CC 2015 04 13
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
APRIL 13, 2015
Mayor Laufenburger called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was opened
with the Pledge to the Flag.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT:
Mayor Laufenburger, Councilwoman Tjornhom,
Councilman McDonald, Councilwoman Ryan, and Councilman Campion
STAFF PRESENT:
Todd Gerhardt, Chelsea Petersen, Paul Oehme, Kate Aanenson, Todd
Hoffman and Roger Knutson
PUBLIC PRESENT:
Todd Neils 9910 Saddlebrook Curve
Jo Syverson 489 Pleasant View Road
Laurie Susla 7008 Dakota Avenue
Mayor Laufenburger: Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to this council meeting. To those of you
that are present in the chamber here as well as those who are watching on Cable Channel 8.
Mediacom Channel 8 at home. Council members regarding our first action tonight is to review
the agenda and I’m going to make two agenda changes at this time. Item number 7 on the
consent agenda and item number 9 on the consent agenda I am going to move to New Business
and they will be, item numbers 2 and 3 respectively under New Business. Are there any other
modifications to the agenda? If not we will proceed with the agenda as amended.
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS:
None.
CONSENT AGENDA:Councilman McDonald moved, Councilwoman Tjornhom
seconded to approve the following consent agenda items pursuant to the City Manager’s
recommendations:
1. Approve City Council Minutes dated March 23, 2015
Resolution #2015-17:
2. 2015 Sealcoat Project: Award Contract.
Resolution #2015-18:
3. 2015 Street Rehabilitation Project (Kerber Boulevard): Call
Assessment Hearing.
4. Item Deleted.
5. Approval of Arbor Day Poster Contest Winners.
6. Approval of Purchase Agreement for Property Adjacent to the Water Treatment Plan,
Gateway.
Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015
7. Item moved to New Business.
Resolution #2015-19:
8. Adopt Resolution Approving Partial Conveyance of Property to
3241 Dartmouth Drive, Tract Z, RLS 7.
9. Item moved to New Business.
10. The Arbors, 7570 Dogwood Road: Approve Request for Preliminary Plat Extension,
Applicants: Peter and DeAnna Brandt.
Resolution #2015-20:
11. Adopt Resolution Adopting Carver County Hazard Mitigation
Plan.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS.
None.
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF SPECIALIZED SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH
CARVER COUNTY FOR WATERCRAFT INSPECTORS.
Todd Hoffman: Thank you Mayor Laufenburger and members of the City Council.
Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Hoffman, thank you.
Todd Hoffman: You’re welcome. The last work session council discussed the proposed
approval of the specialized service agreement with Carver County for watercraft inspectors. As
the council is aware we’ve had watercraft inspectors in the city for the past few years and this
year we’re, I’m looking to take a different direction with providing that service through Carver
County. Not through either volunteers or Volt Temporary Services. So we’ll address the
questions that were brought up at the last work session and then we’ll also talk in some detail
rd
again on the program itself. Most recent background, again on March 23 the City Council
considered provisions of the proposed service agreement. The council directed staff to seek
additional financial contributions and they asked for clarification to provide regarding the
proposed combined county, city watercraft inspectors program. Following your work session on
th
April 7 the Carver County Board of Directors, Board of Commissioners did take up the
proposed agreement and they did approve it as presented. To go over the additional funding that
has been secured. $2,000 from the City of Chanhassen. Those are new dollars. $2,000 from
Carver County. Carver County has pledged an additional $2,000 and then the Riley-Purgatory-
Bluff Creek Watershed District another $2,000. So that’s $6,000 in additional funding which
would then be attributed directly to reducing the contribution from the Lotus Lake Conservation
Alliance so their contribution goes from approximately $18,000 down to approximately $12,000
for the coming season. Questions and answers. These are the questions that the council posed at
the last work session. Some of the answers get quite lengthy. I’m not going to go through them
all unless we want those answers read but I will focus on the first and the last. One of the
questions is the proposed agreement with Carver County. With the County fair to the City and
2
Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015
it’s partners and these are responses from Carver County. From Marty Walsh, Director of Parks
and Recreation. His response is yes. Chanhassen is not being treated differently as compared to
others. Either the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District or other, or the County. So we’ll spend
a little bit of time if you have questions specifically on these. Can you help us understand what
process was used to designate how the AIS State Aid dollars are being invested and so the
County took into a variety of things. You know into that factor. Again I’m not going to read it
unless Mayor you would like me to.
