Loading...
CC Minutes 1997 11 10CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 10, 1997 Acting Mayor Mason called the meeting to order at 6~35 p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag. COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Acting Mayor Mason, Councilman Berquist, Councilman Engel, and Councilman Senn COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: Mayor Mancino APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilman Berquist moved, Councilman Engel seconded to approve the agenda as presented. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None. CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Berquist moved, Councilman Senn seconded to approve the following Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendation: c. Resolution #97-88: Accept Street and Storm Sewer Improvements in Forest Meadows, Project 95- 10. f. City Council Minutes dated October 27, 1997 Planning Commission Minutes dated October 15, 1997 g. Resolution #97-89: Approval of Resolution Authorizing the City to Enter into a Snowmobile Safety Enforcement Grant Agreement. h. Authorize Advertising for Bids for Light Rescue Truck, Chanhassen Fire Department. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Acting Mayor Mason: Councilman Senn, do you want to talk about that now or at the end of the agenda or have you already stated? Councilman Senn: You can move it back, that's fine. Acting Mayor Mason: All right. With that we'll move item l(e) right after item number 7, under Administrative Presentations. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: None. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ASSISTANCE FOR EMPAK/INSTANT WEB COMPANIES REGARDING COUNTY ROAD 17 IMPROVEMENTS AND ADOPT ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR COUNTY ROAD 17 (POWER BLVD) IMPROVEMENT PROJECT. City Council Meeting -November 10, 1997 Acting Mayor Mason: Special assessment assistance for Empak/Instant Web Companies and adopt assessment roll for County Road 17 has been tabled until next meeting. Some people that needed to be here have been called away on emergencies so that will be tabled until the next meeting I believe Don. Until the 24th of November. SITE PLAN AMENDMENT FOR CHANHASSEN CINEMA~ BOB COPELAND. Sharmin A1-Jaff: Briefly, between what happened at the last City Council and this one. The applicant has made all the changes that he was asked to make by the City Council, which included retaining walls, handrail, lights, decorative lighting and added the window above the entrance into the theater has been added into their plan. The coming attraction sign is back. Back light fixtures have been added as well. So basically we've resolved all of the issues. The one remaining item deals with the finish of the exterior of the building. The original plans indicated an EIFS finish. The applicant is proposing a different material. Basically what they have done is poured concrete and then the concrete will be finished to resemble, in our opinion, a stucco finish. The plans called for a stone finish. The difference between the EIFS and what the applicant is proposing is durability. That's the last remaining issue that the Council needs to give staff direction on. Thank you. Acting Mayor Mason: Thank you. Is there anyone on Council who has questions for Sharmin at this time? Mr. Copeland. Do you want to step up and have your say? Bob Copeland: Thank you. Thank you for hearing some more about this discussion. I'll run through the first part of this very briefly because Sharmin has touched on it already and if someone wants to discuss it more I'd be happy to but. We have made the changes that we felt were necessary to change the building back to what was previously submitted. And I'm trying to think if there are any items that she missed. We've done everything that we can at this point to make the building consistent with the drawings that were submitted, and I would like to take a few minutes though of your time and discuss this EIFS versus pre-cast situation. First of all as you might guess, pre-cast which is this.., is made by Portland Cement, concrete into a form. And that form can be just about any shape and have any texture. Any kind of lining that you can imagine. Now EIFS, which is this is a sample of, EIFS stands for. Well first of all it's EIFS and that stands for Exterior Insulation and Finish System. And it's made simply by taking rigid insulation, which is what this is. And applying a cost of a... light material over the finish of it. Now this rigid insulation can be cut so that it has grooves or it can have projections or in's and out's, and so on. And what you can see that this is an application that's troweled on over on top of the rigid insulation. If you'd like, I'd like each of you to come up and tap the two of them so you can feel the difference. The best analogy that I can think of to describe the difference between these two products is like, it's similar to the difference between painted plastic and painted steel for a car bumper. In other words they look the same. They can be made to look the same and you'd have to go up and tap on the two to tell the difference. I think that's what we're looking at here. There are some similarities between these two products. As I mentioned, they can be made to look so similar that you will have to tap on them to tell the difference. Each of them can be made to look like stone. And the last similarity that I'll mention is that they can be made to be just about any color you can imagine. They can both be the same color or just about any color that you can think of. Now the differences. Pre-cast can be made to have a much greater variation in the texture .... we've got a smooth finish. We've got a little bit of a texture and then we have a significant texture down here. EIFS, while it can have some difference in variation and textures, is typically more uniform and I think this is a representative example of... The joint by the way can be made to look identical. That brings us to the most important difference between these two products and that is durability. EIFS is just not as durable as pre- cast. We hope to have a lot of people next to this cinema building and we think that it's important that City Council Meeting -November 10, 1997 their product be durable. It's not very hard to poke holes, kick holes, whether intentionally or unintentionally into this... In fact here's an example. This is a paperclip and you can just poke it right into it. It's not, it's really, it's just not hard to do. So anybody with a key or a knife or a heel or a toe of a shoe, can make a nice dent. In fact, I've done a little checking since we were here last and the City of Bloomington does not allow EIFS on commercial buildings like this. And in fact, if this were proposed for Bloomington, we couldn't propose EIFS for this building. They're not happy with it's durability. They're not happy with the way it weathers. They complain that you can see where the work stops one day and starts the next. So they will allow it in certain, select uses but they have to be very minor, highlighted sort of accent locations on a building. Just as a further illustration of it's durability, I went out to Southdale and took a couple photographs. This is granted the most significant or dramatic example of what can happen to EIFS but it can be damaged and look really bad. Councilman Berquist: How's that get repaired? Bob Copeland: Well, I'll show you. You can patch it. Councilman Berquist: Use a sheet metal staple to it? That's how I'd fix it. Bob Copeland: Here's a picture of a patch... That's a patch and the hole underneath... Southdale. So it can be patched but you might not be real happy with the patch. So it seems clear to us that these two products can be made to look very similar. They can both be made to resemble stone. The pre-cast has a little greater variety and texture, which we think is good. Think that's a plus. But the main difference is durability. And so the choice seems to be pretty clear to us. That this is definitely an improvement over what was drawn on the preliminary plans by our architect at that time. One last handout. Using pre-cast on a building like this is not a... or new thing. The other day I came across this little blurb that talks about pre-casting used on the exterior of... This one company alone has used it, according to their literature, on 22 different cinemas around the country. So I'm not saying that EIFS isn't appropriate in some cases but it's not appropriate for this building. So with that I'd be happy to answer any questions that you may have. Councilman Berquist: I'm assuming Bloomington has approved, you said they won't allow EIFS but they will allow the material that you're proposing. Bob Copeland: Pre-cast. Oh yes, definitely. Councilman Berquist: And the, can you tell me a little bit, I mean originally Truman Howell, the architect, drew up a plan that was fairly specific in detailing EIFS as the exterior material. And what's, has durability been the only criteria for the decision? I mean at some point you had to have talked to him and said, what are we going to use for an exterior and come to an agreement. Bob Copeland: Well no. Not really. But I mean we're responsible for what was submitted and what was approved and I'm not suggesting anything other than that but the fact of the matter is that he prepared a plan and it was submitted before it was reviewed by any of us. Now that, again that doesn't make it, you know like you don't have to pay any attention to it. We do have to pay attention to it and we didn't bring that up. I'm answering your question is all. Councilman Berquist: But you're intimating, in a back door way which is really wasn't what I asked but in a back door way you're intimating that this would have been your material of choice from the get go? City Council Meeting -November 10, 1997 Bob Copeland: Well, as you go through a project, you study materials and you try to find the best way to accomplish things and Truman, at the time that he prepared that drawing, I think he probably felt EIFS was the best solution. But as we got into it more and we researched the EIFS product and the alternatives, it became clear to us that we could provide something that would look like EIFS, or as close to resembling stone as the EIFS ever would have, but was a lot more durable and had a wider range of textures available and so we felt it was an easy decision to make it pre-cast. Councilman Berquist: So all the details that were indicated on the drawings, and I think we're looking at what, eighth inch scales at that point? So they really weren't much in terms of details. Bob Copeland: They're probably 16th but anyway. Councilman Berquist: But all the details that were indicated on the drawings at the time that we were looking are consistent with what you're intending to do with pre-cast? Bob Copeland: Well that's right. The drawings that were submitted and approved are not very detailed but they do show some things and they do call out EIFS and there's a hint of some scoring on there but you really can't tell what's going to happen for sure on there but it, we're maintaining the same character and flavor that was intended all the way along. Councilman Berquist: Okay. Well I wasn't at the last meeting but one of my, are you going to show something? Sharmin A1-Jaff: Basically showing what we asked the applicant... There is some scoring shown on the building. Councilman Berquist: So is this. Sharmin A1-Jaff: It was intended to give stone look. Councilman Berquist: And the original coloration's as I recall were grays and now we're talking about beige's but that's. Sharmin A1-Jaff: There were, there was one with grays and there was one with beige. Councilman Berquist: Okay. And the stuff that was all upstairs was all, I'm sorry what? Councilman Senn: Magic marker of the moment is what it is. Councilman Berquist: That's probably true. Bob Copeland: We prefer the beige's but we'll make it any color you want. Councilman Berquist: I'm simply trying to point out differences from what was submitted to what now we're being asked to look at as what's real and this is a contentious issue, given the amount of money that you're putting into it and given the amount of money that the City is contributing, having recertified the district. My concern is that we get a project that looks good, that's attractive, that draws people to the area. That remains good looking. That does not cheapen as the years go by. I mean I like the pre-cast, City Council Meeting -November 10, 1997 that aspect of the pre-cast. I think the drivit, the EIFS probably has more ornamental characteristics than the pre-cast could give you. But not having a lot of detail within the context of the drawings, not able to determine ornaments we may lose if any. Bob Copeland: well I don't think you're losing any. There were some detailing there on the original plan and some lines that look like they might have been columns and we're retaining all that. That's, we're casting that into the pre-cast and we've got on the pre-cast, this sample doesn't show it but the real panels themselves, there's a difference in the.., of some of these planes. Everything's not all on the same plane. We've got as much as a two inch difference in the various planes... Councilman Engel: And you can make those joints look like the EIFS instead of the thin, narrow straight ones? Bob Copeland: No, that's not what... This is not what we're trying, this is not the look we're trying to achieve. This is the look we want. We think this is more consistent with the type of stone. There are dozens of different kinds of stone so... and there are different kinds of joints for stone but this is the kind of joint that we are interested in. That we think will most resemble the stone that's in our mind. Councilman Berquist: Well I'm done your temporary Honor. Acting Mayor Mason: Well thank you. Councilman Senn? Councilman Engel? Councilman Engel: Go ahead. Councilman Senn: Mr. Copeland. I guess as far as the EIFS goes you've got, you don't have to debate the issue with me. I dislike EIFS. I've never liked it. I don't think it's a durable product either so I share your views. In fact I've never voted on anything around here that included the use of EIFS. I think the long and short of where we need to get though is I think the Council wants to see something pretty well in tune with what they pictured when they approved, you know effectively