satisfies the smaller questions but I really hesitate having, I really hesitate having the Council continue with this discussion until we seek advice from City's bond counsel. Especially on the issue as to whether we can even legally do this or not. In the TIF legislation there's a fundamental premise to the entire use of it called the But For Clause. And it's paramount in any TIF project or TIF district that a but for standard be met prior to the construction of a project. And this, I don't know, I've never seen a retroactive TIF deal before in all my years in this business and I guess I'd really feel a lot more comfortable getting all that information in hand and know what our options are before we would even proceed I think further with the discussion of this issue because I think that, I'm going to say fundamental question is one that needs a, I'm going to say a formal legal opinion, at least in my mind from our bond counsel. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Councilman Berquist: And I'm of the opinion that we don't know enough about the real final numbers of the deal. At least I don't. Until at least at this point...introduction of this other letter and what the ramifications of that are. Mayor Mancino: Any other comments? Before we move for a motion. Jules, would you and if there's anyone else that would like to give testimony on this, please come forward and state your name and address. Jules Smith: Thank you Mayor, members of Council. I'm kind of getting into ancient history but it's my understanding the City had a plan in that district that anybody who built in there, they had adopted a proposal that anybody who came in there would get a certain amount of help. And one of the reasons that I think, and I think Roger was the attorney here. I think I'm using his form, or he sent me the form, on this contract with Victory Envelope which was the last of the buildings that my clients built. The Instant Web, United Mailing and Victory Envelope, was that there were practically no, there wasn't all that much for Victory Envelope. I mean we're looking at $1,900,000.00 worth of credit and we used less than 10% of that. Whereas most people would use almost 100% of it, in the case ofEmpak. I think. It looks like they would use 100% of it. And we under the best of circumstances, even if all these assessments were paid, would be under 35% of what was normally the deal that the HRA made with people who built in the industrial park. So in discussing that, and I have to go, really go back in my file. This is, in 1987 we entered this agreement where they provided that because Victory Envelope was using such a small amount, and could use such a small amount, there weren't very many assessments there at the time, that they would include the lot across the street as well and that we could use whatever Victory Envelope's credits we could use against that lot because they define development area as both of the lots. And so, and it says exactly that they would pay the assessments then outstanding, which weren't very much. And all future assessments until the end of the TIF district. Or they'd apply the credits. So I'm just, and of course at the initial hearing on this when we brought this up and we were more or less informed that we had enough credits to cover all the assessments and so of course at that point, if that's the case, we don't have an objection. And I sent in an objection letter primarily to preserve our rights because both Don and Todd 20 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 were off at a meeting and I didn't have a chance to get a hold of them so I put in, and I did talk to David. I put in a letter just to keep the thing open and maybe we all better sit down and, it isn't up to me to ask to table something but take some time and work this all out and I was just meeting with Todd and I'll get him copies of this contract. Mayor Mancino: Appreciate it. Jules Smith: Anyway, we could probably use a week to discuss this. Mayor Mancino: Yes, that's what Councilman Senn suggested. Thank you. Is there anyone else wishing to address the Council on this? Robert Boyle: Mayor, members of the City Council. Mr. Ashworth. My name is Robert Boyle. I represent Empak. I received the information by fax this afternoon from Mr. Gerhardt and I'm, the best I can say is I'm not prepared at this time to respond to the issue of whether the credit calculation is accurate or the basis for the credit. I don't have the original documents available to me in the time that we had to respond but if we have a few days between now and the next meeting, I think we'd be in a position to respond to any questions you may have and work with staff on reacting to the proposal that they're presenting to you tonight. Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you very much. May I have a motion please? Councilman Senn: I'm going to move to table this item and I assume that means we need to table the assessment roll also. And I would table it with the direction that staff take all the documents. Seek City's bond counsel's opinion on the legality of the type of action we're considering on whether we can retroactively do this type of a TIF deal and then get back to us with that information as well as all of the updated and final numbers at that time as well as copies of the correspondence and/or agreements as referenced tonight. Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Don Ashworth: Madam Mayor? Mayor Mancino: Yes. Don Ashworth: So the motion would really, hopefully table this item to the 27th, again making the assumption that Holmes and Graven and Graven, Kennedy I guess now, are able to provide that opinion and other materials. Staff doesn't have a problem with that. I think we can.., from the County that they need that type of information prior to roughly December 1st, is my recollection so we should have time. Councilman Mason: You'd think we could get it cleared up by then. I hope. Roger Knutson: Mayor? I'd just point out this is a public hearing on the assessment roll so if anyone else is here to comment. Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Before we make the motion and a second, is anyone else here to comment on this? 21 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 Councilman Mason: Do we need to, is the assessment roll item B? I mean do we need to act on it? I mean should we act on item A first? Mayor Mancino: Can we do separately A and B? Councilman Senn: Yeah, I had included it in my motion... Mayor Mancino: That we would table both. Councilman Senn: ...to table because I assumed we can't act on the roll with dollar amounts in it without this issue being resolved so. Mayor Mancino: So your motion would be for 7.5A and B. Councilman Senn: Correct. That was what my motion was. Mayor Mancino: And there is no one tonight here that wants to come in front of the City Council and speak to us about this issue. So the motion has been made. Has it been seconded? Councilman Berquist: Yes, I. Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you. Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Berquist seconded to table action on the TIF assistance for Empak and Instant Web Companies and the assessment roll for County Road 17 Improvement Project 93-29 with direction that staff take all the documents, seek City's bond counsel's opinion on the legality of the type of action we're considering on whether we can retroactively do this type of a TIF deal and then get back to us with that information as well as all of the updated and final numbers at that time as well as copies of the correspondence and/or agreements as referenced tonight. All voted in favor and the motion carried. AMEND A CONDITION ON THE INTERIM USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR A 32 SQ. FT. MONUMENT SIGN AND AN 8 SQ. FT. VARIANCE FROM THE 24 SQ. FT. MONUMENT SIGN REQUIREMENT~ 850 FLYING CLOUD DRIVE~ DICK HENNING. Bob Generous: Mayor, Councilmembers. The applicant is asking for an amendment to the interim use permit to permit a 32 square foot sign on their site. The ordinance permits 24 square feet. The additional square feet, staff doesn't really feel poses the problem or a concern about that with the higher traffic speeds on 212. Staff is recommending approval of the amendment to the conditions subject to the four conditions. Mayor Mancino: Thank you very much. Is the applicant here tonight? Would you like to make a presentation please? Dick Henning: Good evening. My name is Dick Henning. I own the garden center down there. With my discussions with the City, with Cynthia Kirchoff, we've gone through pretty much everything. The only reason we need a sign is we've got so many people driving by saying they can't find us because we have no sign out front. Originally if I had known we would have had to do this a year and a half ago when we got 22 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 our original variances, we would have done it at that time. We didn't know this until approximately 3-4 months ago and we've been working with Cynthia since that time on this sign .... any questions. Mayor Mancino: Yeah, do you have a color rendering of the sign? What the sign will look like? Dick Henning: I don't know if she gave you a copy of that. Mayor Mancino: No, we have a black and white. Is there anything? Dick Henning: No, no. Mayor Mancino: There's nothing in color? Dick Henning: ... dropped it off... Mayor Mancino: Will you explain the sign just a little bit and what the base is. Dick Henning: It's going to be, to tell you the truth, I presume it's ~ inch plywood. Finished plywood, vinyl coated, painted white. The lettering will be vinyl with a little logo on top which is our insignia. It says Nursery and Garden Center, Wholesale and Retail. Supplier of Landscape Materials. That's basically we supply the materials to homeowners, wholesale and retail. Mayor Mancino: And you realize that the staff report and the Planning Commission passed that the words, Supplier of Landscape Material be deleted. Dick Henning: Well that's something I'd like to talk to the City Council members about because that's exactly what we do. We supply landscaping materials. It doesn't say landscape contractor. It doesn't say landscaper. It's landscape materials. Rocks, edging...plants. Mayor Mancino: And you don't think that the public knows that from Nursery and Garden Center? Dick Henning: It's in all our ads and everything. Supplier of landscape materials. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Any questions for the applicant at this time? Councilman Berquist: I know it's a pain in the tail to go through all this for a sign. Believe me, I understand but rules are rules. How's this thing going to sit? Are you going to put it on a 4 x 4 or what? Dick Henning: It's going to be mounted on 6 x 6 timbers, painted white. It's going to be on the 212 entrance to our property. It's going to face east and west. With the letters on both sides of the sign. Councilman Berquist: Now how far above the ground is the bottom of the 4 x 8 sheet? Dick Henning: 4 feet. Councilman Berquist: So it's going to be 8 feet tall. Dick Henning: Yeah, it's going to be about 3 ½ feet above ground. 