Mayor Laufenburger: Not necessary, thank you.
Todd Hoffman: There are.
Mayor Laufenburger: Just Mr. Hoffman, this information was included in the packet that was
provided to all the council members and it was also made available to the public, is that correct?
Todd Hoffman: Correct, and there’s copies of the presentation here if anyone from the audience
would like one.
Mayor Laufenburger: Thank you.
Todd Hoffman: Another question, was there a formula for designating the lakes and the short
answer is no formula was used. It’s basically based on both past practice and then in the case of
Lotus Lake there’s additional hours that other people want and so those are added on hours. We
asked why are Lake Ann, Lake Susan and Lotus Lake not being scheduled for inspection hours
paid for the County and the County explains where they’re putting the money as a part of the
inspection program. Lake Ann, Lake Susan and Lotus Lake. They’re all getting a very, a
variety. Lake Ann and Lake Susan get scheduled 3 times a week. Lotus Lake 7 times a week.
And I think one, that is important to touch on in some detail is will the County provide an
appropriate rapid response service to the Chanhassen lakes in the event that zebra mussels are
discovered and so everybody’s been tracking the Christmas Lake rapid response quite closely
and so this would be something that we would not have availability to if we weren’t teaming up
with the County. Now that we are teaming up with the County, their response is yes but keep in
mind that rapid response can be in several forms. For example since we could not find a specific
colonies of zebra mussels in Lake Waconia, a treatment area could not be defined so rapid
response you know was really not employed in the same way it was on Christmas Lake. But it
was, at Waconia was to notify the DNR and they implemented a protocol to investigate and
follow up with the notification of the infestation at Christmas Lake it was different and so it
depends on where they’re found. How many are found. What age they are. All of the different
criteria but Carver County’s response is yes. They’ll be involved in a rapid response program as
long as we’re one of their partners in this program. I touched on it a little bit earlier but the
rd
schedule at Lake Ann and Lake Susan is Friday, Saturdays and Sundays and holidays. May 23
th
to September 7. 14 hours a day. 6:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. At Lotus Lake it’s quite more robust.
thth
May 9 to September 7. 14 hours a day. 6:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. and then going into September,
th
these are typically the hours that the LLCA is picking up and paying for. September 8 to the
th
30. Just because of the shortening window of daylight you go from 6:30 to 7:30 and then later
in October. You shorten those even more. And those schedules remain about the same as last
3
Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015
year with the exception of modifying that end date at Lotus Lake. Last year it was, the program
thst
was going to end on the 15 of November. This year it ends on October 31. It starts to get
quite cold and most boating activity is concluded by that time. Here are the hours of inspection.
686 hours will be scheduled at both Lake Ann and Lake Susan and 2,363 hours at Lotus Lake.
That’s a combined total this year of 3,735 and that compares with 3,236 last year. The difference
there is because we had those DNR grant hours that were specifically targeted at Lotus Lake.
Next year those are not present this year so that’s why the local hours go up. So combined the
expenditures, we’ve gone down a dollar so Volt was $16.02. Carver County is $15.02 so we’re
at $56,099 compares to about $53,000 budgeted last year. Here’s the spreadsheet for who’s
paying for what. Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed, last year they invested $23,000 and
change. This year they’re up to a commitment of $27,000. Again these are budgeted. The bills
are going to come in depending on how the season plays out. How many you know severe
weather days. How many shifts are not fulfilled and so these are budgeted dollar amounts.
Carver County is in for their $2,000 that they’ve committed to. The LLCA or Lotus Lake
Conservation Alliance so now, with the $6,000 added it brings that down from the $18,000 to the
$12,099 for their contribution. City of Chanhassen, goes up with the $2,000 additional pledged
so it goes up to 14 and a half total budget. $55,599.10. Talked about the changes a little bit last
time. Changing the rate. Decision not to seek that grant at Lotus. Since we’re not operating our
own program we cannot seek direct grants from the DNR that, Carver County is receiving those
grants and has sought those grants in a variety of aspects of their program. Lotus Lake, their
expenditures go down slightly and then we loaned 10 Apple iPad Minis to the Carver County for
data collection. The DNR, that program is going very well with their data collection is very
efficient. Nice program. And then inspection program reporting requirements will all be
administered by Carver County through the DNR and so the City will not be involved in that.