the concept, you know or picture, okay. And consequently decided to stick over a half a million dollars into help achieve that. I'm not positive how we get to that point. Okay. I'm not sure that what you're suggesting as it relates to the pre-cast panels is going to get us there. I much prefer the use of concrete to accomplish what we're talking about accomplishing, but I guess I want to be assured that there's a way that we can achieve the differences and texture, the look of stone which I think is what everybody was trying to buy or buy off on at the time. And was it in our work session, Mayor Mancino I think brought up a good example with the ped bridge, which I hate to bring that thing up ever for anything but we have a pedestrian bridge here. Bob Copeland: I know what you mean. Councilman Senn: It's a stone look. Same thing. I mean it's pre-cast concrete basically type of thing and so, could we, do you see any alternatives on that that could maybe achieve that look, I'm going to say a little better than what's being suggested and we'll just say throw the EIFS out for the moment. Bob Copeland: Well, here's the model. I don't know, was that out here last week? I don't recall. Councilman Engel: Yeah it was. City Council Meeting -November 10, 1997 Bob Copeland: Okay. And I think it's very consistent with the preliminary drawings. The preliminary drawings never said stone. Councilman Senn: No, I understand. Bob Copeland: But that was in our minds. To make it resemble stone. The model is consistent with the drawings and I have the drawings... If you look at the original design here, you know we have a cornice on the top.., now we have a more extensive cornice than we have here. We have these simulated columns... We still have that. We have some different, possibly some different planes happening here. It's not really called out. You can't tell for sure but it might be hinted at or you might expect something like that. And the joints are very faint but you can see that there probably are some joints here so we think we've been very consistent with that. See the elevation of the building step up, one, two, three times. We've got one, two, three steps. The size and shape of it are exactly the way it was indicated here. We have a marquee that projects out the way the original drawing was. Councilman Senn: Now back up one sec. Go to the model. Go to your sample. Now show me on the sample where that is on the model. Bob Copeland: The pre-cast? Councilman Senn: Correct. Bob Copeland: Well this is just a, I couldn't bring in a 10 foot by 25 foot piece. So this is just a sample to show you the different textures. Councilman Senn: Oh, okay. So those aren't the textures you're planning on using. Bob Copeland: They aren't exactly the textures but they're not, this is not a piece that will be used. Councilman Senn: No, no, I understand that. But show me on there where you're going to plug the textures into. Bob Copeland: This lower piece is smooth. This lower piece here is smooth. And then this part... Acting Mayor Mason: Bob, I'm sorry. I can't see because of the EIFS stuff. Councilman Senn: Get rid of the EIFS for the time being. Acting Mayor Mason: For the time being. Councilman Senn: That was a movement in the right direction. Bob Copeland: The lower band here will be smooth. Like this only painted a different color. This part, ... if you will, will be this medium texture. This upper part here will be this very course texture. Councilman Engel: Is it all the same color Bob? City Council Meeting -November 10, 1997 Bob Copeland: No. We're going to have two tones. We'll have a tone here and a lighter tone here. The same tone will be repeated, this same color will be repeated again. Then we'll have a trim, accent trim color. Councilman Senn: Now what are your columns going to be? Bob Copeland: They are the smooth. Those will stand out. Councilman Senn: They will protrude out how far from the rest of the surface? Bob Copeland: About an inch. Councilman Senn: About an inch. Okay, what other differences in depth will there be on that front? Bob Copeland: Well, maybe I can point out. For example here's this piece. You can see this sticks out about 2 inches or so... it is very close to the same plane. These project out, there are some set back in. Recessed. This is that courser texture right here. Councilman Senn: Okay. I see what you're trying. All right. And then what are you, as far as your cornice across the top and stuff goes, how are you accomplishing that? What's that going to be? Bob Copeland: That is going to be sheet metal. That's going to be bent in, down and in again so there are several different layers.., and that will be pre-finished sheet metal. A color to be determined. Councilman Senn: Now is your pre-cast concrete going to be tinted or are you going to be painting these? Bob Copeland: Well, we're going to put a stain on it. I've been using the word paint just because...it's a stain that is, adheres very well and has a lot of longevity to it. But it will have to be re-stained maybe in 10 years or something like that. Councilman Senn: Okay. So effectively the pre-cast panel itself will be in the gray still underneath all the way through? It will not be tinted at all? Bob Copeland: Well the pre-cast itself is just concrete color. Councilman Senn: All right, okay. Bob Copeland: Cement color. Then it gets, everything that you see will be, will have a stain on it. Councilman Senn: Right. Be surfaced applied. Bob Copeland: It will be a different gray or the color that we prefer.., right, and then maybe a vanilla color is what I could call it. Councilman Engel: Kind of what your top panel. City Council Meeting -November 10, 1997 Bob Copeland: Well, this is all the same. Actually it isn't going to look like different colors but this is all exactly the same material but the textures are different.., so this is unfinished. It has no stain or paint of any kind on it. This is what the raw product looks like. Acting Mayor Mason: Now, I've got to ask this only because I don't, I don't understand some of this, I was going to say pre-shrunk stuff but that's cotton. So when these pre-made slabs come in they'll be, when I saw that I assumed that there's just going to be a score of lines all the way down but now I'm realizing no, no, no. They'll get scored so it actually's going to look like brick. Bob Copeland: It will look like stone. Acting Mayor Mason: Well, I mean stones. I'm sorry. Right, right. Okay. All right. Bob Copeland: But the...come out and they're 25 feet wide and they're, I'm sorry. 25 feet high, 10 feet wide. And then they're put together. And if you look closely you can see, for example here's a... from here to here. I don't know if you can see my fingers but from here to here would be one panel. And here to here would be another one. But you can see that the scoring and so on, make it so that the joints between the panels will not be obvious... We feel that we're providing, we feel that we're being consistent with the character and appearance that was.., but we're going about it a slightly different way... Acting Mayor Mason: Any more questions for Mr. Copeland at this time? Bob Copeland: This is a drawing of it again with the railing on it. Councilman Berquist: And we're going back to that railing? Acting Mayor Mason: Yeah, that's all back in, yeah. Bob Copeland: Right. Acting Mayor Mason: Well it's going to look very nice. All right, thanks Bob. Council. Bob Copeland: I'll leave this... Acting Mayor Mason: All right, thank you. Discussion. Thoughts. Comments. Concerns. Where are we going to take this? Councilman Senn: Well I guess again, my thoughts would be hopefully away from the EIFS, number one. Number two, as far as the use of the concrete goes, you know I guess now that I'm visualizing better what they're planning on doing and how they're planning on doing it, I guess I don't have as many concerns with it. I mean I really hate to get into playing designer. I like to look at it more from a standpoint as what's going to be put there or going to last and is it going to look like what we were buying off on effectively when we agreed to subsidize the project and I would say that it appears to be doing that. You know we could haggle a little over the detail which might go into the, how would we say the different textures or texturing of the pre-cast panels which all cost money. But it seems to me that would be about the only place that it would make a lot of sense at this point to play with it if at all there. And again that really gets down to more what the total look come out to be and you know, if the total look does come out to be effectively what you're seeing there and it's the durable product, I'm not so sure what we can argue with. City Council Meeting -November 10, 1997 Again, other than maybe looking for a few little upgrades or something like that but I'm not quite sure how we'd achieve that at this point. So that's just my thoughts. Acting Mayor Mason: Thank you Councilman Senn. Councilman Engel. Councilman Engel: I, like Mark, have concerns about the concrete but now that I've seen the pictures, seen the model. I've heard him describe the way we'd get the colors we want. I'm comfortable with it. Councilman Berquist: As am I. My concern is that the longevity of the project be guaranteed given the amount of commitment that we're making to it from all sides. And I'm okay with it. Acting Mayor Mason: I concur. I think this, this is definitely better for the interest of the city. The concrete. I share the same comments as the rest of Council. Seeing all of this was very helpful tonight. Thanks. With that, Mark. Let me ask you. You talked a little bit about playing with textures of the stone. Any more thoughts on that or? Councilman Senn: Oh, Bob. Could you come back up? My one concern is basically where you're using and how you're mixing the, let's call it the smooth finish, which is the least durable of the concrete finishes. I mean more or less, it mars easier. It shows the marring. Bob Copeland: I don't know. I don't know whether I agree with that statement. I mean this is pretty hard to mark. Councilman Senn: Well but it's pretty easy to scratch, especially when you're picking effectively a coloration system on the surface of it is all I'm coming back to. At least that's been my experience. It's far harder to, I'm going to say mar the textured surfaces. Now again, I'm not saying let's change the smooth texture but I'm just wondering in terms of utilization of what you're utilizing and where. That's my only concern. Again, I don't want to play designer. I mean again, I really don't want to do that. I hate that when people do it to me. I don't want to do it to you but I'm just saying it's something I really think you should consider because, at least when I've used that type of an application, I've sometimes been turned around and proven that I was sorry to use it. Especially in a high traffic, high population area. Councilman Engel: Which texture is on the very bottom? Councilman Senn: The smooth one. That's one concerning me. Councilman Engel: That one? Councilman Senn: Yep. Bob Copeland: If you look at this picture, you can see this is, this is the bottom and that's the top... Councilman Senn: But you've got to maintain it. That's your call. I'm just saying that's my concern. Acting Mayor Mason: All right. Well if there are no other comments, I'll ask for a motion from Council. Councilman Senn: Let's see, do we have to deal with, or Sharmin, as far as the motion goes do we have to deal with each one of the issues you've now resolved in let's say items 1 through 4? City Council Meeting -November 10, 1997 Acting Mayor Mason: They're back to original issues aren't they? I don't believe... Councilman Senn: Well that's kind of why I'm asking. I mean. Sharmin A1-Jaff: ...just approve it from changes.., concrete. Councilman Engel: Concrete panels. Councilman Senn: Okay so approve as per the staff report with the exception that we're going to move from the EIFS to the pre-cast concrete. Sharmin A1-Jaff: There are a few minor, minor details that staff and the applicant can work out... Councilman Senn: Okay. I'll move approval of the site plan amendment as per the staff report substituting pre-cast concrete instead of the EIFS as the exterior building material. Councilman Engel: I'll second that. Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Engel seconded that the City Council approves the amendment to Site Plan #95-21 as shown in the plans dated October 13, 1997, with the following conditions: The Site Plan Agreement shall be amended to reflect these changes and an addendum to the agreement shall be recorded with Carver County. The site plan shall substitute pre-cast concrete panels instead of E.I.F.S. as the exterior building material. All voted in favor and the motion carried. REVIEW COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, 4141 KINGS ROAD, LOWELL CARLSON. Sharmin A1-Jaff: Briefly, the applicant has a contractors yard and was directed to install a fence no later than 1994. The fence has been installed yet. Staff has worked with the applicant for quite a while and at one point the City was going to install the fence and assess the applicant for the cost. The applicant tried to work with staff and decided he was going to put it in. At this point the applicant has received some proposal where developers are interested in his property to develop it as single family development subdivision. The applicant is requesting that he holds off on the fence .... guarantee us as to when the property will be developed. I have prepared three options for the City Council. First one is to establish a deadline for Mr. Carlson to install the fence. The second one, the City installs the fence and assess Mr. Carlson for the work. And the third one is to require Mr. Carlson to remove the outdoor storage items but not install the fence. However, we would require a letter of interest from the developer. We inspect the property every 3 months to make certain the project is progressing. If complaints surface, the fence will be installed at the expense of Mr. Carlson. So basically we need direction from the City Council as to how you wish staff to proceed with this. Thank you. Acting Mayor Mason: Thank you. Questions for Sharmin at this time from Council? 