23 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 Councilman Senn: To pursue what you're talking about. I mean you're talking about timbers stacked up 4 feet high. Dick Henning: No, no, no. There's going t6o be two timbers put in the ground. Vertical. Upright with the sign mounted between the two timbers. Councilman Senn: Okay. And the sign's going to be plywood. Painted. Dick Henning: Painted plywood. Like 99% of the signs are. Councilman Senn: 99% of the signs where? We don't have any other in Chanhassen that way other than temporary ones so I'm just curious. Dick Henning: Driving by the signs I usually have gone by. Councilman Senn: Okay, so you're going to have two upright timbers, or 4 x 4's or 6 x 6's or whatever with a plywood sign bolted to it. Dick Henning: Yes. Councilman Senn: On both, painted on both sides? Dick Henning: Yes. Councilman Senn: Okay. Why, if this is for people finding you and identity, why do you need the phone number on there? Just curious. Dick Henning: So they know how to contact us. Councilman Senn: ... phone book, yellow pages, I don't know. Most signs don't usually have phone numbers on them. Dick Henning: The City asked us to draw up a sign and I had my sign company draw it up. I think it's an attractive sign. It's drive by it and you can jot down a number and call us. Councilman Senn: Well all I'm trying to get at is I mean if you eliminate some of the clutter of the sign you might be able to get it down to the size that it conforms to the ordinance too. Dick Henning: The size of the lettering, pretty much everything on the sign, we're not, address, phone number and who we are and what we do is on the sign. Councilman Berquist: I'm having a difficult time reconciling this application with the one that we spent the better part of the summer on. And I wish it were that, I truly wish it were this easy. I don't mean to make light of the situation. But we just required something much more substantial and significant from a fellow business person along Highway 212 there and for us to receive a staff report that recommends approval based on what you're telling us is extraordinary. 24 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 Councilman Senn: That's an understatement. Councilman Berquist: That's how I try to speak. Dick Henning: The only thing the staff has objection to is landscape. The word landscape. And that's exactly what we do. We supply landscape material. Councilman Berquist: I understand that. I'm not disagreeing with the verbiage. It's the construction of the sign that surprises me and I think the rest of us, so. Mayor Mancino: Thank you Mr. Henning. If we have any other questions we'll ask you. Is there anyone else that would like to speak on this? On this issue. Okay. Bringing it back to Council. Councilman Senn, comments. Councilman Senn: I guess my comment is this whole thing needs to be kicked back to staff. I mean obviously somebody's made a decision to establish a whole second set of signage parameters for the City of Chanhassen. One which we've never agreed to nor I believe fathom that we would agree to when we established the sign standards we have. You know I mean if we're going to go around and say this part of the city can have sloppy signs and this part of the city has to have nice signs, or this neighborhood has to and that neighborhood doesn't, that seems to me that's kind of self defeating as it relates to our ordinances and enforcement of them as people may want to contest them. I think you know for a normal commercial sign, aside from the materials issue, which I think is the real foundational issue here and also how the sign fits and how it's monumented or whatever. I just, I look at this sign and I see absolutely no reason why the sign can't be modified to fit within the parameters of the sign area requirements of the code. And so I don't really see a reason for a variance from that context and I think there's just too much information, too much clutter on the sign. I mean it's just a lot more than normally you frankly put on any commercial sign, and stuff. But I mean that's really a secondary issue to establish whatever our parameters are going to be and I think it's wrong to lead the applicant effectively down a trail effectively allowing this type of signage if those aren't the parameters we have and at least as far as I'm aware they are. I'm kind of surprised to see these new parameters for the first time. Mayor Mancino: Bob, the existing sign ordinance says it can be 8 feet tall. Bob Generous: Correct. Mayor Mancino: It has to be a monument sign. So it has to have a base. A monument base. Okay. I'm just trying to be very specific here for Mr. Henning. It can be at this point 24 square feet. That's what our sign ordinance says, for that area. For the business fringe area. Okay. Any other requirements from the sign ordinance? Councilman Senn: Different square footage did you say? Bob Generous: No. Councilman Senn: Oh, okay. Councilman Berquist: Does the interim use permit throw anything, does that do anything? 25 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 Bob Generous: No, that sets a sunset to the use of the property. Councilman Berquist: But it doesn't relax anything regarding? Bob Generous: No. Mayor Mancino: Are there any other? Bob Generous: I believe there's something, I don't have the exact ordinance, that states that it must be high quality material or... Mayor Mancino: It must be high quality and compatible with the existing building. I know those two. So is your, would your suggestion be a tabling for staff to work with Mr. Henning or? Councilman Senn: Well I guess I'll table it for the staff to work with Mr. Henning but more importantly I guess I'd like staff to come in and talk with us about what our signage parameters and criteria are so we can reach a base understanding of that. I think as a Council we're sitting here thinking it's one thing and obviously staff's thinking it's another, if we're getting the staff approval for something like this. Councilman Berquist: Well I suspect that there's a fundamental misunderstanding somewhere. We need to find out where. Councilman Senn: We need to find out what it is. Councilman Mason: Agree. Mayor Mancino: Councilman Mason. Councilman Mason: The words were just taken out of my mouth, yeah. There appears to be, what both Mark and Steve are saying I think is absolutely correct and I think Mr. Henning is getting caught in the middle of it. Dick Henning: Well I've been working with the City for 3 months. Councilman Mason: No, no. I understand that. And that's what I mean about you getting caught in the middle of it. Dick Henning: ...three times... Councilman Mason: I understand that. What Councilman Berquist eluded to a little while ago is we have been spending inordinate amounts of time on a sign in your neighborhood that is substantially different than the sign you're proposing here in quality and I would guess in cost and what not and at the very least we have to figure out why these two signs within what, a half mile of each other are so drastically different. Councilman Berquist: Although I do want to say that the sign ordinance hasn't changed in the last two years. Councilman Mason: Right. 26 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 Councilman Berquist: And that the one that you are asking to prepare this sign should have had the wherewithal to come in and get his copy of the sign ordinance and try to prepare a proposal predicated on that. Dick Henning: We did. We've been working with the City. They told us what they wanted. This is the third time we've redesigned the sign. Councilman Berquist: If that's the case, then I certainly apologize to you because you've been run around in circles and there's some big differences between the sign that you're showing us and a sign we just, like I say, spent the summer approving a mile, a halfa mile up the road from you. So I mean if those misunderstandings are true, I apologize to you. Councilman Senn: Well I think we all will but we still have to fix the problem. Councilman Berquist: Right. And that's what we're proposing is to table it so we can figure it out and you're going into a season that you want to get your stuff up. It already should have been up. Been up two months ago. Mayor Mancino: Well also, I mean you know anyone who does come in, applicant who does come in for a variance, you know there is room there when it is not a straight application that abides by the ordinance. So you are coming in asking for a variance which takes a little bit of extra time too. Councilman Senn: Well and if the urgency is timing at this point, our ordinance does allow for a permit for temporary signage which is administrative and you can pursue it with staff and get something up for identity. Dick Henning: This is a temporary sign because I can only be there one year after sewer and water... Mayor Mancino: Oh I know but that could be 10 years from now. Councilman Senn: That could be 20 years from now. We don't know when that is. Dick Henning: That's true. Councilman Senn: That's hardly temporary. Mayor Mancino: But you can go ahead and put up a temporary sign now. Councilman Senn: Yeah, the temporary. You know maybe you should follow up with staff and look at a permit, what is it 30 or 60 days we allow or something on a temporary sign? Bob Generous: It depends on the type. Councilman Senn: Yeah, but why don't they follow up with that and see if there's a way to. Councilman Berquist: Can we grant him? 27 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 Dick Henning: Then in 30 days I have to go through this again. Councilman Senn: No. What I'm saying is it's on a temporary sign, which is kind of more of the nature of what you're talking about here. There's provisions in our sign ordinance that allow you to put that up as a temporary sign for a certain number of days per year. Okay, and you can apply administratively. You don't have to come to the Council or the Planning Commission to do that. You can basically go in, get that kind of a sign permit and function until we get this straighten out, if in fact. Dick Henning: Well I already paid for a permit and permit and permits. Mayor Mancino: You've paid for one permit. Councilman Senn: Permits, permits and permits? Dick Henning: And the permit to go through this, what we went with Skip Cook last year. Councilman Senn: Well we're not having you pay any more permits. We're taking the matter. Dick Henning: There's a fee to put up a temporary sign. Another fee. Mayor Mancino: Is there a fee associated with a temporary? Bob Generous: There is a... dollar fee. Mayor Mancino: Well, then we'll go ahead and waive that. Councilman Senn: Then we'll waive it so he can get something up temporary. Mayor Mancino: Dick, the other thing is, when you did present this the first time. When it came in front of the Planning Commission and the Council, there were no drawings. There was nothing for us to see. Dick Henning: Because we were... Mayor Mancino: I know, but I'm just saying you know, you need to. Dick Henning: I wasn't here. I had my secretary and we weren't asked to bring anything. Mayor Mancino: It was a condition of the Planning Commission approval was to have you bring drawings and materials to the City Council and we didn't get them that last time so we had nothing to go on. Dick Henning: Right, I understand that. Mayor Mancino: So, I mean that's. Dick Henning: You know I'm being more than patient to get this done. I do want it done right. I don't want, I mean one of my employees hung a banner out and I thought I'd committed holy sin with the City of Chanhassen. I mean I could have killed Mother Theresa and gotten away with less. 28 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 Mayor Mancino: I doubt that. Dick Henning: ... happened when my employee hung a banner up... retaining wall on the front yard. Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you. We will go ahead and table this. You can talk with staff about putting up a temporary sign and we will waive that fee. May I have a motion please? Councilman Senn: My motion stands. Mayor Mancino: Second? Councilman Engel: Second. Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Engel seconded to table action to amend a condition of the Interim Use Permit to allow a 32 sq. ft. monument sign and an 8 sq. ft. variance from the 24 sq. ft. monument sign requirement for Dick Henning at 850 Flying Cloud Drive. All voted in favor and the motion carried. REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO OPERATE AN AUTO SALES ESTABLISHMENT ON PROPERTY ZONED FRINGE BUSINESS DISTRICT, AND SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR AN AUTO SALES ESTABLISHMENT ON .53 ACRES, LOCATED SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 169/212 AND EAST OF HIGHWAY 101/169, SOUTHWEST BROKERS, JAMES OLSON. Bob Generous: Thank you Mayor, Council members. The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to remodel and use the old SuperAmerica site on 169/212 and Highway 101 in southern Chanhassen. The applicant proposed to clean up the site and remodel the building and make it attractive. As a condition of approval they will be installing landscape around the.., and clearing out impervious surface in Highway 169 right-of-way. Staff is recommending approval of the conditional use permit and site plan subject to the conditions in the staff report. I'd be happy to answer any questions you might have. Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Any questions for staff'? Is the applicant here tonight? Would you like to present to Council? James Olson: Good evening Mayor and Council members. I've had a bad hair day with the snow. I'm proposing the sale of automobiles at this site. I've driven by it. I live in Eden Prairie and I've driven by it for the last 5 years and seen it's basically been a dumping zone. I have in the last over probably 30 day period have gone down and cleaned it up and about every weekend I go and there's more trash. I keep cleaning and cleaning. We're inside trying to renovate the building now. I have talked to Bob. We've gone over some plans to put some shrubbery and plants and some trees and so on to make it aesthetically look a little bit better. I've been in the automobile business for 20 years so I understand and it's more of a reflection of myself the way that the business will look and be presented so I would like to you know, make it look nice. There's kind of a grayish awning around the building. I'm going to paint that. That will be painted kind of a jade green with kind of an almond colored lettering and so on. It's going to look a lot better than what it is now and that's about all I have to say. Mayor Mancino: Great, thank you. Is this a business that you're going to be there and? 29 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 James Olson: Yes. Mayor Mancino: I mean this has nothing, this kind of. What are going to be your hours of operation? James Olson: From 9:00 until 9:00. Mayor Mancino: Okay. And is there enough lighting there for you for people to see the area? I went and I didn't see, is there pole lighting out in the parking area? James Olson: There is a pole lighting and then what was there, when it was a SuperAmerica was a canopy lighting. There is lighting. I've talked to electrical contractors and you now about doing lighting, pole lighting. Just what's existing in the ground already. They've been cut off I suppose when they took the tanks out of the property and there was pedestal poles for pole lighting there. They've been taken out so I'll have to... put the lighting back up and I just don't want to go through a lot of expense until I get the conditional use. Mayor Mancino: Okay. So you will be adding lighting. And you're going to be painting the mansard roof part of it? James Olson: Yes. Mayor Mancino: And the back part too? James Olson: Yes. I was down this weekend and pressure washed and got off all the loose paint and cleaned it and swept the leaves and cleaned around the area. I'm just waiting now for a warm day just to get it painted up there. Mayor Mancino: Okay. And you're going to be selling used cars? James Olson: Yes ma'am. Mayor Mancino: How many, how many used cars will you have on the lot? James Olson: I think we talked about 25 to 30. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Are the cars that are down there now, that are parked there, are they? James Olson: No. Some people have been putting them there and I see up the block there's cars sitting all over with signs on them so. I'm not really utilizing it right now so I didn't really say anything to too many people right now. Mayor Mancino: Good. Any other questions for the applicant? Okay. Councilman Berquist: I'm just curious about the traffic egress and ingress from 169. Mayor Mancino: Yeah. I could not get out of it going west. I was down there on Sunday and going east was okay but getting onto that westbound lane, it's hard. 30 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 James Olson: That was a concern of mine too. I guess we'll just have to kind of play it by ear and hopefully the business will, you know people will go by and come back later in the day when it isn't so busy, you know if they see something that they would like to stop and see. But that was a big concern of ours is the traffic and so on. I know the fella across the street, I know the guy who had the one across the street years ago and he had that problem and so on but we'll just have to kind of deal with it. Mayor Mancino: Bob, does MnDot have any concerns? Bob Generous: They're conditioned... Mayor Mancino: Well I'm more concerned about is a business. How that will affect you. James Olson: Well hopefully we'll put a nice enough product that people will come in there. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Councilman Senn: I'll move approval. I think it's great to get that thing cleaned up and wish you well. James Olson: Thank you. Councilman Mason: I'll second that. I agree. Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve Conditional Use Permit/t97-4 and Site Plan/t97-13 for Southwest Auto Brokers at 615 Flying Cloud Drive, plans prepared by Curiskis Architects, Inc., dated 7/21/97, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall comply with Section 20-291 of the City Code. 2. The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City and provide the necessary security as required by the agreement. 3. The applicant shall install site landscaping as shown on Landscape Plan prepared by Curiskis Architects, Inc., dated 8/14/97. 4. Overstory species from the City's Approved Tree list be used. Shrubs shall also be chosen from the City's list. 5. Revise site plans as follows: Narrow both driveways accesses onto Trunk Highway 169 to 30 feet wide. Reduce mm around tabs 5 feet at each end of the parking lot. Add erosion control silt fence at the southwest and southeast comers of the parking lot approximately 10 feet from each comer. 6. The applicant and/or property owner shall supply the City's Building Official with maintenance and pumping records of the septic system every two years. 7. The applicant shall be responsible for obtaining and complying with any and all permits from MnDot for construction within Trunk Highway 169 right-of-way. The applicant shall comply with the conditions in the letter from Scott Peters to Robert Generous dated September 8, 1997. 31 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 The applicant shall restore the drainage pattern to previous conditions. This work includes re- grading and restoring the rock swale on the south edge of the property, remove trash obstructions from comer drainage points and construct rip rap swale from parking lot to natural ditch. The applicant shall agree to establish a wetland buffer zone along the south property line. In creating the buffer zone the applicant will agree to allow natural vegetation to grow, agree to keep all business, storage and maintenance activities out of the buffer area. Wetland buffer areas shall be identified in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. 10. Provide proof of septic tank pumping by a licensed pumper to the City. This must be done before the building is occupied. 11. Provide ties for the septic tanks, pump tank and distribution box. This must be done before the building is occupied. 12. Revise the proposed site plan to provide the correct accessible parking. This should be done before Council approval. 13. A separate sign permit shall be required for all signage to be installed on site. All voted in favor and the motion carried. CONSIDER REQUEST FOR EXTENSION TO DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT FOR HALLA GREAT PLAINS ADDITION~ PROJECT 95-13. Dave Hempel: Mayor, City Council members. Staff has received a request from the developers, Don and Sandy Halla for a 2 year extension to the development contract with all the remaining public improvements. The City approved construction plans and development contract for Halla Great Plains Estates on October 23, 1995. The plans that were approved were basically broken out in a 3 to 4 different phases. The first phase was what's constructed out there today. 9 out of the 34 lots are being serviced through this first phase. The development contract does allow the developer to request an extension of time from the City. If an extension is granted, it should be conditioned upon the developer updating a security to reflect cost increase and extended completion date. To date only Halla Nursery Drive, Raspberry Hill and Delphinium. Mayor Mancino: Delphinium. Dave Hempel: Need help there. Has been constructed. Councilman Mason: It's those sinuses. Dave Hempel: The City holds a letter of credit in the amount of $562,755.00 to guarantee completion of the remaining public improvements. The letter of credit is scheduled to expire on November 17, 1997. Given that the construction costs increase annually, staff recommends that the letter of credit be raised approximately 7% to cover inflationary construction costs. Staff is in support of granting the extension for 2 years to complete the remaining improvements. However recommend no further extensions be permitted in the future. Staff is recommending approval of a 2 year extension contingent upon the conditions listed in 32 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 the staff report. And along with three other conditions that were submitted to you by a memo to you tonight including the construction hours, noise amplification and development signs. Mayor Mancino: Oh, so you just bring it up to what our existing development contracts have in as standard language now? Dave Hempel: That's correct. Mayor Mancino: Which is to everyone. There are a couple questions. Number one. The developer shall extend the letter of credit until. When do they have to extend that letter of credit? Within the next 30 days or is that? Dave Hempel: We do send out written notification 30 days typically in advance of the letter of credit expiring so they can work with the bank in extending their letter of credit and get us the proper documents in time. Mayor Mancino: Okay. So they have 30 days until they get that letter to extend the letter of credit. What about number 2? The applicant shall submit for review and approval by the City of Council revised grading plan incorporating the new berms. You said they're already there? Dave Hempel: That's correct. The additional fill material was generated through the first phase. Didn't exactly have a home for it and it needed to get off one of the lots that was going to be built on and the berms were created in the future phase that were not authorized or approved in any construction plans. Mayor Mancino: And when do you want to see this revised grading plan? By when? I want a date on this. Dave Hempel: I know the applicant's engineer is working on this. I've had some telephone conversations with him on it. I suspect to see some plans before certainly next week or so. Maybe Mr. Halla can update us on the status of that as well. Mayor Mancino: Great. So if we