We’ll receive reports both from the County and the State. Combined program gives each partner
lots of flexibility. The City and the Watershed District, we’re funding 2,939 hours and Lotus
Lake they’ve elected to fund 796 hours to get to the total and together that 3,735 hours, that
represents 28 percent of all inspections county wide that Carver County and so we’re over a
quarter of the all inspections throughout the county. At 16 boat landings and so we have 3 of
them so 3 of the 16 landings account for again 28 percent so overall county wide our programs
are more robust than the average inspection location in the county. Tonight’s recommendation
for the council is that the City Council approves the Specialized Services Agreement with Carver
County for watercraft inspectors and then as we’ve been talking all along, yet you direct staff to
continue working with Carver County and our other funding partners and program partners to
identify program improvements moving forward and that’s something we’ve been committed to
since the start of our AIS program here in the city of Chanhassen.
Mayor Laufenburger: Thank you Mr. Hoffman. Any questions of City Council to Mr. Hoffman
or staff? Mr. Campion.
Councilman Campion: I have a very brief one. Todd, I think you said that Carver County does
apply for those DNR grants that we had in the past applied for this year.
Todd Hoffman: (Yes).
4
Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015
Councilman Campion: Does that mean that they could use those grants or those DNR inspectors
as part of the coverage for the hours that we’re contracting here? Because I know we had issues
with them in the past I believe.
Todd Hoffman: Yeah, from what I understand they’re receiving cash so there’s two different
kinds of grants. I don’t believe the County is receiving any grant where they’re actually putting
a DNR inspector on the ground.
Councilman Campion: Okay.
Todd Hoffman: They may be. I don’t know but then the other kind of grant is just cash. Where
you get paid back cash for the time that you’re putting in in your own inspection program.
Councilman Campion: Okay, thank you.
Mayor Laufenburger: Any other questions for Mr. Hoffman? Councilwoman Ryan.
Councilwoman Ryan: Mr. Hoffman I know I asked this question before in the work session and
in looking over the numbers and then again you put the, I think it was under the funding. The
budgeted amounts. I don’t know if you can pull that page back up please. These numbers just
kind of trouble me a little bit. You know we have the Watershed at $27,000. Carver at $2,000
which I know we just asked for and they agreed to. We have the LLCA at $12,000. We can read
you know the City of Chan at $14,000 and yet the County is, if in looking at my notes, the
County has received $132,000 this year from the State combined with $60,000 last year totaling
$190,000 and we’re only seeing the $2,000 coming towards the City. And we are a part of the
County and I still struggle with the fact that these groups are putting essentially $56,000 and yet
the County is benefiting from our lakes and ramps and parking spots. And there just seems to be
an inequity in terms of how this program is being executed this year and I know we’re down the
path and the County Board has approved it but if you can help me understand those numbers
because they, it sure looks to me like we are paying for inspections as a part of, as opposed to
being part of the total county program.
Todd Hoffman: Councilwoman Ryan, there’s a variety of ways that I think all of us can take a
look at the, what’s going on with the County. And so as I stated in the work session I’m not
going to give a presentation on the County AIS program. I don’t have all the information
available. It’s a big program. 45 inspectors. Lots going on. Multifaceted lakes county-wide.