10 City Council Meeting -November 10, 1997 Councilman Berquist: I'm sure that this thing started because of complaints but there's no reference in here to ongoing complaints. Are there any? Have there been any? Sharmin A1-Jaff: There is a dispute between Mr. Carlson and his neighbor but that's a private matter and. Councilman Berquist: It has nothing to do with the storage of material on the property? Sharmin A1-Jaff: That's how it started. That's how we were alerted to what's going on. And there's outdoor storage and contractors yard activity taking place and that's not permitted by ordinance. Councilman Berquist: Have there been complaints regarding the contractors yard operation? Sharmin A1-Jaff: Over the years, yes. Councilman Berquist: Singular neighbor or by others as well? Sharmin A1-Jaff: I can't answer that. I don't know, sorry. Councilman Berquist: Okay. That's enough. I mean it's in a relatively remote, relatively. Sharmin A1-Jaff: Correct. However the surrounding area is developing so as. Councilman Berquist: Developing, yes. Present tense but the immediately surrounding area is built. This is just right across the street from Round House Park, that area? Sharmin A1-Jaff: Yes. Councilman Berquist: Thank you. Acting Mayor Mason: Any other questions from Council at this time? Councilman Senn: Not right now. Acting Mayor Mason: Mr. Carlson, would you mind stepping up, if that would be okay. No hurry. No hurry. If you will, what is your spin on all this? What's your feeling on what's been going on here? Lowell Carlson: Well, the complaints is like you said, from a neighbor that maybe I have got a construction yard but for instance that neighbor that's calling and hollering and screaming, he's probably never, ever, he's never for a matter of fact that I know of, hauled his garbage away. He digs holes and buries it all up there and burning and if I started one of my diesel trucks he's yelling because I'm burning something without a burn permit. It's a constant mess and I'm getting old and I'm getting tired fellas and maybe I ain't got that long to be around but anyway. On this property, Heritage Homes has been after this you know on account of the road and the development and they've got 7 lots that they want to develop it. And maybe.., much longer but anyway. We've been really giving it thought on the thing and you know on this fence deal, it's something that's got to be put up but not enough fill in the back and you don't gain nothing. It goes down over an embankment and whatever but that's here nor there you know. So I've got to move it a little closer to the road than the city likes and so on and so forth but it comes to a thing of 11 City Council Meeting -November 10, 1997 maybe me or age or you know, they say well that equipment there. So I put it on Highway 7. I get an okay from Mrs. Anderson or Keith Anderson to sell the property. Or sell the back track hoe so now the City's on my back for having the track hoe sitting on 23 acres out there with a for sale on it, you know. So they threaten me with letters and say it's got to be off in such a such time and well finally, luckily somebody come along and bought it you know. So I got out of that one you know. But they said they have complaints. Well complaints on 23 acres you know, I don't see anybody even out there but. But anyway, that's what how the complaints, complaints but usually it goes back to number one you know. And like I said I will filing, this is the last time there's been a go around here just lately and I will be filing harassment charges against him. He lives in Victoria and I don't see how that Chanhassen gets involved but Victoria's problems of harassment, or the complaints but anyway. I guess we'll go on from there and whatever but, and what you guys thing but. Acting Mayor Mason: I see here that one of the options is I certainly can understand why if you're considering selling the property you wouldn't want to install the fence. I certainly can't fault you for that. Are you able, are you in a position to remove the outdoor storage items? And so not have to install the fence. Lowell Carlson: Remove them off the property? Acting Mayor Mason: Well, so they wouldn't be a concern for the neighbor. Lowell Carlson: Well that's pretty impossible on that property I mean you know. I hear you because they live way back in the fields and you know, I don't know if he's got binoculars or whatever that it seems to bother him with that equipment but it's, in the excavating business there isn't an excavator that has a clean yard as far as I can see, you know. I mean you come and go and you come in with one job and you drop it off and pick up another piece of equipment and that probably lays there until you finally get towards the fall of the year when you catch up and go back and start cleaning up again. But it is a tough racket to be in. I mean it isn't just like an ordinary job I guess. Maybe that's what I should have took a long time ago. So it is a little tough around them bases. I guess I can't argue with that. Acting Mayor Mason: Okay. Does anyone else on Council have any questions for Mr. Carlson? At this point. Councilman Senn: No, not for Mr. Carlson. I would like to hear if there's anybody else here though. Who wants to speak on it. Sharmin A1-Jaff: In 1985 the applicant had to go through a conditional use permit procedure. One of the conditions was that he install a fence and clean up what's on the site. That hasn't been done. Councilman Senn: I understand. I understand that. Councilman Berquist: He agreed to that in December of '93. Signed a stipulation to that. Councilman Senn: Correct. Lowell Carlson: Could I ask one question? Councilman Senn: Go ahead. 12 City Council Meeting -November 10, 1997 Lowell Carlson: When did this conditional use permit come up? That isn't a conditional use permit on my property. Sharmin A1-Jaff: In 1985. Lowell Carlson: That's a locked in, grandfathered, well what am I trying to say I guess but it is not a conditional use permit on that property. That thing stays as an excavators yard as long as it, as I live, my kid lives, whatever so. On that property there is not a conditional use permit on that property. We have been through that pretty hard stages on the conditional use deal but. To my knowledge there's not a conditional use permit but. Councilman Berquist: Is that part of the stipulation agreement? Sharmin A1-Jaff: Part of the stipulation. Legal non-conforming operation and it's not allowed to expand. But again, one of the conditions of the stipulation agreement was that the applicant cleans up... Acting Mayor Mason: And that was signed and agreed to in '93 I believe, right? Sharmin A1-Jaff: Right. Councilman Engel: 8th of December '93. Acting Mayor Mason: Okay. Thanks Mr. Carlson. I think if we. Is there anyone else here that would like to speak to this issue at this time? All right. Council. Councilman Senn: Well I guess I, Mike ifI could. I'll tell you, I read through this and I was really torn back and forth because it's one of those items that comes before us that kind of probably should have ended a long time ago and nobody's done anything about it so it hasn't ended. The last thing I want to do is see us get in a situation where we're going to sit there and kind of wonder when something's going to come, because it seems like we've had a deal here where supposedly there's been some pretty hard and fast agreements and those haven't even been adhered to. So I'm not sure that I look at this and say there's been a lot of good faith either way on this deal. But practically speaking, at the same time if somebody's seriously interested in developing the property, I think it's kind of a waste of money to build the fence. So the idea or solution that I guess I would like to propose is that we first establish the cost to build the fence. That then Mr. Carlson agree to post a bond or escrow 1 ½ times the fence cost. And that the terms of that bond and escrow then be very specific to say that if the property does not have an approved development plan or if there's not substantial progress towards it in the City's sole discretion within 6 months, the property owner will forfeit the bond or escrow and the City will install the fence. Now I've proposed that for several reasons. One is, it requires the property owner to put something at stake up front. Which creates in effect the impetus for him to get going and do something or not do something, but if he chooses to not do anything and we end up with the fence in 6 months, then there's no questions about it. And there's also no questions about how we're going to recover the cost of putting the fence up. And I guess it seems to me that would be maybe the best practical approach at this point. Councilman Engel: Mark and I are thinking along the same lines. I was writing.., myself and he said 6 months. I just came up with a date of May 1st in my own mind. Along the same lines though. Give him a 13 City Council Meeting -November 10, 1997 chance. Get a development contract.., fence they end up bulldozing. Gives him time to decide what he wants to do. But one way or the other it will be resolved next spring, so we're thinking the same thing. Roger Knutson: Acting Mayor? You might want to consider what you want to do if escrowed funds are not forthcoming. In other words, you go out and get a price for putting up this fence. It's x dollars. You don't hear from Mr. Carlson or at least we don't get the x dollars. What do you want to do? Councilman Senn: We would immediately go out and install the fence and assess it back against his property. How'sthat? Okay? Acting Mayor Mason: Councilman Berquist. Councilman Berquist: Can we assess back against the property? Can we encumber the property for that type? Roger Knutson: Yes. You stipulated in the stipulation that we could do that. The Court Order says we can do that. Councilman Berquist: So in this stipulation that was dated 8 December, okay. Well that was the question that I had was what if that's not forthcoming. The only issue that I'd like to clear up, if we're going to take a hard ball stance, and given the fact that there was an agreement signed by all parties, including Mr. Carlson on the 8th of December, 1993 and to date nothing has been done. My intention is to be kind of a hard nose. But Mark said the City's sole discretion and I don't think that necessarily has to mean that, what it means in my mind is that you're working towards compliance with the stipulation agreement, which means that the property gets cleaned up. It doesn't mean that you discontinue using it as a contractors yard. It means that you simply clean up the messes that have been there for years and that continue to accumulate. The vehicles that have been abandoned. The other junk that's lying about. I don't think this is necessarily something that is designed to be mean. It's just simply designed to enforce the stipulation that was signed by you back in '93. Councilman Senn: Well I think also the property owner would be, how do I say this? In a way I think Mr. Carlson you'd be best thinking of yourself at this point too. If you're seriously considering selling this property for development, you'd better get going and get it cleaned up because if you don't, you're going to have a very rude awakening when somebody comes out to do what's called a Phase I Environmental on your property. And there's two ways to deal with that. Deal with it up front or deal with it after the fact and I think you'll find that dealing with it after the fact is far less a good alternative than dealing with it up front. So that's just a silly piece of advice. Lowell Carlson: Could I just say one thing? ...they want a chain link fence.., you're going to see all the equipment through the fence. I mean I don't understand.., except for one guy, one neighbor... Councilman Senn: Well maybe, I think you're under a misimpression. We are not talking here about a chainlink fence. We're talking here about a privacy fence. It is required to screen the contractors yard from adjacent properties. It's not a chainlink fence. Lowell Carlson: On this plan it says a chainlink fence. Outside... 14 City Council Meeting -November 10, 1997 Councilman Senn: Mr. Carlson I understand that but what we're talking about, just so there's no misunderstanding about it, the fence we're talking about installing is a privacy fence which will screen your yard from the neighbors. Okay. It's a screening requirement that we have on any contractors yard. Lowell Carlson: Has that been approved? Councilman Senn: It has been approved before and has not been adhered to nor honored by you under the terms of the agreement. Lowell Carlson: ... property and so on and so forth and decided to build.., three different buildings were drawn up... 12 acres over there next to me. He didn't get the property closed and when he did get it closed he had to have it right now and.., weekend to tear the building down.., on and on and on but. Councilman Engel: I think just to clear things up, to the east side is a 6 ½ foot wood fence. It looks like.., storage area. Then you've got a chainlink fence and you've also got the trees up every 30 feet along that chainlink fence. But it's spelled out in the agreement where it's chainlink and where it's wood but it is clearly wood is the portion that you're referring to and it's got chainlink as you're referring to, but you've also got the tree every 30 feet along the chainlink. And I just want to clarify really, the City's deciding. Acting Mayor Mason: Right, it's right in here. Councilman Engel: ... build a fence, really if we do what Mark's proposing, it's up to Mr. Carlson how the fence gets built and if he sells or has a development plan, it doesn't happen. If it doesn't that's his decision. It's really not ours. All we're saying is this is the agreement from 1994, I believe. Acting Mayor Mason: '93. Councilman Engel: '93, fine. We're not making the decision. We're simply saying here's a couple of options. He can pick the one he likes best. All right let's, the City's not really making the decision. Roger Knutson: Acting Mayor? I think I sense the motion you're going to make. You might want to also provide that once you get him the cost of the fence, he has x days to get you a cash escrow. So we're clear on what you expect to achieve. Acting Mayor Mason: Okay. Councilman Senn: Sounds good. Want me to take a try at one and you help me out if I need help please? I would move that the City establish the cost to build the designated fences and landscaping around Mr. Carlson's property, and once that price is established, Mr. Carlson then has 10 days which to post a bond or provide cash escrow 1 ½ times the cost of that, those improvements. The terms of forfeiture on either the bond or the cash escrow would be that if the property has not been, or does not have an approved development plan or if there is not substantial progress towards one in the City's sole discretion within 6 months, the property owner shall forfeit the bond or cash escrow and the City will immediately install the fencing and landscape materials. Should Mr. Carlson not furnish the escrow within the 10 day required period, the City will immediately undertake installation of the fencing and landscape materials and said cost will be then assessed back against Mr. Carlson's property. Roger Knutson: The only suggestion I'd make is that you replace the term bond with letter of credit. 