put in a date of November 15th and...by November 15th, okay. And again, the applicant shall submit a check for $300.00 to cover administration fees for considering this. Again, when is that payable and due? Dave Hempel: That would be with the granting, or giving him a letter or a copy of the resolution whereby the City extends the development contract for another 2 years. Mayor Mancino: Okay. All those 3 things have to be in place before we will grant the extension. Dave Hempel: Correct. Mayor Mancino: You have to have the revised grading plan. You have to have, okay. Thank you. Is the applicant here and would you like to come up in front of the Council? Don Halla: Thank you Your Honor, members of Council. City staff. The only thing that I have to say is with reference to the berm. We had to get the soil off the site and put it in what I think Dave would say is an acceptable spot. A lot of that soil is going to have to be reused again. It can be shown as a berm but 33 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 right now they're running into shortages on other lots where they dig that soil back into so I think it's going to be a. Mayor Mancino: So this is a temporary berm? Don Halla: Really a temporary berm to get it off the site that it needed to come off of. It was put in in a place that it could be permanent but as I think Dave would agree, it was put in a good spot if it was permanent but it really is temporary because I can see right now many loads are going to have to come off possibly for two building permits that are being considered at this point. Mayor Mancino: Okay. And Dave, would you like to respond to that? Dave Hempel: Yeah, just a comment to that affect. Area residents adjacent to this development see the berms now and may like it from a privacy standpoint. Future property owners that buy into Mr. Halla's development see the berms. Think they're a permanent amenity and then all of a sudden they go away. You may get some feedback on that I guess. If there's a way, I can certainly put it in a development contract or on the grading plans that they are intended to be temporary berms. To be removed. We can certainly work that out too. There is one adjacent property owner that did call me on one of the berms that was created due to the steepness of the slopes. I indicated that that would be resolved eventually when we came to approval of the grading plans to maintain the 3:1 slopes vegetation. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Don Halla: Once it gets to a permanent stage, there'd be no problem whatsoever. Mayor Mancino: Okay. How's the development going? Don Halla: Well, actually we have one home in, which was in the Parade of Homes. We have another one which I guess we've been back and forth with the City quite a while, for a month. Now he doesn't even know if he wants to build it and that's what kind of known as the Gabbert Home. Mayor Mancino: Oh sure. Don Halla: Because of delays. He doesn't know whether he can get it done in time any, so that's a little up in the air. He really said he put it on hold as of Friday. Results with that I don't know exactly what he's going to do with it. We have another party that has additional, they have to get the permit from the City and frankly they're trying to get it done instantly so they could get their house in the ground yet this fall. That's been in fully for a week. I know the septic site was in for about 3 weeks and was just looked at today. If anything I'd say I'd appreciate it if the City would expedite trying to help these people through instead of dragging things on. I think they have everything in that the City needs from both of them but the process is defeating them in some cases, is the attitudes that I've received back from the contractor and from the other party. Sorry to say that. Mayor Mancino: Well we like to know that. We always like to know when we're doing well and when we have places to work on so that's fine. Appreciate you're telling us. Any other questions for Mr. Halla? Okay, thank you. Comments from any Council member? Then may I have a motion please. 34 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 Councilman Senn: How do we deal with the berm thing? I agree with David's comments on that. I know it's going to erupt later. Mayor Mancino: Well you said once you get them up at the end they will be permanent so you will have permanent berms there at the end of the project, correct? Don Halla: ... fill.., according to each one. I don't know that exactly at this point in time.., other material could be put in it's place. Mayor Mancino: But you want to keep it temporary. You want to keep the berm. Don Halla: The berm stays temporary.., because no matter how high people build their homes, whether they're walkouts or. Mayor Mancino: Well I think Mr. Halla has to deal with that with the people who buy in his subdivision. Don Ashworth: I believe the City Attorney might want to address this issue. Roger Knutson: This is, the grading plan is part of the development contract and once you sign off on it, it's got to stay that way until they come back and get approval from you to change it. So if you want those berms to be temporary, then you should say so clearly. Otherwise, if the grading plan shows them in, they've got to stay there. And that should be reflected in the development contract so we could just do, staff could just do a quick addendum to the development contract to get it recorded against the property. So no matter what way you decide it, people will know what they're buying. There's no confusion about it. Mayor Mancino: So do you have any problem putting them in as permanent and making sure that you will have berms there? Don Halla: I guess there.., city engineer feels there'd be enough soil... Mayor Mancino: Okay. Okay. Councilman Senn: Don't have a good solution. What do we do? Approve it and basically say that. Councilman Berquist: Why not approve it based on the engineering, the development contract changing to reflect temporary berms. Mayor Mancino: So approve it as they are permanent. Councilman Berquist: Approve them as temporary and then as the project matures, the decision is made whether to convert them to permanent. Whether or not they. Councilman Engel: When it's built out. Councilman Berquist: No, as it builds out. Councilman Senn: Well the thing that disturbs me here is, I mean normally we do kind of like one year extensions. We're doing a two year extension. So I mean effectively whatever we put in there now we live 35 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 with for two years. And if those go in basically and sit there for two years, I think we're going to pay hell to take them out. How's that? Councilman Berquist: Well they're not part of the original development contract. So if they're identified as temporary and he comes to hand the project over, they're there. He takes them out or these don't come into the public domain. Councilman Senn: So they're not part of the current grading plan? Dave Hempel: Correct. Councilman Senn: Okay. Mayor Mancino: They're an addition but the other point that Dave was making is that people buy on that site or near that site thinking that those berms are going to stay. I mean who would take out the berm later? Councilman Berquist: But that's why they're called temporary on the development plat. Mayor Mancino: But the people who buy don't know that. Councilman Berquist: Well that's his problem. Councilman Senn: We could put.., signs along the highway. Now you see it, now you don't. Roger Knutson: Mayor? I'm repeating myself a little bit but if you want to put people on notice, we can do a simple addendum to the development agreement that just says that. They're temporary, or we don't know. Whatever you want. Councilman Engel: Can't we just put a simple, like you say addendum that says these berms are temporary and they may become permanent. Roger Knutson: But there's no guarantee. Councilman Engel: There's no definitive position on it. Roger Knutson: They may be taken out at the developer's discretion or whoever. Councilman Engel: ... finish the project they decide... Roger Knutson: That way if someone purchases and if they read the development contract. Underscore and, which is recorded against the title of the property, but I don't guarantee what people read. They should know. It doesn't mean they will. Councilman Senn: Okay. How about move approval then with the stipulation that that be added to the development contract if they are temporary and go from there I guess. Councilman Mason: Second. 36 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve a two year extension to the Development Contract for Halla Great Plains Estates contingent upon the following: The developer shall extend the letter of credit until November 17, 1999 and increase the amount to $602,148.00. The applicant shall submit for review and approval by the City Council a revised grading plan incorporating the new berms, and whether the berms are temporary or permanent. The applicant shall submit a check for $300.00 to cover administration fees for considering this extension and review of the revised grading plan. The development contract be brought into compliance regarding construction hours, noise amplification and development signs. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Mayor Mancino: And all you have to do is promise me Mr. Halla that when they, they can't come and complain to the City Council if the berms go down. Councilman Senn: When they do we're going to stand Don right up there. Mayor Mancino: We're going to put you right on the hot seat and we're going to read the development contract and your Minutes. You're up there. Okay. Don Halla: Thank you. Mayor Mancino: Be careful of the snow. I know. I'm not ready. CONSIDER ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY FOR A WATER TOWER~ LOCATED EAST OF HIGHWAY 41~ WRASE PROPERTY. Don Ashworth: I had anticipated presenting this item when literally most of the water issues would be presented by the engineer in November. Would then be seeking authorization to move ahead with the plans and specifications for the tower itself and some of the trunk lines in going through the necessity to have the tower, etc. I was contacted by the Wrase's and they would like to take and see this move ahead. It is the ideal site for the tower itself. Accordingly we did have an appraisal for the property. That appraisal amount was put into the form of a contract that I believe I made a copy of for the City Council. And again the amount in there is exactly the same as the appraisal that we received. We're recommending that the City Council authorize executing that contract. The cost would be paid through partial resale of a part of the property. Right now Steiner is looking to the south 100 feet with about 38,000 square feet. At basically the same cost per square foot that the City paid the Wrase property. I believe is $63.00 a square foot. Somewhere in that range. About $120,000.00. And the remaining city cost would be paid as a part of the TIF district the City Council does have in place and that is a valid expense and use of TIF dollars. Again, staff is recommending approval of authorizing the contract as presented. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Before we get into comments or questions. Mr. Wrase, would you like to come in and speak to the Council? Rich, do you have anything to say to the Council on this? Okay. 37 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 Don Ashworth: Oh, I should note in there that part of that contract does look to, and again it's going to be solely at our discretion. Using the older structure on the property potentially for some type of a public use. I know the Park and Recreation has looked at that. Members of our staff have been through the home and tell me that it's a marvelous structure for it's age. I believe, do you know the age on that? Wasn't that like the 1860 or something? It is quite an old structure. There could be the possibility of moving that close to the O'Shaughnessy property or kind of on the knoll on the Singer property overlooking that wetland area and potentially be used as an interpretative center at some time. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Councilman Senn: Mayor, questions. Mayor Mancino: Questions. Councilman Senn: Don if we, I think we should act on this tonight and get Wrase's squared away because I don't think we should hang them up any longer but do we need to do kind of like the second step of that. Can't we just act to simply purchase the property tonight and then undertake a discussion of you know, how we want to see and use the property and if we do want to sell a portion off to Steiner. And if so, how we're going to sell it off to them, etc. Don Ashworth: Sure. I did not mean to link those but I thought that if I did not make the Council aware that there was a potential purchaser for part of the property, that it might slow it down. Councilman Senn: I'd like to see us, you know like I say, purchase and get Wrase's taken care of. But at the same time I'd really like us to maybe in work session undertake a discussion of how we want to approach it from there as far as the long term use and sale and whatever of the parcel so, I'd even move to that effect. Councilman Mason: I'd be happy to second it. Mayor Mancino: Is there any questions prior to the, while it has been moved and seconded. Any discussion? Councilman Berquist: Not that I'm trying to hold up, nothing that's going to hold up the vote. I'd just like to see the appraisal and what not. I'm not going to hold up the vote. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to authorize purchasing the Wrase property as submitted by staff. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Councilman Senn: Just a follow up, Don. Is there an urgency on that with Steiner so if there is, we should probably get it on a? Don Ashworth: No, it's the other way around. I put a lot of pressure on him last week to try to get some commitment back to us because I had anticipated that you might want to see slowing down Wrase's until you knew exactly what we could resale this for. So no, there's not an urgency. 38 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 Councilman Senn: Okay, good. Mayor Mancino: So everything should happen, what? Next couple weeks? Don Ashworth: Oh, I'd say sooner than that. I think the document in fact calls for closing, I don't have mine in front of me. But. Roger Knutson: Next week or so. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Rich, what's your mom going to be doing? Rich Wrase's statement was not picked up by the microphone. Mayor Mancino: In the area? Close by. Rich Wrase: She's lived in Chanhassen all her life also you know. Mayor Mancino: You're letting her go to another city? But you'll still be close. Rich Wrase: Yes...miles south on TH 41 from her old place so... Mayor Mancino: Good. And when will she be moving? ... Okay, good. Thanks. Councilman Mason: I do like, I do want to pursue the use, I mean because I know that is such a fine structure. Pursue the city using that in some way. I mean I'm not saying that we absolutely have to. I just want to make sure we do pursue that because that would be kind of a nice touch. Mayor Mancino: Is there any place in particular that you see it going? Or that she does? Your family does? ... Okay, thank you. CONSIDER DISCONTINUANCE OF THE LAKE ANN PARK AND SOUTH LOTUS LAKE PARK GATE ATTENDANT PROGRAMS. Councilman Mason: I'd like to know how you and Don really feel about discontinuing this program. Todd Hoffman: Thank you Mayor, members of the City Council. The gate attendant program happens to be one of my favorite programs here at the City because some 11 years ago when I was hired. Councilman Senn: To keep going or be discontinued? Todd Hoffman: Just fond memories. When I was hired I found myself in charge of that program. Councilman Senn: You were a gate attendant? Todd Hoffman: Hiring gate attendants at a wage higher than my own. So the gate attendants were the reason for my first raise here at the City of Chanhassen so... 39 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 Mayor Mancino: And you want to let them go? Todd Hoffman: Yes we do. The gate attendant program has been around for some 20 years at Lake Ann Park. The thought goes that originally it was here to pay for the lifeguards. The lifeguards have obviously elevated in cost over the years. We now have a lifeguarding program of some $18,000.00 per year on a contractual basis with Minnetonka Community Services. There's also talk of discontinuing that programs. On a national trend, lifeguards are going away from beaches. But again, that's a separate issue. Year in and year out we see ourselves hovering around that $15,000.00 in annual revenues. $10,000.00 in expenditures and those are hard costs. Then we add in Gary's time, which I talked about. And then Don added accounting and the cost that you're putting into counting that money on a daily basis and then again some of the other issues such as having youth employees of our community with $500.00, $600.00, $800.00 in cash alone at the gate house on evening, week nights and weekends, which presents a safety hazard as well. This is the second year in a row that the Park and Recreation Commission and staff is recommending that the City discontinue this program. The Park Commission thought it was a nice touch in view of the $4.9 million bond referendum, which was approved in June. People do not like paying to use their city park. It is not a standard approach to city parks. If you go to a county systems or the state systems, you see charging throughout the State but there are few, very few city parks which charge a gate entrance fee. So if you need any more reasons, I'll continue on but to get to the point. Again, for the second year running, the Park and Recreation Commission recommends the City Council discontinue not only Lake Ann gate program but the South Lotus Lake gate program as well. Currently we do not have a gate house at Lake Ann. We would have to go ahead and reconstruct that. Run utilities and pay those costs. And the gate house at South Lotus Lake was installed really over fears of what would happen when the public boat access was constructed and. The South Lotus Lake boat access has proved to be a good neighbor and people are quite pleased with how it's operating so we feel it's a good time to let these programs fade off into the distance. Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you. Any questions for staff? Councilman Senn. Councilman Senn: Not a question. Mayor Mancino: A motion. Councilman Senn: No. I would like to propose an alternative. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Councilman Senn: I would like to propose the alternative that we issue, this is something another city's doing by the way so it's not totally an originally thought here. Mayor Mancino: You're not re-inventing the wheel. Councilman Senn: Not re-inventing the wheel. But I would like to see us issue two stickers to each household in Chanhassen so they can use their parks free. Free of charge and I would like to put up a sign at Lake Ann... stickers on the cars and say that the stickers are available in City Hall during normal business hours to purchase at whatever desk. And will be available on a charge basis to non-residents. Mayor Mancino: Excuse me, and who is going to, I'm sorry, police the stickers? I mean don't we have to. 40 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 Councilman Senn: The additional community service police officer that we hired for recreational purposes. Mayor Mancino: Do we have enough personnel to go through a park and see if everybody has a sticker on it or not? What I'm wondering is if we do something like this, can we really execute it? Can we really enforce it? Todd Hoffman: They do not enforce it to date. They rely on the gate. In absence of the gate we would have to ask the Public Safety Director if he thought that was. Councilman Senn: The City that uses this system has found that the system is predominantly self policing and when, and effectively the reason it is self policing is yeah, they do drive through once in a while and they really don't pay a whole lot of attention to it except you know if they start noticing that there's a build up of abuse or whatever. I mean effectively any non-resident can buy an annual, I mean the sticker's an annual thing. I'm not talking about a daily thing. And I mean they can buy an annual one and then use it so I mean if they're a non-resident and they're coming for softball or whatever, I mean all they have to do is come in, buy a sticker and they're all set. It's pretty user friendly. I mean you know in relationship to that, and it allows us to recover you know some of the costs and stuff, which we should be recovering for the heavy non-resident use in that park and stuff so that's, at least what I found from the other city. Councilman Mason: I guess to take off on that, you could even make it even a little easier for non- residents. I mean example, at all the Hennepin County parks, you can actually fill out a thing from there and mail it in with your check and then the County will mail you the sticker. So you wouldn't even have to go to City Hall for that. I think there's some merit to that. It's worth taking a look at. Mayor Mancino: Excuse me, I was coughing. I just have one question because we used to, when I lived in Deephaven, you'd go and be able to park at the Deephaven beaches if you had your city sticker. And if you didn't, you know you needed to buy one. So I do know of other cities so are you saying that we should print stickers for every resident in Chanhassen and mail those to them so they can put them on their car? Councilman Senn: Yeah. I mean we could make it actually part of the, well.., separate mailing. Make it part of the city newsletter or something and send it out to them. I'm not talking about a complicated, expensive sticker. I mean the City that does this, it's a very inexpensive, almost paper like sticker with some adhesive on it that just wham, it goes on the window. It's only an annual sticker so I mean it's, you know it's not something they're putting a lot of cost into. Mayor Mancino: Todd, what are your thoughts? Todd Hoffman: There's a variety of reasons we're looking at discontinuing the program. One of those is administrative and duties that accompany this. If you look back at the income received through non- residents, $1,500.00-$1,800.00. $2,000.00 per year. Many non-residents, by policy, are allowed in free presently. It will add some confusion. Any youth program, be it swimming lessons, baseball, soccer, and they're non-residents, they're allowed in free. The only non-residents who are charged are those heading directly for the beach. And so if you're talking about $1,500.00-$2,000.00 in revenue, again we will consume that in administrative costs issuing stickers. Doing the postage. Mailing. Booking that money, etc, etc. We're not talking big dollars and I think we would add some confusion to the fact that we already let you know hundreds and hundreds of non-residents annually into the park free by policy, and that is by policy due to the City Council previously taking action to charge all those people and then having a riot on their hand when those people come in and say, you know you drive over to our park and your kids come up 41 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 to our park and they're playing free and we're coming down to your park to play on your ballfields and we're not interested in paying. Mayor Mancino: Well weren't you also concerned about grandparents who come to the park and want to watch their kids play baseball or soccer. Todd Hoffman: They're getting in free. Mayor Mancino: And they aren't residents necessarily. Councilman Mason: Well I would move to discontinue the Lake Ann Park and South Lotus Lake Park gate attendant programs and I do think this is a discussion worth, if we get a free moment at a work session, just look at some pros and cons of Mark's suggestion. Councilman Engel: Yeah, if we're going to put that kind of sticker out, it's going to add administrative costs. You really have to look at wiping out those exemptions. Councilman Senn: That's inherent in it. Councilman Engel: Yeah, we can't do it without wiping out those exemptions and if we do that, I want to hear a little bit more about that before we do that right now. Mayor Mancino: First let's go with Mike's motion. Councilman Senn: I'll second it. Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Senn seconded to approve discontinuing the Lake Ann Park and South Lotus Lake Gate Attendant programs. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Mayor Mancino: And that might be something to investigate. That proposal or something about it Todd with the Park and Rec and just get their comments and recommendations. Todd Hoffman: Okay. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS: Councilman Mason: Shrubs on Minnewashta Parkway. Charles is not here. He's aware of it. One of the residents, Craig Lamb and I have been talking back and forth and trying to get to the bottom of it. As you will recall, all of this happened the year of the '91 Halloween extravaganza, which it's here. At any rate, there's nothing contentious here. Mr. Lamb just wants something clarified. My understanding is that shrubs were planted, oh you are here. I'm sorry. Do you want to talk? Sure. I didn't realize you were going to be here tonight. Good. I'm glad you made it. Craig Lamb. Thank you. My name's Craig Lamb. I live on 7514-77th Street, which is about the third lot in on the Parkway coming from Highway 5. When the parkway was widened, the shrubs were replaced in the fall of '94. Very late in the fall. They died over the winter partially due to the late planting. Partially due to the way the snow was plowed. They were replanted again by the landscape company in the fall of '95, so I lived through the dead one through the summer of '95. During July of '96 1 contacted Charles 42 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 Folch. He told me that replanting was scheduled, but it was under litigation with the landscaping company. So I just let the, when it got to be fall I thought there was no sense in pursuing it now because they'll just die again, getting late planted. Starting in early May of '97, of this year, I left numerous messages for Mr. Folch without getting a hold of him. The exact date of when I finally got ahold of him was probably June or July. We had a conversation that didn't end very well, or whatever because I basically was told that the landscaping company was bankrupt. The City was not responsible for it. There was no budget for it and that's where it was left. That's when I, about two months later after fuming for a while, I got a hold of Mr. Mason and that's where it's at today or whatever but. So for, since fall of '94 I've been without any shrubs protecting my yard from the parkway, which were removed at the time it was widened and that was the original agreement is that some kind of shrub line would be replaced to match my existing ones to replace the ones, the trees and the shrubs that were removed. Mayor Mancino: And you expected them to stay living? No, I'm just kidding. Craig Lamb: That would have been sure nice. Councilman Senn: Do you know why they're dying? Craig Lamb: I can only make assumptions. I think they were planted way too late. Mayor Mancino: It sounds like it. Craig Lamb: And they had sat down on the Parkway for probably 3-4 weeks just bundled there. Mayor Mancino: Drying out. Craig Lamb: Yeah. And the second time they were planted again in the fall so they've never had a summer to try and grow. Mayor Mancino: So they've never really established themselves. Craig Lamb: No. They've never developed root systems. The other contributing factor to it is that the parkway is plowed onto the sidewalk. The sidewalk is then plowed on top of the shrubs. Mayor Mancino: Are they coniferous or what kind of shrubs are they? Well, are they lilacs? A green. Craig Lamb: Evergreen shrubs. Mayor Mancino: Oh evergreen, okay. Yeah, then that would be a problem. Craig Lamb: Yeah, so I mean it never has a chance to establish and like I said, the parkway gets plowed. The sidewalk gets plowed and it all ends up on top of that. Mayor Mancino: Well and they're probably not salt tolerant. It wouldn't matter what kind of evergreens you put. How did yours stay living prior to that? Were yours the same kind? 43 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 Craig Lamb: No, what was there was lilac bushes and a cottonwood tree and on the very end, what is left there, there are 4 or 5 of the evergreen type shrub. The flat leaf ones that are now probably 12 to 15 feet tall that survived because they were far enough away from the parkway at the time. Mayor Mancino: Well it sounds to me as if the wrong kind of shrub was planted there to begin with. Craig Lamb: Trying to match what was existing. The other problem that I've come across is, our house has been listed since May and over 50% of the people looking at the house, or the realtors have made a comment about the shrub line and/or the parkway and had the shrubs grown when they were planted, we would have had a natural barrier there so that would not be a contention so it's created a hardship there too and I'm not going to say it's prevented the sale of the house but it sure hasn't helped anything. So I'm just looking for some kind of help that something be planted there, and maybe it's not this fall but some kind of guarantee that I can give whoever maybe would purchase, that a resolution is to rectify something. Mayor Mancino: We'll do a site visit and get back to you. Craig Lamb: Appreciate that. Thank you. Don Ashworth: Would you make sure.., has your name and address. Craig Lamb: ... idea of the time frame. Mayor Mancino: Well we're going to have to get out there soon, at least to make an analysis and what kind of shrubs should go in there and then get back to you in the next month. Councilman Senn: Did Charles happen to mention to you whether the landscaper's bond had been released or not? Craig Lamb: I think was released after the second planting. Councilman Mason: Yeah, and I believe see, that's one of the whole issues here because they went. Councilman Senn: And they went belly up after that? Craig Lamb: That I'm not sure but I think that's what he said. That it was released after the second planting. Todd Hoffman: Craig, do you think a tree spade can get into that location? A tree spade on a big truck. Craig Lamb: Oh, I don't think you'd need one. I mean they're 2 foot shrubs that are, they planted them and dug them with shovels. There's 11 of them. Mayor Mancino: Balled and burlap, couple gallon. Craig Lamb: Yeah. There's 11 of them there. 5 of them are dead. The other 6, maybe. Councilman Senn: Todd, what are you thinking of? Something we're moving or what? 44 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 Todd Hoffman: Yeah, we've moving 100 trees this fall with a tree spade out of the Erhart Farm at $27.00- $35.00 a tree. 8 to 10 foot trees. Mayor Mancino: But what I'm concerned about, and if we can check with Jill, is to put again coniferous trees there that are not salt tolerant and get all that salt from the street, it's just going to happen again or else you're going to get the street side that's all burned out and looks terrible. Craig Lamb: All the 14 foot ones that are there now, from about 6 foot down are already experiencing that. Mayor Mancino: Well it's either because they're not salt tolerant or you have deer in the area. Councilman Senn: No pine is good salt tolerant but deciduous are much, much better in terms of salt tolerance. Craig Lamb: Well that's the thing is that what was planted does not match I mean. Councilman Senn: But you're talking about deciduous, aren't you? Mayor Mancino: No, coniferous. They're all coniferous. Todd Hoffman: ... pine trees. We've moving some deciduous out of the tree farm as well. We've got an opportunity there. You're not going to chase this contractor down so... get it handled, we might as well handle it. Councilman Senn: How about if we do pursue that and plant a combination of the two and see what we can do. I mean we don't. Mayor Mancino: No, no, excuse me. The coniferous just won't work. I mean you've got to do deciduous. Councilman Senn: What if you staggered them? What I'm saying is, if you planted some of both and staggered them back and forth so the coniferous are further away from the area that he's talking about it might. Craig Lamb: ... quite a ways into the lot then probably because the way that they blow that, that snow is probably ends up maybe 10 feet into from the sidewalk because of the, you're piling it twice. Councilman Senn: I'll talk with Charles. Todd Hoffman: What's your number? What's your phone number? Mayor Mancino: ... Thank you very much for coming .... Okay, let's go back to the consent agenda. CONSENT AGENDA; L. APPROVAL OF CONTRACTS FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES; REFERENDUM PARK AND TRAIL PROJECTS. 45 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 Councilman Senn: On (1), I guess I have quite a number of questions because I tried to catch Todd. He was out of the office today. I'd really like to look at the proposals from the different, I don't know what you'd call them. Proposees or. Todd Hoffman: Firms. Councilman Senn: Firms and stuff and I would like to not only see the scope submitted by each but the numbers submitted by each and would like to, I think that will answer a lot of my questions but that information wasn't readily available before tonight so I'd prefer just to table this, do that and bring it back if we could. Mayor Mancino: Is that a problem for you with the timing? Todd Hoffman: It tightens up our schedule. I mean we're ready to kick off with community meetings, etc, etc, but I want everyone to be comfortable. The process was quite extensive. We have all of the proposals are here. I'm pleased to let you know that those who are most competitive in their point ranking were also the most competitive in pricing by a substantial margin so these folks are the most reasonably priced. But again I'd like to present Councilman Senn with all the information that he'd like to see. Again their time frames, we will start having community meetings. Each one of these projects will have a community organization behind it preparing design schematics, etc, etc and two weeks is time we'd like to have but. Mayor Mancino: Well we could certainly, if Councilman Senn would be agreeable to this, put it on the work session agenda and between now and then, Councilman Senn could ask you the questions. Get the information he needs. Councilman Senn: That'd be fine. No problem. Mayor Mancino: Would you be agreeable to that? Councilman Senn: Yeah, just table it til the work session. Councilman Mason: Second. Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to table approval of contracts for professional services for the Park and Trail Referendum projects until the next City Council work session. All voted in favor and the motion carried. O. ADOPT 1994 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE FEE SCHEDULE. Councilman Senn: 1(o). I mean we've talked about that in work sessions probably ad nausea at this point. I pulled it for the reason that I have no problems raising the base fee to the '94 level, okay. Mayor Mancino: The UBC? Councilman Senn: Yes. The problem I have is I'm not going, and you know it's just my opinion. I'm not going to vote to do that unless we make it effectively contingent upon making sure that the balance of our fees in relationship to building or in some type of line with an average or range rather than above or top of the pack so to speak. And I know we've talked about plumbing and we've talked about HVAC and stuff 46 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 but basically you know, it's one of those things. Yeah, we can just kind of put it off. The problem is if we put it off, I don't think we're ever going to get done and I know we want to raise this to produce the additional revenue and everybody else is already charging the '94 rate so again I have no problem with that. But again I don't want to throw it way out of whack, especially with people that have to buy the multiple permits. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Well I would like to move that we go ahead and approve the UBC 1994 rates and that we ask Steve to come back and show us what the average rates are for plumbing and for, is it heating? And we decide that at a different time. To me the two aren't predicated one on the other. I think that we do need to get up to date and do the 1994 for UBC and go ahead with that and we can certainly, then I feel comfortable taking a look at the other two. Councilman Mason: I'll second that. Resolution #97-85: Mayor Mancino moved, Councilman Mason seconded to adopt the 1994 Uniform Building Code Fee Schedule and ask for further information to be brought back later regarding plumbing and HVAC. All voted in favor, except Councilman Senn who opposed, and the motion carried. Councilman Senn: The second part of that though is I assume we're still going to pursue and undertake the discussion of the stacking levels which is not inherent just because we're raising the increases, correct? Mayor Mancino: Correct. Councilman Senn: Okay. ADMINISTRATIVE SECTION DISCUSSION. Mayor Mancino: I will start out by making a few comments on number one. Is the memo from SRF Consulting Group and that is the newsletter that they have drafted kind of a first draft. A couple things. Number one, one of the things that I was expecting to see at this time, prior to the newsletter, was an overall project plan that we as a City Council were going to look at. Don't know if Jim Grube, Don was going to do that for us. I don't know if it's something SRF was going to do but an overall project plan for TH 101. So I would still like to see that. We wanted to be able to have some comments on it when they were at our work session. Secondly, the newsletter is obviously what it describes as the process. There's really no content in it. There's really no dates. So what I would like to see added to the newsletter, and I can put this in memo form and be more specific is, they've given us four processes here. Gathering the information, traffic analysis, preliminary roadway layout and the EAW. I'd like to see dates associated with those so that people understand kind of timing. The only date they do give is gathering information will be done in the next four months. I'm assuming that's November, December, January, February. Then they give a very general, three paragraphs on public input. And again I would like to see a little bit more specific. At what point in the process really will there be public input. Otherwise, I thought the newsletter was good. It's a very good idea. Don Ashworth: As I put a note in there, I also have called in Hennepin County regarding schedule. This is pursuant to a question by Councilman Senn asking that they include a project schedule. You just referred to project plan. Is there a difference between project plan and project schedule? 47 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 Councilman Senn: Well Grube addressed that, I mean because we really pushed him on that issue. We wanted him to come up with a project plan before he went out to the neighborhoods. He has agreed to do that and he's agreed to bring that back to the Council for review before he takes it to any public meetings. But at the same time he said it was not developed now and would not be developed until they got further into the process. And if you read this, I mean it kind of suggests that saying they've got to effectively design a project they don't know yet quite you know, what it's going to be lane wise because of traffic, etc. I mean so he's left it kind of an open ended question but I think the thing we want to make sure of is whatever they come up with and however they come up with it, we want them to be in here talking to us first about it so we can provide some direction on it before it goes out to the public. The last thing we want to see have happen is that it go out to a public meeting and we don't even know what's going on, nor do we endorse it or endorse it's view to the public. Don Ashworth: So ifI ask him for a project schedule, I'm assuming that that, during this time we're going to be doing this this time, and doing that. And to answer yours then, within that time frame, then you want to make sure that let's say each one of those get presented to you first. Councilman Senn: Yeah, any step he is taking out to a public meeting needs to first be brought before the Council. And so we can provide him. Mayor Mancino: But when will the public meetings be? Councilman Senn: Pardon me? Mayor Mancino: And when will the public meetings be? Councilman Senn: Right, and I'm assuming when we require that we'll have a schedule of it. Don Ashworth: I apologize to the Council. This Highway 101 notification. It was beautiful. Vicky showed it to me and all of the lots we had are all in yellow but I forgot one thing. You put yellow into a Xerox machine. Councilman Mason: And guess what? It comes out white. Councilman Senn: Nancy's comments, I agree with that are fine. The other problem is that, I don't know where's the list come from? Don Ashworth: I just drew it. I took a map like this and I went like this. And I gave it to Vicky and I said make all those lots highlight and give me a list of all of the names, which she did and it was very pretty in yellow. Councilman Senn: There's something wrong with our system. Mayor Mancino: Why, are there more lots? Or less lots? Councilman Senn: It's leaving a number of people out. Including yours truly by the way. Don Ashworth: I... briefly look through this to see if I could see you. 48 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 Councilman Senn: No. It's missing me and both, 3 other people on my street. It's missing, well it's missing quite a number of people at least that I know of in three neighborhoods. Mayor Mancino: We might want to take another look at that, okay. Councilman Senn: So somehow or another we've got to get in sync with the system so everybody's getting notified. I can show you the ones I know and you can try to figure out what happened to them if you want me to. I can do this outside of this tonight. Mayor Mancino: Any other comments on that? Number two. Schedule of City Council work sessions. I think we've added a few things tonight. I just wanted to say that I do think that on October 20th we're going to prioritize requests and start developing a strategic plan. I have a feeling that that, the strategic plan may go into the next session with capital projects from all departments are reviewing those. So I think what really happens October 20th will actually go into November 3rd and what we are supposed to do for November 3rd will actually go into November 17th. So I just wanted to say I thought, I think that the budget process will take three more meetings so nobody's surprised. And if it doesn't, it doesn't but that's my feeling. Councilman Mason: Just so you know. One of those Mondays is conferences. I mean this comes up every November and I'll be sure to let you know because those are some pretty important meetings that I'd like to be a part of but. Mayor Mancino: Great, thank you. And is that something you can still attend but be a little late? Councilman Senn: You could put a sign up in your room, come see me at City Council. Councilman Mason: Actually, typically they're over around 8:00 or 8:30 so yeah, but that's. Mayor Mancino: Would you, and maybe that's you know we could move it a night or something. Councilman Mason: It just kind of hit me. I'll make a note to find out when conferences are and get back to you. Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Because I think these next three meetings are important. Councilman Mason: Absolutely. Mayor Mancino: So if we can all be here. Councilman Senn: I wanted to jump back, or are you still going down the line or were you? Mayor Mancino: I am. Do you want to go back to where? Councilman Senn: No, not back. I was down to the letter of Thomas H.J. Tomassen. Mayor Mancino: Okay, is there anything before that? That's my number three too. Oh my gosh, we're thinking alike. Okay, your letter. 49 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 Councilman Senn: Yes, letter. Mr. Ashworth. Letter to you from Mr. Tomassen. Is this the same fellow we talked about last time or is this a new letter? Mayor Mancino: How far down is it? Councilman Berquist: The gentleman about the utilities? Councilman Senn: Yeah. This is about the gentleman about the delinquent utilities. Don Ashworth: This is the same one. Councilman Senn: Oh okay. It is the same one. Did we do some follow-up on that or? Don Ashworth: I just haven't had a chance but I will take and, let's see. I will, I guess one of the problems I had was, I just, I really don't know what to do with the thing. I would like to be able to protect the City's interest which the only way you can assure that, if he goes into bankruptcy is to have certified it to the County. Councilman Berquist: How many dollars are we talking about? Don Ashworth: I had told you from before that it was a high $700.00 or $800.00 and that continues to be my recollection. Councilman Senn: I thought we were going to look at an alternative. Mayor Mancino: Some sort of a payment plan. Councilman Senn: Some type of a payment plan and agreement which allows us with his pre-agreed signature to put it on his tax roll should he declare bankruptcy, but in the meantime allows us to work out a payment schedule with him and if he wants to come in and appeal, you know some segment of it or whatever to the Council, he has the option to do that. Roger Knutson: Mayor, just so we're clear. If you enter into an agreement that says if you file bankruptcy we can certify it to taxes. Among the contracts that will be discharged in bankruptcy is that one. It won't get certified. Councilman Senn: So it won't? Roger Knutson: It can't do that effectively. Councilman Senn: So you have to actually file it before? Roger Knutson: Yes. Councilman Senn: It can't be dated before and filed after? Roger Knutson: Certified to taxes. It's just a contract. It can be discharged. 