But I can speak to what our role as a partner or actually a client in that. We’re actually
contracting for their services and so the lakes in Chanhassen are generating this year in 2015. So
Lotus Lake, $4,765 dollars. So that’s what the DNR has allocated for that lake based on the fact
that you have a landing there. You have some parking spaces there. Lake Ann $3,335 and then
Lake Susan $2,859 dollars. If the City of Chanhassen just eliminated our programming and said
okay, Carver County we would like you to participate in Chanhassen with your funding, I can’t
tell you what percentage of those dollars they would come up and use in Chanhassen but they
would certainly put some inspections on our lakes. We don’t know what those would be but they
would be a small fraction to what we’re currently you know allocating in the $56,000 so if you
take a look at the dollars they’re receiving, what they’re telling us is, they’re taking 28 percent of
5
Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015
their work load and their presentation to the City and again I agree with that is, is that those kind
of dollars to operate that program, they’re going to spend those kind of dollars. The $15,000 or
when you add it up the $12,000, they’re going to spend that and more to provide that service to
Chanhassen. But for the fact that we’re there, you know our program, adopting that program,
taking that underneath their wing is going to cost the City, or cost the County a lot of dollars you
know to do that so. That’s what they’re telling us is that, we’re not going to get dollar for dollar
back. Now that might be an argument into the future. If Carver County says okay Chanhassen
we believe, and that’s an opinion for the County Board as well. You know how is the County
Board going to allocate those dollars back to the City? Are they going to absorb all the overhead
costs and then just take these dollars that are being generated and put those onto inspections?
We don’t know what the future answer will be.
Councilwoman Ryan: And again I come back and it probably is something that should be
directed at the County Board as well, which I’ll get to a little bit later but you know I just find it
interesting that we as a city who operate in the county of Carver that is receiving dollars from the
State, that we have to say that we’re contracting for services. And I know that because of Volt
Work Force put us in a predicament this year so we’re back pedaling a little bit to make sure that
we’re covered which is very important but you know just by saying on itself that we have to
contract for services within the county that is receiving dollars because of our lakes, ramps and
parking spaces, I just have a problem with that. And when we talk about the 28 percent of the
services that Carver County is going to have to provide, well we’re paying for that. That still
isn’t using the County’s dollars that is, that they’re receiving from the State so I don’t have any
further questions. I that is a huge concern to me the way that these numbers break down.
Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Hoffman can you clarify for us, are there any programs that the
County is doing that could benefit the City of Chanhassen that are not showing up in these
numbers? Is there anything that the funds from the State that are going to the County are being
used for besides inspections?
Todd Hoffman: A variety of things. Primarily they’re doing some education. Some signage.
They’re going to have a decontamination unit but that’s funded through another grant program.
That’s going to be at Lake Waconia and.
Mayor Laufenburger: Will that be available to people who visit Chanhassen lakes? That
decontamination unit if necessary.
Todd Hoffman: It may be. That decontamination takes 20 to 30 minutes per boat so depending
on the availability and then after a certain number of boats you have to clean that unit as well so
it may or may not be available so. I know we’re all struggling with, the fact remains Carver
County would not have to take us into their program. They could simply say you know, and
early on they said we’ll give you your cash and you go do your program and if we did that as a
community we’d be far worse off than we are now.
Mayor Laufenburger: From an expense standpoint?
Todd Hoffman: Correct.
6
Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. And Mr. Hoffman related to the distribution of the funds, is the
County going to be inspecting based on their desire or are they going to be inspecting based on
City of Chanhassen’s desires?
Todd Hoffman: The City of Chanhassen and our funding partners, yes. Our schedule.
Mayor Laufenburger: So we’re saying County this is the support that we need. This is the
coverage that we’re looking for on our lakes and will you do it and they’re saying yes we will for
this amount of money.
Todd Hoffman: Correct.
Mayor Laufenburger: Any other questions or comments to Mr. Hoffman? I do have a couple.
Do you have any concern Mr. Hoffman about whether or not the County can provide the
inspection services that they’ve committed to doing so?
Todd Hoffman: Not of any great concern, no. I believe they’ll fulfill their commitment.
Mayor Laufenburger: Will there be an opportunity for us to provide feedback to the people who
are running the program to tell them looks like we’re not getting what we’re paying for?
Todd Hoffman: Yes.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, good. You mentioned the iPads. We’re going to loan those to the
County. Will they be using the same application that we did? Is it a DNR application to capture
this information?
Todd Hoffman: Correct.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, so we’re essentially, they’re going to be using our devices as tools
right?
Todd Hoffman: Yes.
Mayor Laufenburger: And I’m assuming that they’ll use those devices perhaps in Chanhassen as
well as in other locations as well right?
Todd Hoffman: Yes.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, is there any restriction on how we said you know you can only use
these in Chanhassen or anything like that?
Todd Hoffman: No the employees that will be working here may shift out and flex out to other
locations.