15 City Council Meeting -November 10, 1997 Councilman Senn: Okay. So noted. Acting Mayor Mason: I'm wondering if you would consider changing that 10 days to 30 days? I mean we've waited. Councilman Senn: Mike, I'd do the 30 days but then I'm kind of in tune a little bit with where Mark is. I'd really like to see this resolved by, you know, by spring. I mean if we give him 30 days to do all this, plus add 6 months, I mean we're going to be halfway through next summer. I mean I'm trying to say let's get it out of the way in the early spring one way or the other. Roger Knutson: The only thing I don't know about at this time of year is when frost is going to be deep enough in the ground to make it, you can always put in a fence no matter how deep the frost is, but it's going to be, the cost is going to be substantially different. Councilman Senn: Yeah, right now there's only an inch or two of frost. I mean if we get this done and get the 10 days, we should actually in a position, if he doesn't furnish it, to go ahead and get the fence built yet this season. If not, I think we're, again we can do it but we're going to be increasing the expense substantially to do it. And then the other end is the tail end which I'm trying to bring up on the thing. I mean I supposed we could reduce the 6 months to 5 months or whatever to counter but I don't know, then at the same time we're going to also be up to you know, probably permanent or pretty decent frost conditions within 30 days I would think. Councilman Engel: Why don't we just do what I was thinking is hang a date on it so that everybody knows, like May 1 ? That's effectively 6 months. Councilman Senn: Yeah. I don't have a problem with that. Councilman Berquist: And then change it to 30 days? Councilman Senn: If you're comfortable with that. Councilman Engel: The money, otherwise fence by May 1st. Councilman Senn: I would say 30 days, well but see how long is it going to take us to get the cost of the fence together? Councilman Engel: End of the week. Todd Gerhardt: Week or two. Councilman Senn: Yeah, and we're starting to, how about 15 days? Councilman Berquist: How about 30 days? I mean if it's, another snow season, everything's covered. Who cares? Acting Mayor Mason: Yeah. I'm a lot more comfortable with the 30 days. 16 City Council Meeting -November 10, 1997 Councilman Senn: Councilman Engel: Councilman Senn: Okay. All right, let's do it. If that's what everybody wants to do. We've got a hard date on the back end. That's fine. May 1st and 30 days then. Councilman Engel: I think we'll know what's happening one way or the other. Acting Mayor Mason: We should maybe re-read the motion. Or not? Councilman Senn: Those were simple changes. I think it's probably in the record. Councilman Berquist: So 30 days from the date of the fence. Lowell Carlson: ... 30 days from what? Councilman Berquist: Do you want me to wing this? We're going to determine how much it's going to cost. Approximately how much it's going to cost to put a fence up in accordance with the stipulation from back in 1993. Once we determine how much it's going to cost to put that fence up, we're going to let you know it's going to cost x number of dollars. Let's pick a number. Let's say it's going to cost $100.00. You will be, it's going to cost a hell of a lot more than that but let's just use that. You're going to be required to deposit $150.00 in a bank and that bank is going to furnish the City with a Letter of Credit that says they have that money. Six months from that date, or May 1st, you will be required to have that fence up or significant changes in place for the disposition of your land. Lowell Carlson: You're talking about May 1st. After that... Councilman Berquist: You're going to start construction prior to May 1st of your fence, if you're still there. And if you don't, you're going to lose that 1 ½ times whatever it's going to cost to put the fence up. Councilman Senn: But you could also have somebody making a development plan to the City and proceeding forward with that. Then you won't have to put the fence up. But that's got to happen before May 1st. So no more delays. No more dragging of the feet. Acting Mayor Mason: Yeah, understand that if we have some sort of proof that there is something in the works for this development, the fence may not have to go in. Lowell Carlson: As old as I am, I probably ain't going to be able to make that up... fellas. I don't want you to feel sorry for me... Acting Mayor Mason: Good enough. Lowell Carlson: Like I said, I'm getting old and... Acting Mayor Mason: I bet that doesn't happen Lowell. Councilman Engel: Are you aware of what the terms are Mr. Carlson? Are they clear? 17 City Council Meeting -November 10, 1997 Councilman Senn: Todd, maybe the easiest way to. Councilman Engel: Are you aware what the terms are? Is it clear? Lowell Carlson: I guess so. Councilman Engel: Okay. Councilman Senn: Maybe ifI could suggest, we're going to have to go out and take a week or two to get the cost together, okay. Could you have somebody take this portion of the tape and just transcribe that motion and get it sent out to Mr. Carlson right away so he has it in writing and understands it. You know prior to us coming up with that cost. Okay. Councilman Engel: That's good. I like that too. Todd Gerhardt: We usually do that. I mean Sharmin will send him a letter on the results of the meeting. Councilman Senn: Okay, but I'm just saying usually that happens a couple weeks later doesn't it, rather than right away? Todd Gerhardt: We can do it right away. Councilman Senn: Okay, super. Councilman Engel: Good. Then he'll have it. Acting Mayor Mason: I did not hear. There was a motion made. Was there a second? Councilman Engel: Second. Acting Mayor Mason: Okay, the motion has been made and seconded. Councilman Berquist: With the amendments as noted. Councilman Senn: Correct. Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Engel seconded that the City establish the cost to build the designated fences and landscaping around Mr. Carlson's property, and once that price is established, Mr. Carlson then has 30 days in which to post a letter of credit or provide cash escrow 1 ½ times the cost of those improvements. The terms of forfeiture on either the letter of credit or the cash escrow would be that if the property has not been, or does not have an approved development plan or if there is not substantial progress towards one, in the City's sole discretion, by May 1, 1998, the property owner shall forfeit the letter of credit or cash escrow and the City will immediately install the fencing and landscape materials. Should Mr. Carlson not furnish the escrow within the 30 day required period, the City will immediately undertake installation of the fencing and landscape materials and said cost will be then assessed back against Mr. Carlson's property. All voted in favor and the motion carried. 18 City Council Meeting -November 10, 1997 RECEIVE RECOMMENDATION OF PARK & RECREATION COMMISSION CONCERNING GREENWOOD SHORES ACCESSIBILITY REPORT. Public Present: Name Address Gwen Hennessey 6800 Utica Circle Alice Fowler 7050 Utica Lane Joanne & Bill Lambrecht 6990 Utica Lane Steve Cuodziwki Ann Archer Butcher 7090 Utica Lane Judy Christensen 7100 Utica Lane Dick Lynch 7120 Utica Lane Stephen Schmitz 7101 Shawnee Lane Jason & Jan Adair 7061 Shawnee Lane J. W.P. 7090 Tecumseh Lane Gerry Maher 7101 Utica Lane Rocky Waldin 7100 Utica Lane Barbara Klick 7116 Utica Lane Greg Blaufuss 7116 Utica Lane Todd Hoffman: Acting Mayor Mason, members of the City Council. And members of the neighborhood. Welcome and thank you. During the week of August 5, 1997, this past summer, Ms. Rachel Manteuffel contacted my office concerning the complaint she had about the lack which she perceived of as a lack of reasonable access to Greenwood Shores neighborhood park. I informed her that she should write a letter to the Park and Recreation Commission. Submit that letter and then the Park and Recreation Commission would talk about that report. She did that. The Park and Recreation Commission felt it appropriate to order an accessibility study by an independent group. RSP Architects was consulted to do that study. Ms. Julee Quarve-Peterson, an accessibility expert, who in fact did the 1991 city wide accessibility report for the community, prepared that report. It talked in depth about a lot of issues, not just parking at Greenwood Shores neighborhood park. And really to focus on the issue, what their recommendation regarding parking was, was to build an internal parking area within Greenwood Shores neighborhood park. An issue which was discussed at length back in the late 80's as well and was not approved by the City Council at that time. So in lieu of developing this internal parking lot, the commission thought it was appropriate that at least a portion of the no parking signs along Utica Lane come down with the exception of those that were required for safety purposes around the curb as you enter that area of Utica Lane. So they made a motion which again is a summary motion which was included in your report. That Commissioner Meger moved, Commissioner Berg seconded to recommend the City Council remove all of the no parking signs currently installed on Utica Lane with the exception of those required at the curve near the entrance of the park for safety reasons. Furthermore, that the access area around the gate be widened and surfaced with asphalt for the purpose of allowing easier access by those who are handicapped. It also makes it easier to get through there with a bike and the bike carriers. All commissioners voted in favor of that motion and it carried unanimously. There has been some confusion over whether or not staff acted in accordance with that motion of that evening. Since those are, those are not verbatim Minutes but are summary Minutes, to date Karen Engelhardt, our Office Manager went back to the tapes which are recorded from those meetings and took the verbatim Minutes from that motion. I, in turn then take notes and clarify the motion for the summary Minutes. But for the record the verbatim motion was that Commissioner Meger moved to ask the 19 City Council Meeting -November 10, 1997 Engineering Department to look at the area and determine which signs would make the most sense to take down as far as no parking. And also look at widening the entrance to the park. Seconded that and all voted in favor of the motion and the motion carried. In a staff work session we discussed taking this recommendation to the City Council. At that meeting Mayor Mancino asked that it go back for a public hearing, or chance to comment by the neighbors before the Park and Recreation Commission. On Tuesday, October 28th the Park and Recreation Commission held that public hearing. Four residents spoke. There were more residents there that evening. And talked about their concerns with the commission. The area of greatest concern was knowing exactly what portion of the no parking zone would be retained around the curve and in front of the park. A map depicting that area, as determined by Dave Hempel, our Assistant City Engineer, is attached and I have an overhead which I want to put up for you as well. And what the area is defined as, to give you a little real world perspective here... This is the section of Greenwood Shores which we're discussing this evening. Utica Lane as it enters. Down where it curves with the entrance. And again in Dave's opinion, we talked about, during our site visit, taking this black line, not only on the inside of the curve for no parking, but on the outside curve as well. Essentially covering these two home lots which are adjacent to the park. It was Dave's opinion that if we are indeed attempting to accommodate parking in safe areas, that these portions of the outside curve and again in his opinion were indeed safe for parking and provide some convenient parking to the site. And did not arbitrarily push that parking up farther along each side of Utica Lane. So again the commission, during their conversations talked about the fact that the signs may be taken down in this area and down in this area. And that they thought that the no parking areas would remain on both sides of Utica Lane within that curve, but in their motion they felt that recommendation to the expertise of the engineering department. Councilman Berquist: Where are the current no parking areas? Todd Hoffman: The current no parking areas, it will be easier to show on here. Extend to the north really at the edge of the photo and they extend to the east where you can actually see the signs here. They extend to the east to this point. And down Tecumseh a short ways. The closest, in the current configuration, the closest parking is approximately 600 feet. With that the Park and Recreation Commission made their original recommendation on September 23rd. Again, they did not confirm or change that recommendation at their October meeting so in lieu of other direction from the Council, it would be staff's recommendation that you follow the recommendation of the Park and Recreation Commission made on September 23rd of this year. Acting Mayor Mason: Any questions for staff at this point? Councilman Berquist: The widening of the entrance. The letter from the individual that was lamenting the inaccessibility, was there something in there that said that the entrance wasn't wide enough? Todd Hoffman: So there's no confusion. There's an entry gate and then on the right side of the gate is a little gravel path that goes around that would not easily accommodate a handicap person. That's all we're talking about widening is that little gravel path. It would take moving a boulder out. Cutting down a berm a little bit and then asphalting