50 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 Councilman Senn: And if we certify it to his taxes there's no way we can work out a payment plan, correct? Roger Knutson: Just semi-annual. Councilman Senn: Catch-22, right. Roger Knutson: So what I'm saying is you can work out a payment plan but you just have to realize, there is potential that that won't get satisfied. I mean he could file. Don Ashworth: Maybe I could look at some alternative. You know you can certify the actual, I'll call it the principal amount type of thing and then work out something where he pay off what I'll call the interest and penalties...you lose it. It's not as bad as losing the principal. I honestly did think about this one several times because I knew that... I just couldn't come up with a good response. Councilman Senn: Could you talk to him and try that out? I mean in a sense of asking him if he would, you know effectively go with us on the basis that we do do the principal and then just make it his option whether he wants to set up a payment plan on the interest and penalties and/or make an appearance and appeal to the City Council. Don Ashworth: Something that you should realize is that he, he believes that the current penalties and interest are very arduous. Roger Knutson: He doesn't like them. Don Ashworth: Yes. And so I mean that's the other part of it. I'm not going to pay this because this just isn't right that you have such a ridiculous. Councilman Senn: Well, I don't want to get into the merits of that one way or the other but at the same time if the guy did lose his job, has been on tough times, I'm not looking to cram interest and penalties down his throat. That's my opinion but I mean I think it's more important that we recapture the principal and be protected on that. And maybe even forego that but I guess if we do that, I want to be, or I want to have somebody assure me and convince we're doing it for a real reason. Don Ashworth: I'll proceed on that basis. And hopefully tell what I came up with Monday night. Councilman Berquist: I don't like to confuse the issue but I would suggest a telephone call from you asking him what he would like to be able to... to get the thing cleared. Councilman Senn: Next one I had was Triax. How about you Nancy? Mayor Mancino: The next one I had was the next one. I just wanted to remind everyone that next Monday, October 27th is when we'll have a public hearing on the safety improvement projects from, on Highway 7 from TH 41 to east.., to St. Bonifacius. Now MnDot will be here to give a presentation on that, Don? Don Ashworth: I think the City Council, 6:30 p.m. on Monday, October 27th. Yes they will. 51 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 Mayor Mancino: Okay. So they will give a presentation. Then we will open it up for people who want to make comments, correct? Don Ashworth: I had the impression, oh City Council. I thought that this was one they were just. Mayor Mancino: No, they're going to have a public information open house but they said in this, it says that the public information open house, they really aren't even doing a presentation. They're just there to answer questions. I would think it would be wise for them to make a small presentation at our Council meeting. So just so they come with that expectation on City Council's part. That they will do some sort of a presentation and it would be very helpful to then be able to see it on the overhead or. Don Ashworth: Well this will make it easier because you had those other items with the park, whatever so, but it's definitely going to cut into our work session portion, budget. Mayor Mancino: No, this is, no. This is a regular City Council meeting. Don Ashworth: Oh this is the regular? Okay, never mind. Mayor Mancino: Okay. You go to Triax. I went to, oh. Councilman Senn. You represent us in the Southwest Metro Transit Commission. I have a question for you reading the Minutes. The hub commercial development. You commented that the movie theaters and retail space. Retail space would not find this site attractive if a movie theater was part of the development. Why? Councilman Senn: Because theater patrons take up all the prime parking spots and retailers will not go into convenience spaces because their customers can't get close enough to their stores to use them in convenience. Mayor Mancino: Then how do they do that at the malls? Like at the Eden Prairie Mall and you know, Mall of America. Councilman Senn: That's different. That's an enclosed mall where effectively you park in a Ridgedale or a Southdale or whatever and you expect to walk a distance and you're interior in the mall when you go, okay. The types of businesses that are perceived for this are conveniences which you would stop at going to and from work. In and out of your car effectively. Using the transit hub, etc. But they are set up on a basis typically, you know a person's not going to for example want to go pick up all their dry cleaning and carry it two blocks to their car because that's the closest they can get with their car at the time that they pick up their dry cleaning. Even if they're getting offofa bus. And so it was just one of the issues I thought that they need to look at from a design perspective because the place was not designed and laid out well to allow the, how would you say, the retail to function independently of the rest of the facility. And so I just had asked them to look at that. The other thing I had asked them to look at was, let's see here. Southwest Transit is relying very heavily upon that transit hub and what it's going to do with that transit hub to create revenue stream. You've got, there's somewhat of a movement afoot to effectively turn over the controls as well as ability to generate that revenue stream to the City of Eden Prairie, which I think is something that needs to be looked at a little bit harder. How the City of Eden Prairie would, I'm going to say like to see that site developed and in what time frame and under, I mean their primary motivation is not going to be revenue generation versus I think the other member cities primary concern is going to be revenue generation. I think there's an inherent conflict of interest for the City of Eden Prairie given it's location and their involvement. 52 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 Mayor Mancino: Why wouldn't the City of Eden Prairie want it to be a revenue generated? Councilman Senn: I'm not saying they wouldn't want it to be revenue generated, but I'm just saying there's other issues that they would maybe want to deal with that would be higher priority than a level of revenue generation. I was just advocating that the Commission should take a more direct role in that themselves and keep tighter control on that. I mean because there's a lot of unanswered questions as it relates to that, to that hub. You know I mean in terms of what types of development and what types of uses are going to be there. Really all that's etched in concrete so to speak at this point is the transit hub itself SO. Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Is there any other update on the commission? Councilman Senn: Let's see, what else? Was there anything else important? Just to mention I guess they are going through and making a number of route adjustments. If I was not really made aware of many demand for adjustments in Chanhassen, but again I was kind of the new kid on the block so I don't know if they exist or don't exist but if they do, somebody should let me know I guess. IF we're getting any feedback that way, one way or the other. Mayor Mancino: Have we gotten any... ? Don Ashworth: Not that I'm aware of. I'll check at our staff meeting tomorrow. Mayor Mancino: Another good source would be to ask the Senior Commission. Okay. Councilman Senn: I had the Triax one circled. Not because I want to talk about it tonight but because I wanted to first find out... Don Ashworth: First of all I need to set up a meeting with them and basically ask them those same questions. I took it that this was kind of a first draft and to the extent that we wanted to see something different... Mayor Mancino: So yes, it is the base. Councilman Senn: Okay, that's fine. I know what to do with it. Councilman Berquist: I had question regarding it. We had talked at last Thursday's work session about the spendability of the franchise fee. Have you gone through this to know where that's address? Whether it is or not? Mayor Mancino: No, I've kind of gone through it and I couldn't find it so actually it's on one of my lists to ask Brian, is there, are there parameters around the franchise revenue about how it can be spent by the City. There are other questions I had about the services and programming in Section V, page 16 again. There has to be now or a customer survey and it's written very vaguely that there isn't any talk about a confidence interval. Anyway. 53 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 Councilman Senn: That's kind of why I asked the first question I did because going through here I noticed the absence of a lot of the issues we talked about at our separate working sessions with them and that's why I just wondered but if this is the general portion, maybe it's not supposed to be there, I don't know. Mayor Mancino: Well he says, I anticipate that as each of your cities move forward in negotiation with Triax, that Triax proposed documents will be substantially the same as those presented to Wayzata. Councilman Senn: Okay. Then I had a question on the last item. Let's see here. The entertainment center. I don't know, do you know what's going on with that? Bob Generous: Yes I do...the model. Don Ashworth: I thought this was coming up October 27th. Bob Generous: Well that's what it says in the memo. If we could resolve it, we could issue the permit and they could get going... Councilman Mason: I'm a little uncomfortable discussing that without. Mayor Mancino: Are you just looking for general direction from us or do you really what us to give very specific? Councilman Senn: Well there are three specific issues. Bob Generous: There are three changes.., she did want me to reiterate that we are providing financing. Don Ashworth: But I mean shouldn't we be putting this in the form of a staff report that analyzes each of the pros and cons of what they're proposing to do? Councilman Mason: Yeah, I'd feel a whole lot more comfortable with a little bit more background than just kind of hemming and hawing over this. Don Ashworth: Right. This is the kind of stuff in my own mind that you get into trouble later on. Mayor Mancino: Is somebody trying to hurry the process? Councilman Senn: My reason for bringing it up is I thought some of these were pretty significant issues. Especially the primary building materials of the place. The other thing is, the only other thing is I also would like staff to talk, I'm going to say more with the owners, I mean I don't know whether this is correct information or not but I've heard everything from the number of screens have been expanded from what we approved to the number of seats have been expanded to what was originally discussed. I mean I don't know. If they are, they are. That's all part of these changes, we should know that. Especially as it relates to the parking issues and stuff that we already were running relatively tight on. Councilman Mason: All the more reason to have a staff report before City Council. 54 City Council Meeting - October 13, 1997 Don Ashworth: As of last Thursday, we had advised them that this was on October 27th. The only issue I was aware of was the fact that they were proposing to use different materials on the outside and... I both felt that no way are they going to do that without that item being presented to the City Council. Councilman Senn: Well somebody on staff mentioned to me that I think they have 2 more screens over what they originally proposed. Councilman Berquist: They went to 8? Councilman Senn: Well I actually heard there was a possibility to consider more. Mayor Mancino: Is everyone done with the administrative section? The meeting is adjourned. Mayor Mancino adjourned the meeting at 9:37 p.m. Submitted by Don Ashworth City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim 55