7
Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. And do we know anything about the people that are going to be
hired by the County to inspect the lakes in Chanhassen?
Todd Hoffman: We do. The majority of them actually applied with Chanhassen.
Mayor Laufenburger: Oh they did.
Todd Hoffman: We reviewed their applications and then they had to re-apply as we offered
them a job in Chanhassen with the County. The actual hiring agent is Carver County.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Any other questions for Mr. Hoffman? Comments. Okay I, I
know this may be unusual but we have a significant partner in our inspection program in the
LLCA and is there anybody in the LLCA that would like to make a comment tonight?
Laurie Susla: Yes Mayor, thank you.
Mayor Laufenburger: We just ask that you state your name and address and be efficient with
your time okay?
Laurie Susla: I will do that. I brought a show and tell that’ll be super quick.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, alright.
Laurie Susla: My name is Laurie Susla. I live at 7008 Dakota Avenue and I am the President of
the Lotus Lake Conservation Alliance. First of all as always we want to say thank you to the
City Council. To the City taxpayers. To Todd Hoffman for all the work that he’s put in on this
program this year. When Volt backed out we had, he was in total crunch time so he’s done a
very good job in a very short period of time so thank you to you all. Thank you to Carver
County. We’re very happy that they’re taking us on in this program and to the Riley-Purgatory-
Bluff Creek Watershed District. All the funding partners have you know really over the years
worked together very well to make this happen. So quickly I’d like to mention, this is my low
budget power point here.
Mayor Laufenburger: Very creative. Very creative.
Laurie Susla: Yeah. That planning for 2016 is going to need to start around the corner with
budgeting and the time that it will take to get plans in place so as we think about 2016 the LLCA
would like to have a representative at the table as discussions are put together about how things
will go next year so just ask that now as opposed to late in the process. One of the concerns that
we have which was pointed out in the packet is that the program that’s been run in Chanhassen
so far is a voluntary program. Where the boaters can choose whether or not they would like to
submit to, submit is a bad word, but have their boat inspected prior to launch. The DNR, I don’t
know if you can read this but the AIS inspection requirements, that is an expressed condition and
I’m reading this from their information here of operating or transporting water related
equipment. Additionally authorized inspectors may prohibit the launching or operation of water
related equipment if a person refuses to allow an inspection and refusing to allow an inspection
8
Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015
or follow removal order can result in a civil fine. So basically when the DNR folks, inspectors
go through training there’s two reasons to deny a launch. One is if there is AIS on board that
can’t be taken off on site. And two is if somebody refuses inspection so we feel that it’s
important to remove this word voluntary and to actually have this be just a standard watercraft
inspection program as the DNR protocol calls for. Second part of the, and the reason I’m
bringing this up tonight is this is the first time the council’s actually voting on the AIS program
so we feel that it’s important to get the policy correct. The second part is best management
practices and back in 2012 the City committed to spending $20,000 on ramp improvements.
Some of those were done. There were new, well I’m in the wrong order here.
Mayor Laufenburger: New stencils?
Laurie Susla: There were kiosks that were put up similar to this. This is at Lotus Lake. At all
three of the ramps. The DNR has, this is their very extensive book on how to have ramps work
the best way. So the City took a, and this is an example of a full blown best practices ramp with
pull out areas. Water to wash your boat. It has signage in certain locations. There’s just a lot of
things that go into a best management ramp. Best management practice ramp. Some of them are
extremely expensive. At the time the City decided that they did not want to increase hard cover
at the ramps and so not all of these were put into place but there are some that are rather
inexpensive that we could do right now. One of them would be compost bins. These could be
placed at the ramps. They would maybe cost $15 dollars to build but it would be a place that
people could put the weeds that are coming off their boat so that they could not just be throwing
around and thrown back in the lake. Another is a simple tool to pull weeds off the boat so that
we as Chanhassen, we are infesting other lakes. These are all very inexpensive things we could
do. Again the signs that are in place. The problem with the signs that are in place is that, this is
Lotus. You see the boats will come in through here and then they back down to launch. These
signs unless there’s a delay in launch they’re hard to read. People will drive by them. This is
also true with the Lake Ann ramp. This right here. The signs with the launch here and then
Lake Susan, people come down and then launch back this way. Again the signs being here. So
our proposal is that we buy some simple cattle gate type barriers that can be manually opened.