that area. That was the extent of that. Councilman Berquist: When the thing was built, what was the reason to making, for making it as narrow as it was? Todd Hoffman: Really accessibility at that time was not considered a prime objective. The prime objective at the time the entrance was gated was to prohibit vehicles from going down. The path came as a natural 20 City Council Meeting -November 10, 1997 aside from people just having to, both pedestrian and bike travel, having to enter by some fashion, just went around the gate. Acting Mayor Mason: Any other questions for staff at this point? I'm sure there are a number of people that would like to comment on this. We'll certainly get to that. I do see, I'm going put someone on the spot here. I do see a Park Commissioner present. Would you care to comment? Jane Meger: Sure. Acting Mayor Mason: Thanks. And this was not pre-planned. Jane Meger: Jane Meger, Park and Rec Commission. As Todd stated, a lot of our discussion originally was around making the best decision to make it accessible for disabled individuals. We talked a lot about, did it make sense to put some parking down the path at the bottom near the park. And based on the size of the park, we thought that that was not probably the best idea for this park. And as Todd said, when we made our motion we were thinking of no parking signs being removed and I'll be quite honest, I thought that they would go out further around the curve. That the no parking signs would stay out further so I guess I can't speak for all of the commissioners but I would ask maybe to think a little bit further that if we do remove some of the no parking signs as indicated this evening, closer to the entrance of the park, that perhaps we may be consider signing some of that area as disabled parking and leaving up some of the no parking further back. I guess that would be my additional recommendation to what was originally. Acting Mayor Mason: Okay, thanks. Jane Meger: Any questions or? Acting Mayor Mason: Thanks Jane. I do, for the record, there is a letter here from Jan Lash, who is the Park and Rec Chair person who has stated some of the concerns that Mr. Hoffman has already alluded to about, I'm sensing what happened here is engineering has one view of things and Park and Rec has another view of things and perhaps Park and Rec erred in not asking engineering to bring it back to them first. Right now I guess that's neither here nor there. In her letter it is stated that she would like to see the item revisited by Park and Rec Commission or City Council should consider their new position, which I believe is similar to Commissioner Meger's comments. With all of that, I will tell you this, this isn't a public hearing but with this many people here I think if you have some comments you'd like to share, if you could keep their fairly concise, that would be appreciated but I think now would be a good time for that. If someone would like to step forward. Dick Lynch: Good evening. My name is Dick Lynch and I live at 7120 Utica Lane and I'm speaking in consideration of the time things here, for most of the residents that live adjacent to the park and our concerns and our issues that come into play here. I've got some handouts for you to look at... panoramic photos if you will of the area in question. I think the operative word here is neighborhood park and it's a real concern. On a warm summer day or any type of days during the summer you can find as many as 50 people either bicycling or walking. You see mothers pushing children in strollers. Children in wagons. On their way down to the park. Bicyclists. It's a pedestrian type of situation and it just seems ludicrous to tighten up the street and park all kinds of cars in there or to try to make the park something that it isn't. It's just, the pictures are pretty much self explanatory. The blind curve, the sight lines on Utica Lane are, leave a lot to be desired as far as traffic and pedestrians moving through that area. Cars parked on the side of Utica Lane will cause congestion and obstruction for bike and foot traffic and access to the park that the 21 City Council Meeting -November 10, 1997 neighborhood has again depicted in the photos. Also you have a situation with children running out of their yards, through the parked cars and not visible to the traffic and the narrowing down if you will of the street. We feel that an alternative, the recommendation that was put forth in the letter to the Mayor and Council members dated November 9th from Jan Lash on behalf of Commissioners Howe, Berg, Meger and Roeser, it seems to be safe and a reasonable recommendations being proposed to put that parking on the east side of Utica Lane as it goes north. There are no homes. There are no situations where you would have children running out onto the street. And to the best of my knowledge very little use of people coming to the park as you'd have from Tecumseh or the other streets up there where people come down to the park. If you should decide to consider this matter this evening, we ask that you consider the following. Allowing on street parking to be located directly north of Greenwood Shores park entrance on the east side of the street only. Where the street straightens out and does not obstruct bike and foot traffic. On the east side of the section of Utica Lane there is no houses or driveways, hence safety concerns are minimized. If anyone else from the neighborhood has something they'd like to add or bring forward, fine. I think this is kind of a summary of a meeting that we held on the subject. Councilman Berquist: I've got a quick question Mr. Lynch. These panoramas that we're looking at. I mean if this is a no parking sign, I'm assuming that this is a no parking sign. And posted down here is a no parking sign. Dick Lynch: Yes. Councilman Berquist: What's going on that everybody's parking? Dick Lynch: We did that to illustrate. Councilman Berquist: Illustrate the closeness that, the restrictiveness. Dick Lynch: ...what happens... Councilman Berquist: I thought we had a lawless neighborhood. Councilman Senn: They were having a block party, come on. Acting Mayor Mason: Did you have a permit for that? Councilman Engel: I tell you, where was Barney Fife when we needed him. Acting Mayor Mason: Thanks Dick. Alice Fowler: I've just got a, Alice Fowler, 7050 Utica. A couple of things. One is, on the map that you have of the street doesn't really, it doesn't show that Utica Lane does make the curve but it also curves back so that it's not, as you come down along the park, the road curves and then it also continues to curve back to the east somewhat. It doesn't straighten immediately at the bottom of the hill, so that as you're coming down around that curve, you can't see further down Utica until you get really quite a ways onto Utica along the lakeshore. And the other thing is that, if you can note the size of the park itself is small. I mean we're talking about a very small park. And so the amount of traffic that would be really appropriate for the park, we're not, I don't think it needs to be a large amount of parking that we're providing for because the park itself is not very big. There's like one picnic table. There's a little bit of a swimming 22 City Council Meeting -November 10, 1997 beach and really the major park facilities are at the other end of the lake at Lake Ann. So I think all of those need to be part of what we consider in terms of what we're providing. The other pieces as well that the park is not easily patrolled because there is not easily accessed to, there's the park butts up to some private land. Prince's private land and apparently that is a party area for kids and...that activity on his land, which has been a problem in the past. Of kids going into the park and then going onto the private land from there. And it's not easily accessible to the police to patrol that area. So those would be things that I. Acting Mayor Mason: Thank you. Joanne Lambrecht: Joanne Lambrecht, 6990 Utica Lane. One thing that we mentioned at the homeowners meeting that wasn't mentioned here is if you take the no parking signs down, we would like it to be parking for daytime only. Because we have no much vandalism because of the draw of the beer parties that are all summer long in that little park. We've had 5 separate incidents in the last 3 years of damage to our property by the kids going by there because of the huge draw at that park. So we'd like the parking to be daytime only. Acting Mayor Mason: Thank you. Bill Lambrecht: Bill Lambrecht, 6990 Utica Lane. I concur with Alice Fowler and her concerns about the parking. There is now, there is parking allowed on the west side of Utica Lane from the fourth house down which that's my property. So they can park in front of my property all the way down to the curve on the north end of Utica. And there's presently no parking allowed on the east side and I'm just up here saying that if you allow parking on the east side of Utica Lane, which there aren't any houses, then would you then therefore close parking on the west side of Utica Lane, which there are houses and any child or person would, if they're coming through cars, there may be some visibility problems so again, if you open parking on the east side, would you close the parking that's presently now on the west side so that's a concern and consideration. Acting Mayor Mason: Good, thanks. Dick Lynch: I think that the letter addressed from the Park Commission stated the east side and that the no parking would remain on the west side. Barb Klick: Good evening. Barb Klick and I reside at 7116 Utica Lane. I've been there 10 ½ years. I think the issue is really public safety tonight. It really is quite an inconvenience for me to have all the no parking signs. I mean I think people always think oh, we love that. Whenever you have a family event, I'm having a baby shower this Saturday for 20 ladies. We usually have the New Year Eve's party. Everyone has to park far away from us and I'm willing to go through that inconvenience for the public safety. I have young children. You can see one here tonight, and on those pictures I hope you can see on the curves, on one end of the curve where I have a mailbox with my neighbor, that was taken out a few years ago. And this summer, on the other side of the curve there used to be a pine tree down on two houses next to the park, and it's not just the neighborhood but it's the young kids who drive in the neighborhood. And it was a car versus tree and they ended up back boarding that young man and took him away on a back board and his friends and they lose the tree and so the concern really is for the children. You can see the cars parking down there. They come down with everything, and after 10 ½ years I never ceased to be amazed. They come down with the Fun Islands. They come down with the fishing poles and the tackle box and a stringer. They do all that. We have no sidewalks there so they come right out onto the street. It's been great that 23 City Council Meeting -November 10, 1997 you're putting more and more lights at the great Lake Ann Park at the other end but there is that asphalt path that connects there and so more and more kids are playing soccer. It's all the rage in Chanhassen now. They come back through that park at the end of the night, even in the fall now, and come and dump right back out onto that street. There's no sidewalk and no lights so there really needs to be no parking on both sides of that curve. And that's all I have, thank you. Acting Mayor Mason: Thank you. Well I, oh, oh. I'm sorry. Judy Christensen: ... I'm Judy Christensen at 7100 Utica Lane and I live, it's Barb's house, the park and my house. Tonight I have 17 signed statements from the neighbors and what we've done is we've tried to kind of do a summary of what we have presented thus far on paper and you'll find that there are 30 individual signatures of which 16 were present in the audience tonight of those 30. What's interesting is of these 17 signed statements, it's a neighborhood comprised of 84 homes and this represents 20% of them. There were some people that had some additional comments. I'll just give you these now so you can have a chance to start to look at these. I don't know that you're going to, this is basically again just a recap of what we've already provided you. And on here there are four families that had desired daytime parking, where it would be in that section of area if they were going to remove no parking signs. That they would be replaced with daytime parking signs and I think that the parameters were 8:00 a.m. till 8:00 p.m. Of those three families again on those signed statements, there were three families that desired that the no parking signs remain as, exactly as they are. However, at the top of the no parking where they had suggested removing some, there's two bus stops at Utica and Tecumseh intersection as well as Utica and Shawnee Lane. And there were three families hoping that those no parking signs would remain there so that children as they access the bus to and from school, that they would be able to not have parking there and obstruct any kind of, or cause any kind of... for the children getting on and off the bus. There's one family that also wanted to increase the area of no parking signs by an additional 30 feet that's been proposed in Jan Lash's letter that she put together this weekend on the 9th of November. And one family that wants to omit a second alternative. Now I realize that you have this all on audio tape so that will help you if you need all those specific details but I tried to summarize them as the papers get distributed so that that would facilitate your... Acting Mayor Mason: Thank you very much. Is there anyone else? Well, I'll just say this and then I'll turn it over to the rest of Council. With Chairperson Lash's letter wishing it to go back to Park and Rec, I personally think under the circumstances that's a good idea. That's where I'm headed with this but I'd like to hear what other people have to say too. Councilman Berquist: I'm curious. The individual that wrote us twice. Councilman Engel: Rachel Manteuffel. Councilman Berquist: The individual that wrote us twice, does she, are there residents of the area? Todd Hoffman: Yes. Councilman Berquist: That neighborhood. Todd Hoffman: No, downtown Chanhassen. Councilman Engel: Where does she live? That's what I wondered somewhat the same thing. 