Easily swung and open, people just open them. They’re not ever locked and on those could be a
simple sign. Attention Boaters. Whatever we want the sign to say to make them aware, it’s a
sign that they would, it’s like forced education. You must see this sign because you have to go
through the gate to get to the lake. So we could have a sign like this on here, Please Clean Drain
Dry. It could also have a take one type of display piece and in there could be directions to Lotus,
which we almost always have inspectors at Lotus. If they were coming from infested waters
they could head to Lotus to get an inspection if they wanted to. If not the back side of the flier
would have here’s how to inspect your boat so it would be like I said kind of a forced education
instead of the driving by the sign routine. Additionally we’d like to see a hang tag be put on,
thank you. On the rear view mirrors of the cars that have been inspected and the reason behind
this is there is, particularly at Lotus some sentiment that the early morning boaters aren’t being
inspected. That they’re getting out before the inspections have occurred and we think it will be a
really good PR move to say if people drive by they say hey, I can see that car’s been inspected.
There’s that tag. There’s my tax dollars at work. There’s my donation dollars at work. That
type of thing. Very simple. Very cheap. They’re like a nickel a piece. Very, all these are very
low tech ideas. Just examples of things that you know might be something that we could work
9
Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015
on in the future. So that’s it. Again with the reason these are all important is we have learned
through the years that personal responsibility is not working. Last summer we had, there were 8
boaters that arrived in one day with zebra mussels on board at Lake Waconia and also last
summer the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and the DNR believe that it was a single
incident that introduced 5,000 zebra mussels to Christmas Lake so one boater can have a
tremendously devastating effect on a lake so thank you for your time. Thank you for this plan
and we look forward to 2016.
Mayor Laufenburger: Well thank you Ms. Susla. We, as a City Council I know I speak for all of
us saying that we appreciate your participation in the program and not only your financial
participation but also the ideas and the suggestions that you make so thank you very much.
Laurie Susla: Thank you.
Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Hoffman, can you just clarify one thing for me? When we asked the
County to take over the program essentially they’re administering the program, right? So it’s
their inspectors, right? Do you know, are they, will they be asking the inspectors at Chanhassen
to enforce the prohibition of, if we see something on your boat that’s suspicious you can’t go in
and if you choose not to be inspected you will not be going in. Do you know if that’s the case
with Carver County?
Todd Hoffman: That would be at our direction to suggest which way that should be played out.
One thing to note is, although we’ve called the Chanhassen inspection program voluntary,
there’s never been a refusal to have their boat inspected at, in the past in Chanhassen so.
Mayor Laufenburger: And have we ever, have we had any incidents where there’s been any kind
of tension between the inspector and the boater as far as you know?
Todd Hoffman: We have but that’s in the minority. There’s been a few occasions so it’s past
councils that wanted our program to be labeled voluntary. The council can certainly say we just
want to make it that it’s mandatory as a part of your recommendation.
Mayor Laufenburger: Council have any thoughts on that? The term voluntary versus required.
Mr. Campion.
Councilman Campion: I have a question. I believe if I heard Laurie correctly that she was
saying that it was, now that the Volt inspectors weren’t necessarily Level I or Level II certified
and therefore.
Todd Hoffman: They were Level I and certified.
Councilman Campion: Okay, but the fact that now they, they certainly will be now so in which
case wouldn’t it be mandatory?
10
Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015
Mayor Laufenburger: Well I think Mr. Hoffman states it correctly. It’s really up to us to tell the
County how it is that we want people to be treated on our lakes since they’re implementing the
program that we want. Am I saying that correctly Mr. Hoffman?
Todd Hoffman: Correct. The Volt inspectors were trained at the same level as the county
inspectors will be trained.
Councilman Campion: Okay.
Mayor Laufenburger: Level I. We will not have any Level II inspectors at our lakes, will we?
Because Level II means decontamination unit.
Todd Hoffman: Just if they’re here as a floater. Not on a routine basis.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay.
Councilwoman Ryan: Mayor?
Mayor Laufenburger: Yes, Councilwoman Ryan.