24 City Council Meeting -November 10, 1997 Todd Hoffman: Downtown Chanhassen. Councilman Berquist: Thank you. I'm always amazed. You can go along for 100 years and someone sees, someone perceives an inequity and they raise a little cane and look what happens. The inclination that I have is to do exactly what Mike said but having said that, I don't want to do anything. Councilman Engel: I'm with you. I want to know how many parks possibly Ms. Manteuffel drives by on the way to this one.., she does, and I know there's two directly in the area. Acting Mayor Mason: That's not the issue here. Councilman Engel: But I'm just saying. And it may not be the issue here but I think the point I want to make is, there are parks in Chanhassen and that one is a particular burden. Use another one. There's a lot of them. Acting Mayor Mason: Oh, be very careful Councilman Engel. Be very careful. Councilman Engel: ... problem when I think in common sense terms and I sit in a seat like this but. Acting Mayor Mason: Well, be very careful. Councilman Engel: I'd just as soon do nothing. Mr. Berquist, I'll cut myself off there. I'd just as soon do nothing. Now that I've gotten myself in trouble. Councilman Senn: I don't know. From my perspective I guess, I guess I don't share the notion of sending it back because all it means is we're going to have it back two weeks from now again. I think we ought to just make a decision and go forward. I mean there's three sides you have to weigh here. I mean one side is, it's a city park and most of our city parks have some parking or accessibility to them. There's an issue, which we need to deal with nowadays and have spent a great deal of money in dealing with it in many areas relating to the ADA legislation. Whether we are in total agreement it or not is immaterial. I mean it's law. It's what we have to deal with. And thirdly, and by no means least important is the concerns of the neighborhood in relationship to you know what has been and also you know the safety concerns, etc. It seems to me that, you know if you don't deal with all those issues, this issue isn't going to go away. I mean if you take one element of it and try to deal with it, I somehow feel that some other element of it's going to be back. It seems to me that it's reasonable to suggest that that parking be allowed on the east side as is being suggested on the north leg, but not on the west side, even extending down further than it is now to balance out where you would allow it on the east side. It would seem to me that it would be reasonable to maybe furnish one handicap stall posted as such close to the park entrance. And it also seems very reasonable to me to maybe put up some additional park signage relating to both governments and hours of park use, that sort of thing if in fact it is a neighborhood park. I mean if it's a neighborhood park, it should fall under our guidelines for noise and I mean all that other stuff which means there really shouldn't be a lot of use there beyond 10 and other things like that so I mean it seems to me that those are rules that should be posted and instituted along with that. But at the same time would provide a somewhat of a solution to each one of the elements that we really need to do, and it sounds to me like that's something the neighborhood, you know isn't. I'm going to say it's probably not the best of all worlds but it's. 25 City Council Meeting -November 10, 1997 Acting Mayor Mason: All the more, with all you've stated Councilman Senn, it seems all the more reason to send it back for Park and Rec and get their specific comments on that. I mean I hear what you're saying about dealing with it tonight. When I see five different commissioners expressing a concern about an action, I'm loathe to take any action on it tonight. Councilman Berquist: I don't want to see it back either but. Councilman Senn: Well, they're a recommending body to us. I mean it's that simple. We have most of their recommendations and/or comments at this point. I don't know what's going to change. Councilman Berquist: I don't want to see it back but they have expressed, they have expressed a desire to have it back. I think, have you not? So. Councilman Senn: I don't think that's true Steve. Acting Mayor Mason: Well. Councilman Berquist: Isn't that true? Acting Mayor Mason: The letter. Todd Hoffman: As a body they sent the Council a recommendation. As individuals they may have spoke to you otherwise but not as a recommending body. Councilman Senn: I haven't heard from anybody. Acting Mayor Mason: This letter, written by the Chairperson says, and I quote. Now, you're right Todd. I mean with what you're saying but this letter does also state, received November 9. I have spoken with Commissioners Howe, Berg, Meger and Roeser. I was unable to reach the other commissioners over the weekend. We are all in agreement that this item needs to be revisited by Park and Rec Commission or that City Council should consider our new position based on the actual staff input. And it goes on to say some more stuff and it is signed by Jan Lash, Park and Rec Chairperson. Now, what Todd, what you're saying is absolutely right. What I personally think happened here is that engineering made a recommendation based on needs of engineering, and they did their job. They did what they were asked to do. If anything, I think Park and Rec may have overlooked the fact that they should have asked to have the recommendation go to them instead of go to Council so they could take a look at it. Now that's what I'm reading into this letter. If I'm incorrect, so be it. I would rather yes, commissioners are recommending bodies and I believe that we owe them at least that too. If they feel the need to have the second go at it, so be it. Councilman Berquist: Move to table. Acting Mayor Mason: Second. Any more discussion? Councilman Senn: Before we do, we're not under any time lines? Okay. Just wanted to make sure. Acting Mayor Mason: Motion has been made and seconded to table this until the next Council meeting, with the understanding that it will go back to Park and Rec for their recommendation. 26 City Council Meeting -November 10, 1997 Todd Hoffman: Clarification. Just for everyone's notice. It will be the week of Thanksgiving. That Tuesday, November, somebody help me out who's got a calendar. 22nd? Councilman Engel: Last Tuesday in November. Todd Hoffman: 25th? November 25th. Acting Mayor Mason: Okay. So it will not be on the 24th agenda then for City Council. I'm assuming it would be on the December agenda. Councilman Senn: December 8th. Acting Mayor Mason: Is that for sure? Councilman Senn: That's the second Monday. Acting Mayor Mason: December sometimes you just have one meeting and it's on the 3rd. I'm just not sure of the date but. Audience: Well there would be public notice.., of these meetings, right? Acting Mayor Mason: Yes. Yes, that's correct. So the next Park and Rec meeting is November 25. So this is when this would come up with them. Assuming this motion goes through. Any more discussion? Councilman Berquist moved, Acting Mayor Mason seconded that the City Council table action on the recommendation by the Park and Recreation Commission concerning the Greenwood Shores Park accessibility report. All voted in favor and the motion carried. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS: None. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: HIGHWAY 5 SAFETY PROJECT AND CITIZENS POLICE ACADEMY, PUBLIC SAFETY DIRECTOR (VERBAL). Acting Mayor Mason: Was anybody going to do the Highway 5 Safety Project and Citizens Police Academy? Todd Hoffman: Upstairs. Acting Mayor Mason: That was done upstairs? When our. Todd Gerhardt: Yeah. Acting Mayor Mason: Okay. Councilman Senn: Oh okay, so it was the police academy thing? Acting Mayor Mason: Yeah. 27 City Council Meeting -November 10, 1997 Councilman Senn: Okay, so we're not doing the Highway 5 Safety Project thing? Todd Gerhardt: Charles, did you have anything to add... ? Acting Mayor Mason: Apparently not at this time. All right. We'll move on to discussion of the administrative section. Mark I believe you. No, oh wait. We're doing l(e) first. Approval of bills. I(E). APPROVAL OF BILLS. Councilman Senn: There's a, I don't now. There a number of items in here that I question and I know you talked about, or raised them briefly before and there aren't answers to them. I just, how should I say this? I mean we're getting to the point again where it just seems week after week we're doing the same thing and these just go ahead and get paid and nothing ever happens on them. And I think this time there's several of them that I'm not sure we should be going ahead and paying until we do understand what they are, and even then maybe we do or don't pay them. But I don't know how we get at that. Councilman Berquist: Well if I could make a comment along those lines. Some of the, every single one that you mentioned tonight at the work session, I had also written down. Every single one. And it seems as though we are at a point in the budgetary calendar where we're getting to a point where let's fill out the budget and I'm seeing those sorts of items, it may or may not be accurate but it seems as though we are. When I see a check to the Chanhassen Villager for $140.00 for subscriptions, knowing full well that we are one of the significant advertisers to that newspaper, I don't understand it. Why we are paying $500.00 for, I'm not going to mention it. Something. We're paying $450.00 for something else. We're paying $76.00 a month for a two year subscription to something. And it goes on and it, perhaps rather than. Perhaps the parameters for spending need to be defined. That's my comment. Councilman Senn: I agree. I don't disagree with any of that. Councilman Berquist: Weather Watch. I mean that's another one. I had that thing. Councilman Senn: Whether it's buying uniforms for professional employees or what, I mean again. I mean it's just, there's just a lot of things in here that there's really questions over. I mean I'd really like to, I mean if, this is November now. There's only going to be a couple of these left. I guess I'd really like to just kind of set them aside. Let's get the answers. Let's understand them. Let's make sure we're comfortable with them before these things are paid and. Councilman Berquist: I mean if that's the only way to make a point, is that kind of where you're going? Councilman Senn: Well it's kind of where I'm going Steve because we've been supposedly trying to get better at this for the last 9 months and I'm sorry. I'm seeing this in the exact same place I saw this last year in November. It hasn't gotten better. So that's my frustration. Acting Mayor Mason: So are you looking to pull out specific items or what? I mean some sort of action needs to be taken on the majority of these bills this evening. Councilman Berquist: There's nothing in here that can't wait until, for Monday's work session I wouldn't suspect, would you Todd? 28 City Council Meeting -November 10, 1997 Todd Hoffman: My expense check. Councilman Berquist: I'll lend it to you. Councilman Engel: Other than that. Councilman Senn: Well now that the points have really been made. Councilman Engel: Other than that, maybe we can go ahead. Councilman Senn: Could we table the list until the work session and basically act on it at the work session as say a continuation of this? Councilman Engel: I want to raise one other question about this first, Acting Mayor, before we go on. Is I thought we were aiming for a regular report of department spending compared to budget and compared to same period prior year, as opposed to just getting this check register. Councilman Senn: You missed last work session Mark and that was one of the big questions that came up. We do have that in last time's administrative packet and if you'll look at that, what it shows is a substantial positive variances throughout the entire budget. Meaning we haven't, I mean there's supposed to be a 25% effective remaining budget to be spent and in most categories there was significantly more than that and that was one of the concerns was that okay, now here we are. Councilman Engel: It doesn't just disappear. Councilman Senn: It doesn't just disappear. And there were no good, I don't know, I guess response as answers as to why that specifically was and so they were going to go back and look at that. But this kind of ties directly into that as far as I'm concerned. Councilman Engel: Yeah it does and I looked at that packet before I left town last week and I don't remember seeing that. But then I wasn't here so I could have easily have missed it but, yeah. I am concerned that we start spending just a little bit more time from that standpoint. I must have just missed it. Acting Mayor Mason: I'm hearing from our esteemed Assistant City Manager that there's nothing here that can't wait until Monday's work session? Charles Folch: There's no contractor payments, things like that? Todd Hoffman: Yeah, there's contractors expecting to pick up checks tomorrow morning. They're budgeted projects. They've done their paperwork. They've delivered to the City. The City has issued a check register and. Councilman Berquist: Okay then I'll move. Todd Gerhardt: If Council doesn't want to approve them, we... Todd Hoffman: That's their choice but I just want to... 29 City Council Meeting -November 10, 1997 Acting Mayor Mason: Well I'm not, I'm hoping no one's suggesting. Well, I'm not suggesting that. Councilman Senn: Well give us an example. Todd Gerhardt: Well there's a Nodland Construction for Lyman Boulevard installation. Todd Hoffman: Expert Asphalt for Round House Park. Charles Folch: If there was a list of the questionable ones, why don't we just pull those off. Acting Mayor Mason: Well that would. Todd Hoffman: I mean you tell a vendor they can't take a $20,000.00 check for a week, and that's of concern to them. I mean I don't question the Council's questioning but. Charles Folch: IF you can itemize the specific ones of concern. Councilman Berquist: Certainly. Councilman Senn: Okay. Should we take it page by page then? Councilman Berquist: You go first and then I'll pull up what I don't have. What you have that I don't. Or vice versa. Councilman Senn: Okay, first page. First page, let's see here. $35.00 for, second item. $35.00 for lunch. Let's see here. 1, 2, 3, 4, fifth item down. American Heat Video Productions. One year subscription, $936.00. Let's see here. American Infant Care Products, two diaper decks. Wondering where those were going or whatever. Todd Gerhardt: Down here. Councilman Senn: So that's part of City Hall remodel? Todd Gerhardt: Well, it came out of maintenance repairs. Out of, not the City Hall construction fund but out of City Hall repairs. Been having kids, diapers changed on tables that people have lunch out here on, and the librarians asked that we install a couple of diaper tables inside. We put one in the Men's and Women, to be politically correct. Councilman Senn: Fine. Leave that one in. Acting Mayor Mason: Hey there's nothing political about changing a diaper. I've done it. My wife's done it so. Councilman Senn: So that's it for the first page for me. Anybody else have first page? Councilman Berquist: Well I did have. I had. Councilman Senn: You had some of the same ones? 30 City Council Meeting -November 10, 1997 Councilman Berquist: Second item. Abra Auto Body, air bags for open house. $450.00. Todd Gerhardt: So just three items on first page then? Councilman Senn: Yep. Councilman Engel: There was more than that. Councilman Senn: Well I said you don't have to worry about the diaper one so you've got the lunch. You've got the Abra and you've got the American Heat Video Productions. Second page, the top item on vehicle expense for October. I had a question on. And I think that was it for page 2 for me. Councilman Berquist: Me too. Councilman Senn: Page 3 had nothing. Councilman Berquist: Likewise. Councilman Senn: Page 4, I still wish Roger would break his darn bills down. Roger Knutson: I do. Councilman Senn: Nothing we ever see. Roger Knutson: By the tenth of an hour. Todd Gerhardt: if you want to see Roger's bill, I mean it comes that thick. I mean he details each itemized project. Councilman Senn: Okay. That was it on page 4. Councilman Berquist: I had that last item on page 4. $18.00 luncheon for Senn. Councilman Senn: OH yeah, I had that too. I missed that at the bottom. Councilman Berquist: I don't know about that one. Councilman Senn: That was me and Mancino and whatever but I don't even know what it was. Councilman Engel: And your spouses. Councilman Senn: $18.00, I don't even know what it was. Todd Gerhardt: I'm sure you attended a chamber meeting. Councilman Senn: I know but when? That would be almost a year ago. 31 City Council Meeting -November 10, 1997 Acting Mayor Mason: Councilman Senn: Page 6. Todd Hoffman: Page 5? Councilman Berquist: Page 5. Let's just roll through this please. Mike wants to get home. Page 6. Councilman Senn: Oh, I'm sorry. Did I jump one? Villager subscription, $140.00. And let's see here. was somewhat astonished by. Since I buy them all the time too and they don't cost anywhere near that much money. Councilman Berquist: They only have 48 stars. Acting Mayor Mason: I'm sorry. I could not resist that. Councilman Senn: No, actually I buy very expensive ones for the office buildings. But that's all right. Todd Gerhardt: If you have a vendor, we'd be interested in knowing. We buy, I mean we live on top of this hill here. We get a flag that lasts maybe one year and it's unbelievable the number of complaints we receive when our flags start to get just a little tattered. So we try to resew them. Councilman Senn: So you buy ones that last how long? ...well let's see here. That was it for page. Councilman Engel: Can we get a bulk discount? Todd Gerhardt: Well we resew them. Councilman Senn: Do you have anything on page 5 Steven? Councilman Berquist: I just wanted to talk briefly about our sidewalk replacement at the Hanus building. Dayco. Councilman Senn: Where's that? How did you know that was the Hanus building? Councilman Berquist: Toll. Todd Gerhardt: It is the sidewalk. About a year ago we had the concrete removed in that area. It heaved so they couldn't open up their door. We took that concrete out in the winter time and put a wood deck down for winter. And finally replaced it. Councilman Senn: By all means we want to do that before we make him buy the property in about two weeks. Councilman Berquist: Well which brings up another question and perhaps and. Todd Gerhardt: He bought the concrete pad in front of the door... Yeah, I'm sorry. Page 5 I had the Chanhassen I also had a question on two U.S. Flags for $323.00. I 32 City Council Meeting -November 10, 1997 Councilman Berquist: November 1st is past. Is it in the new... ? Todd Gerhardt: We're closing next week. Councilman Berquist: Okay. So we'll scratch that one. Pay that. Pay Dayco. Todd Gerhardt: So you don't want to see Dayco anymore? Councilman Berquist: No. Councilman Senn: Page 6. Todd, what's the staff uniform for Patty? $199.45. Todd Hoffman: Chanhassen Recreation Center staff uniforms. I don't know why Patty is writing a check for it but I'll find out for you. Councilman Senn: I'm assuming $199.00 is more than one uniform. I don't know but I guess that's why I'd like more information on it. Todd Hoffman: Yeah, you buy just the shirts for the recreation facilities supervisors who sit at the front desk at the Rec Center. Todd Gerhardt: It's part of the budget. You have a uniform section in probably Public Works, Park and Recreation. Councilman Senn: Well I understand but I don't understand why Patty's writing the check out of her personal account. Councilman Berquist: Another one... I think we had talked about this but I just wanted to get it clarified. Relocation assistance. Todd Gerhardt: That's Karen Demun. She was the renter in the Round House and as a part of our negotiations for settlement of relocation out of that premise, we need to make monthly payments for, I think it's 18 months. $362.00 for rent differential from what she was paying there and where she got relocated. Councilman Berquist: Really? Todd Gerhardt: Ask Councilman Senn how difficult it was to deal with her. Councilman Senn: OH yes. Todd Gerhardt: We negotiated going on two years. Councilman Berquist: I'll use the same line you used on Charles. This was the best you could do? Councilman Senn: I didn't negotiate this deal. But I have to say if Todd negotiated it, it probably did a good job knowing her. 33 City Council Meeting -November 10, 1997 Todd Gerhardt: After 6 months Mark Senn, believe it or not, threw up his hands and says how can you deal with this woman. Councilman Berquist: All right. Councilman Senn: Have you got any more on page 6? Councilman Berquist: No. Councilman Senn: Page 7. I didn't have anything on page 7. Councilman Berquist: Page 7. This is where I start nickeling and diming. Enforcement Products. Public Safety Patches. $500.00. I got my in line rink answered. Drain tile. Chan Rec Center. West in line rink. $2,500.00 to put drain tile in. It wasn't drain tiled when we constructed it? Todd Hoffman: It was drain tiled underneath the, both rinks. Along that west side we saw the worse frost heave of the entire rink and were concerned for our long term investments of those two rinks so the same contractor who built the rinks provided a proposal which was very fair for the work they had to do in those tight confines there to put that additional drain tile in so, to protect our long term investment. If you force them up too high, you won't just be putting drain tile in. You'll be taking up the whole side and putting down new footings. Councilman Berquist: Well it's sort of like the parking lot underlayment. I mean we pay these professionals, quasi-professionals in some instances, to design these facilities. And if they design drain along every surface except for the west surface and we end up with the worst heave along the west surface. I just get tired of the change orders. Pay $500.00 here. $30,000.00 there. Todd Hoffman: There's drain tile under, you know uniform presence underneath that whole facility. And then on the west side we just saw that water dumping down there and it's in the tightest spot and it's not getting out so this is additional drain tile that we needed. And if it would have been designed in the first place, we would have paid for it then. Now, in essence what we tried to do is get away with not investing the $2,500.00 to see if it would work. It didn't work so we put it in. Councilman Berquist: Okay. Scratch those. Scratch that one. Todd Gerhardt: So just the patches? Councilman Berquist: The patches. Anything on 8 Mark? Councilman Senn: No. Councilman Berquist: I didn't have anything on 8 or 9. I hope that's the last Hartley, that's all I can say. Councilman Senn: That's the only one I had on 9, was to ask the same thing. I hope that's the last one. But I thought we were told months ago we were done with him. Councilman Berquist: Well we were told months ago that November 1st I think was the day they packed their bag. I think, wasn't it Todd? 34 City Council Meeting -November 10, 1997 Todd Gerhardt: Yeah. It's. Councilman Senn: Well we've already paid him way past August so I don't know what the old August one's resurfacing here for. It must be something that got forgotten. Todd Gerhardt: Before we had Jolene on staff we needed some maps done and so that was her service in doing maps and putting a couple of plats on the data base. Councilman Senn: Okay. Let's see here, page 10 are we up to then? Page 10 I just had a question mark on the three sets of fire gear. What that's all about. Councilman Berquist: Me too. Councilman Senn: ON page 10, second item from the bottom. Jefferson Fire & Safety. $3,915.00. Todd Gerhardt: I don't know what it is. I'll get you a response. Councilman Senn: Okay. Let's see, page 11. I didn't have anything. Did you? Councilman Berquist: I had, we have two contractors that we have made a $1,000.00 refund to. McDonald Homes and S. Kroiss Construction. One for $1,087.00 and one for $1,166.00 and the notation says shouldn't have charged. Todd Gerhardt: I'm sure it had something to do with the building permit. Do you want me to get a clarification? Councilman Berquist: I'd like to know, yeah. Todd Gerhardt: Where was that other one? Councilman Berquist: The other one was, there's S. Kroiss on page 11 and McDonald Homes at the end, the last item on page 12. Todd Hoffman: On occasion what occurs is the developer pays it. The builder, they both pay it. Councilman Berquist: Well I've never seen on worded, I've never seen one like this and I'm attuned to what's coming, what comes through from contractors from the permit department. I've never seen one similar to this so that's what keyed it. Councilman Senn: I had nothing on page 12. Did you have anything else on page 12 other than McDonald's? Okay. Let's see, page 13. The only, I don't know, miscellaneous parts and supplies totaling $1,922.00. It seems like an awful lot of miscellaneous but. Todd Gerhardt: That's probably a month, two months worth of supplies from Merlin's. Councilman Senn: It seems like we see them every pay request which runs what, every two weeks so that's why I was just kind of surprised to see the $1,922.00 all of a sudden. 35 City Council Meeting -November 10, 1997 Charles Folch: I would guess it's probably very similar to like Roger... Roger's bill where basically most of the maintenance division, we have a charge account here... Councilman Senn: Well again, I mean from my perspective Charles the issue is, Merlin's is on there almost every two weeks and there's always a bill and now zap, it's up to $2,000.00. Here we are in the month of November. And if that's a two week period, you know I just wondered why all of a sudden wham. Going up. Charles Folch: We can get a copy of that statement. Councilman Senn: Let's see, that was it on 13 for me. Do you have anything Steven? Councilman Berquist: No. Councilman Senn: 14, I had asked the question earlier and still have the question as to why we're paying the Minnesota Concrete Masonry Assn $163,000.00. Councilman Berquist: Well Don said that check had been voided but what's Project No. 93-26? Who remembers project numbers? Charles Folch: 26B and C, that's Coulter Boulevard, Phase II with also Project 93-26C is that pedestrian underpass of concrete. Councilman Berquist: Okay, so the check has been voided but that's probably what it's for. Charles Folch: It could be the correct amount but it could be made out to the wrong contractor. The contractor on that one was... Councilman Senn: Well will you let us know? Councilman Berquist: We'll see it next time when the check gets written. Councilman Senn: Okay. That was it for 14. Do you have anything on 147 Councilman Berquist: That was the only thing I had a question on 14. 15, I'm not going to worry about. Old Navy, CRC shirt. Order for $297.00. Councilman Senn: Okay. Councilman Berquist: 16. I bought my first punch card for the Rec Center. Councilman Senn: Did you use it yet? Councilman Berquist: I bought my first punch card for the Rec Center and I've been using it religiously. I quit smoking again so I'm trying to do it without gaining another 35 pounds in weight. Councilman Senn: Congratulations. 36 City Council Meeting -November 10, 1997 Councilman Berquist: Thank you. But I went in there and that ab trainer. I'm assuming that's the thing that's sitting there by the television set up in the front of the room. That sucker was $324.00? Todd Gerhardt: Probably more than that. Acting Mayor Mason: Probably a lot more. Councilman Berquist: No. No way that thing should be. I mean I don't have, obvious that I don't have... Councilman Senn: Steve? My son made one for about $5.00. Councilman Berquist: Well I'm sure he did. But that thing was $320.00? Councilman Senn: No, I know what you're talking about. Councilman Engel: Now wait a minute, is this a... with a chain drive? Councilman Berquist: No, no. Councilman Engel: Simply a board with a tilt up stand? Councilman Senn: No. No, no. Councilman Berquist: It's a nice little deal but that's a lot of bucks. The only thing is it makes my belly sore. Councilman Senn: I didn't have anything on 16. Did you have anything else on 167 I didn't have anything on 16. Okay. Councilman Berquist: Nothing on 17. Councilman Senn: I didn't have anything on 17 either. Or wait, no I'm sorry. I did too. RSP Architects. Just a curiosity question. Isn't RSP Architects the architects on the Post Office deal that we've been fighting with so much? Councilman Berquist: Yes they are as a matter of fact. Councilman Senn: But why are we hiring them to do Greenwood Shores? When we haven't been satisfied with them at all as it relates to the post office facility. Todd Hoffman: I wasn't aware that they were the consulting firm. The State Council on Accessibility provided the Park and Recreation Commission with a list of accessibility consultants. Julee Quarve Peterson was on that list. Based from her experience with the City back in '90 and '91 and that's who they selected. Todd Gerhardt: Julee has joined that firm. She used to be out on her own. An independent. RSP hired her on to do accessibility audits. 