Councilwoman Ryan: Todd how, what is done in some of the other or similar sized lakes or
visited lakes in Carver County? Are they mandatory at Minnewashta and Waconia? I mean how
has Carver County handled it up to this point?
Todd Hoffman: I do not know.
Mayor Laufenburger: Any other questions or comments for staff?
Councilwoman Ryan: Is.
Mayor Laufenburger: Go ahead.
Councilwoman Ryan: At Minnewashta there’s a gate correct? Am I correct?
Todd Hoffman: There’s a park gate.
Councilwoman Ryan: A park gate so they, if they refuse inspection you don’t know how they
handle it there? If they turn them away or.
Todd Hoffman: I do not.
Mayor Laufenburger: I don’t have any anecdotal evidence that there was ever a boat that chose
not to be inspected at Minnewashta. In other words everybody submitted. As far as I know
everybody submitted to the inspection.
Councilman Campion: One last question.
11
Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015
Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Campion, go ahead.
Councilman Campion: Mr. Hoffman based on the four best practices that were mentioned,
what’s your interpretation? Is that something we could look into or would we need Carver
County to look into that now that they’re administering?
Todd Hoffman: No, we own the landings and we did go through that. There was a presentation,
a power point presentation to the council in the past and best management practices for our, and
basically all things were included in that and implemented with the exception there was some
additional asphalt that the report recommended so some additional pull off areas and the council
at that time just didn’t feel like putting more impervious pavement close to the water’s edge so
they did not go forward with that part. Regarding the compost bin, we elected not to do that just
because the fact that then dead fish and bait could be deposited there and if it would not be
removed it could be unsightly and stinky and so there’s trash cans right next door where people
put their weeds and their bait. You can’t transport bait if you use lake water anymore so they put
that right in there and then that’s processed a couple of times a week and so the trash cans that
are available act like the compost bin for each one of these landings.
Councilman Campion: What about specifically the gate and the hang tags?
Todd Hoffman: The gate or hang tags are not part of the best management practices. That
would be a policy decision by the City or the council.
Councilman Campion: Okay, thank you.
Mayor Laufenburger: So I think at this time, unless there’s any further questions I’d be open for
a comment or a motion from the council regarding staff presentation.
Councilwoman Ryan: Mr. Mayor?
Mayor Laufenburger: Councilwoman Ryan.
Councilwoman Ryan: I would like to make a comment and then possibly as part of a motion but.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay.
Councilwoman Ryan: Certainly a comment. Mr. Hoffman do you mind putting back up the
recommendation that you suggested? While that’s being pulled up you know I do agree that we
need to be grateful obviously for the ability to partner, potentially partner with Carver County for
the watercraft inspections. Again I know that Volt Work Force left us in a predicament and so
with short notice I think it’s great that we have the ability to be a part of a larger program but I
still have some questions when it comes down to just the funding sources and how that works.
You know this, AIS has been as, when I was on the park and rec board it was, commission, it
came before us then. I know it’s come before the previous councils many times and we kind of
keep going around. Going the same direction and the one question that I don’t know has ever
12
Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015
been asked of council or staff is, you know is there a better way to do this and is there a better
way to utilize the resources that are coming towards the City or the County from the multiple
funding sources and so with that said before we make the motion and direct staff I would like to
add to this recommendation that we pass forward to the County, since it is such a big
responsibility that’s going to be put before them to take Chanhassen on in addition to what
they’re doing now, I would like to see some sort of a task force put together and I think it would
be beneficial to have interested and vested participants in this program. I would like to see
somebody from Chanhassen council along with staff. A County Board member along with staff.
Watershed Districts involved. The DNR possibly. LLCA and I know that there are many
fishermen groups that have been very vocal about AIS issues as well, so to have them involved
with this program. The purpose of the task force would be to review and discuss the successes
and challenges of the program. Discuss the plan for 2016 including funding sources, inspections,
rapid response needs, grant options, etcetera but I would like to see a group of people with vested
interests in the lakes to communicate and plan accordingly. And I’d like to see this happen
sooner than later. June, July to get the ball rolling on something that I think is very important
and as we know is not going away so as part of this recommendation, and I will make the
recommendation City Council approve.
Mayor Laufenburger: Just a.
Councilwoman Ryan: Oh.