37 City Council Meeting -November 10, 1997 Councilman Senn: Well I'm assuming you had more than one name. Next time you might just think to check it in house considering we've been fighting with them for almost a year now. Councilman Berquist: We've been fighting with the Post Office. I mean the problems that we have had with RSP have been at the insistence of the Post Office. Councilman Senn: Probably. I don't know. Page 18, did you have anything? Councilman Berquist: No. Councilman Senn: Page 197 Councilman Berquist: No. Councilman Senn: Page 20? Councilman Berquist: Page 20, no. Councilman Senn: Page 21 ? Councilman Berquist: 21, I just wanted to talk about the trees that we got moved. We already did and I wanted to find out what this Weather Watch service is, which we already did. Councilman Senn: I'd still like to see, I'd like to see some back-up or explanation on that. The Weather Watch one. Why we're paying that amount of money. And what we're getting for it. Councilman Berquist: And this Wilson's Nursery on page 22. We purchased 30 trees for what? What was that for again? Wilson's Nursery. Purchased 30 trees. Councilman Senn: That was for County Road 17 somebody said. Or was that you who said that I thought. Councilman Berquist: It wasn't me. Councilman Senn: Oh, well then maybe it wasn't. I just had that note written to the side from earlier. So that's a question mark. Acting Mayor Mason: Well wasn't, I understand that but wasn't the deal quite, I'm assuming that both of you guys are, or who's ever been had time to look through all of this stuff and the answers you got weren't satisfactory before? Councilman Berquist: I didn't have a chance to talk to him. Acting Mayor Mason: Well. Councilman Senn: Correct. They didn't know the answers. Acting Mayor Mason: Well but part of the deal also was that that file was out for anyone to take a look at. 38 City Council Meeting -November 10, 1997 Councilman Senn: Right, and the file does not answer the questions, correct. All the file tells you Mike is who is paid and what the amount was paid for. Todd Hoffman: And the details. Councilman Senn: And the details about as broad as what we get in here. Okay, so those would be the items to take out and would move approval of the balance. Councilman Berquist: Second. Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Berquist seconded to approve the Bills, except for the ones removed by Councilman Senn and Councilman Berquist. All voted in favor and the motion carried. ADMINISTRATIVE SECTION DISCUSSION. Councilman Senn: Admin Section. It's not referenced on the, or let's see it is. I'm sorry. The second item on the news release. Southwest Twin Cities Highways Change Ownership dated November 3rd or whatever. And that's basically TH 101 has not changed hands to Hennepin County effectively down to Twilight Trail, if everybody knows where that is. That's basically kind of the hair pin curve and stuff, and also since we now know that there's not going to be any ISTEA funding coming through for TH 101, I think we need to put on our next work session agenda item to talk about the referendum dollars as it relates to trails and our prioritization of that given now that TH 101 is not funded or going to be funded from the outside sources we had hoped that it would be and our commitment that we come back and look at that as our top priority if it wasn't. So I think that we should probably get that done fairly quickly, especially giving the planning process that's going to be quickly undertaken. The second part of that, which is really kind of an adjunct to that is that, and this I guess relates more or less to the, what do we call it? News alley. I always want to say the alligator. But the news alley. And that is you know now that we're starting to undertake that process to do the plans for the referendum and the parks and stuff, I think also at our work session we should, Council should spend a few minutes and really kind of come up with a charge so to speak or some parameters to give these groups on what we're doing. I've already run into people who think the plans are already all finalized for almost each one of the parks, and I think they need to understand that there's a process that's going to start and there's a lot of input coming into it and it's all going to come back here to a focal point and then we're going to kind of make some decisions from there. I think we need to be a little bit more deliberate on how we do that up front. So maybe those could both be added as a work session item Todd, for next session. Todd Gerhardt: So I've got add future TH 101 as a work session item and parameters for. Councilman Senn: Right. You can link those together even if you want. I didn't understand what the MPCA's, it wasn't noted on the front but then there's a deal in here Charles from Minnesota Pollution Control Agency relating to sanitary sewer extension. Charles Folch: Where was that? Councilman Senn: Right in the admin packet. It's the third item back I guess. 39 City Council Meeting -November 10, 1997 Charles Folch: Oh that's basically as an FYI...I'm not sure why that...I think that just happened to get in there, but it's nothing out of the ordinary. Councilman Senn: Okay. So it's nothing we're supposed to do anything with then? Okay. Councilman Berquist: What I thought was impressive is that it was addressed to Mayor Mancino... Charles Folch: Actually they've been doing that for years. For some reason they always assign them to the Mayor when they send... Councilman Senn: Any more permit complaints, I know where I'm sending them to. The one who issues the permits. Acting Mayor Mason: Is there anything else in the administrative section? Councilman Senn: Sorry. Couldn't resist. Let's see. Environmental Commission. The, well there's nobody here for that. Todd, just a question. In the Minutes of the meeting they're talking about going off and doing a number of things that are going to cost some dollars. I didn't know we had anything budgeted for that so it's just a question more than anything else. Maybe there's another way they're funding it but that's not obvious in the Minutes. That would just be nice to know. Councilman Berquist: And I had one, the way this letter from MnDot is worded, news release. It says 101 has been, as ownership of 101 has been transferred to Hennepin County. Right? Their complaint was always that well they couldn't do the Carver County side of it. So now the whole road has been transferred to Hennepin County. Councilman Senn: Well that's what it says. Councilman Berquist: What am I supposed to believe? Roger Knutson: The bottom line. Councilman Berquist: No, no. Not, well I'm just talking about the north section. Councilman Senn: North section. Councilman Berquist: I want to find something I can hang my, we can hang our hats on to make them do the blessed road. You guys are no help. AT what point did you realize that ISTEA wasn't coming through? Charles Folch: Oh when we, when I finally got ahold of, what was it? The County... Councilman Berquist: Prior to that you fully expected that it would happen? You had no inkling that it wouldn't? We had done everything that we could possibly do and is in keeping with normal processes for securing government funding to do projects? 40 City Council Meeting -November 10, 1997 Charles Folch: I didn't have a preconceived expectation, other than doing the same dog and pony show that the Council heard from the process they went through the last time it came.., be able to slide this project in with. That's all I could go on... if anybody has any power or influence... Councilman Senn: Did you ask them why their number one project didn't get funded but ones further down the line did? Because they told us this was going to be their number one recommended project. Charles Folch: I think that was going on the premise that they have, well they had the number two bridesmaid last go around. Projects that, I believe it was the park project.., first bridesmaid last time. They had... I think they assumed that the normal pecking order at the time, okay. Then the three of us, those three projects are going to get in there. We had the same preconceived notion about four years ago when we first applied for ISTEA dollars for Highway 5. We were a bridesmaid the first time. They told us re-apply next year. You're sure to get in. Next year, same project. Same submittal. Everything... actually fell down the scale. Maybe a little bit presumptuous on our part. Councilman Berquist: But my question really was, there was no way to foretell this? I mean I've heard from different people that the game, that we haven't played the game with that road segment long enough. We haven't gotten all the documentation in place. We haven't done this yet. It hasn't been hanging fire long enough in essence, and you don't perceive that to be the case? And if you don't, what you're telling me is that maybe we don't know how the game is played. Charles Folch: I was just looking at the categories for the criteria for the rating system. Number one, it's not a Class A arterial.., minor arterial which.., all these different categories, if they have points on their scale, even though it's a real problem highway corridor, if the way the rating system is set up, it can fall short when they're competing against another project that's.., arterial. The same problem we have with Highway 5. They catch.., all the traffic problems. You've got the volumes. You've got the accidents but you know the categories that matter, where they're actually rated, based on what is classified, it falls short. Lesser priority. Councilman Berquist: Very frustrating. Charles Folch: It is. It's a very complicated system and for anybody to try and figure out how the selection committee is going to, which direction they're going to go is... because it's a different committee each year .... the best you can. Councilman Berquist: Okay. Councilman Senn: We've got, or I guess nobody's here from planning. We're getting 20 on our congregate dining now? It said, and we're shooting to get up to 40. Todd Gerhardt: Yeah. At noon it drives you crazy around here at times. You've got to get out of here. Councilman Berquist: Why? Oh, it smells good? Councilman Senn: Todd. Tell me about the Highway 7 trail that crosses into the City of Shorewood. We're building it? 41 City Council Meeting -November 10, 1997 Todd Hoffman: What do you consider the south side of Highway 7? They're Chanhassen neighborhoods. The road just flows into Shorewood and then just comes right back so they're not going to build it. If you want to serve your residents through that small section there, we're certainly going to have to build it. Councilman Senn: So that part of that segment under the referendum, if we go ahead with it then? Todd Hoffman: Correct. Councilman Senn: And that also ties in with those improvements that the State's going to do on Highway 7? Todd Hoffman: We discussed the dual projects. Their projects have no bearing on this trail for us. Councilman Senn: Okay. Let's see here. I had some questions on the capital fund stuff and everything that we got back but I don't know, maybe that's best wait until Don't not here, or is that you? I don't know. I assume that's Don. If it is, we should probably just wait until the work session on it. Todd Gerhardt: Do you want to call him on it? Councilman Berquist: Where is Don? Todd Gerhardt: He's executing the Wrase purchase agreement. Councilman Senn: Okay, so I'll just save those for then. On the capital improvement and the City Hall. Todd Gerhardt: Do you want Don to call you or do you want to call him? Councilman Senn: Either way. It doesn't make any difference. I can call him and give him the questions. Councilman Berquist: The Wrase, isn't that supposed to be a low tower like Lake Lucy? Or not a low tank? Charles Folch: Ground storage tank? Councilman Berquist: Ground storage tank. Is that the intent? Wasn't that what we've been talking about all along? Given the elevation. Charles Folch: ... highest piece of ground in southwest Chanhassen. We were certainly hoping it could be a ground storage tank. Councilman Berquist: I don't remember it being referred to as anything other than that. Charles Folch: Even though it will be elevated, the column will be much thicker, a much larger diameter column which will actually kind of function... It will be very similar, it's anticipated that it will be similar in physical shape to the one in Chaska down off of, is that Lyman Boulevard there? Councilman Berquist: So the calculations have already been done to determine that it needs... 42 City Council Meeting -November 10, 1997 Charles Folch: ... to maintain the acceptable pressures of all properties within that... Councilman Senn: One last thing. Had three phone calls. Wondered if anybody else had some, but I had three kind of, I'm going to say kind of semi-nasty phone calls from people who were really upset over the way the referendum was covered. And people who in fact even submitted letters to the editor and stuff, from one side or the other that didn't get printed and stuff.., newspaper point of view and they were kind of, questions were, well what does the City put into the newspaper, all that sort of thing and I said, erroneously nothing until I read the subscriptions. I said we advertise and stuff but nobody else got the calls? Councilman Berquist: Well the day prior to or the, yeah. The Thursday prior to it coming out there was something in there from the editor that said we did receive a ton of letters. That we either couldn't verify the writer of or they presented issues that could not be properly countered within the time prior to the election. Therefore we chose not to print that. Acting Mayor Mason: That's been an outstanding policy. Councilman Berquist: That was a caveat that he had printed two weeks before we began.., into the heavy letter writing campaign. So if those folks were, their letters were of that ilk, that's why. Councilman Senn: I don't know. They just said they had submitted them so that's all I know. Okay. Acting Mayor Mason moved, Councilman Engel seconded to adjourn the meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Submitted by Don Ashworth City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim 43