Mayor Laufenburger: Can I just stop you for a second?
Councilwoman Ryan: Sure.
Mayor Laufenburger: So the primary focus is you would like to, you would like to see, and
correct me if I’m wrong on this but you would like to see a task force of appropriately
represented constituents to begin the process of examining how to improve the program county
wide in 2016.
Councilwoman Ryan: Yes.
Mayor Laufenburger: Is that correct?
Councilwoman Ryan: Find out again to address that question, is there a better way?
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. So hold on just for a second. I want to ask Mr. Hoffman. If we as
a City are interested in having, and maybe this is Mr. Gerhardt. If we as a City are interested in
having the County execute on a task force on any subject is there a prescribed procedure for us to
do that Mr. Gerhardt?
Todd Gerhardt: I don’t think there’s a legal process. It would be just a written request and it can
be a motion. Charge statement from the council on what your expectations are where the Board
would understand who supported it and what was all involved.
13
Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. And would that be a, that would then be delivered to the County
Board appropriately. We could either direct staff or it would actually go as a motion from the
council and then they would view it as such, and then it would be presented. Would it be
presented to the Board or to an appropriate?
Todd Gerhardt: We would submit it to the County Administrator and he would schedule it on
one of their upcoming meetings.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay.
Todd Gerhardt: And would probably expect a staff member there to answer any questions.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Alright. Okay. And so Councilwoman Ryan are you about to
make a motion? Is that what you’re about to do?
Councilwoman Ryan: Unless other council members would like to discuss the idea of a task
force.
Mayor Laufenburger: Sure. Any comments?
Councilwoman Tjornhom: I have some comments.
Mayor Laufenburger: Councilwoman Tjornhom, yep.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: I think my opinion is that while the discussion of a task force is
certainly appealing and something that we should do our due diligence on once again to
investigate to see what the pros and cons would be and if it’s a direction that we feel would be
beneficial to all parties involved. I would rather see two separate motions because at this point I
can’t support that but I certainly don’t want to prohibit the plans that are in effect or would be in
effect for this summer and so while I’m not opposed to a task force I would rather just have that
be a separate directive that council would consider and pass onto Carver County.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, good comment. Thank you Councilwoman Tjornhom. Anybody
else?
Councilman McDonald: Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. McDonald.
Councilman McDonald: Yeah I guess I would echo what Councilwoman Tjornhom has said.
We’ve been involved in this for a lot of years. I think throwing a task force into this
recommendation stands the chance of scuttling this agreement. I would agree to a separate
motion but if it’s part of this one I couldn’t support it either.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Anybody else?
14
Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015
Councilman Campion: I have.
Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Campion.
Councilman Campion: More of a question. And it’s of Councilwoman Ryan. So for this task
force is it necessarily at the county level or might the task force be you know more of a City of
Chanhassen level where you know monitor the lake. The three lakes to be monitored in
Chanhassen.
Councilwoman Ryan: In my opinion it would be at the county level because if this is the start of,
the beginning of the relationship that the City has with Carver County to facilitate this program I
think it needs to include Carver County and other lake associations for that matter or cities or
people that want to be involved but it has to include Carver County because if this motion passes
we will be part of Carver County. The AIS Carver County program and I would like the task
force to be representative of all parties involved.
Mayor Laufenburger: Did that answer your question Mr. Campion?
Councilman Campion: It does. It does.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay.
Councilman Campion: And I like the idea of the task force. I guess I’m just concerned you
know it’s initiation to be at the County level as we’re you know new to their, the whole program
and I’m just concerned about starting too big and the possibility of it not being successful.
Whereas I think if there was a focus on Chanhassen that we know and understand a little bit
better than you know taking on the whole county at once, I believe that if potentially starting
with Chanhassen focus on 2016 based on differences or the effect that we see of the program
carried out in 2015. That then we could make recommendations and potentially expand you
know such a task force to the County level in the future.
Mayor Laufenburger: Sure.
Councilwoman Ryan: May I answer that?
Mayor Laufenburger: Absolutely.
Councilwoman Ryan: The reason why I think it’s important, probably the biggest reason why I
think it’s important at the County level is because of the funding. I mean we can, as Mr.
Hoffman said, we can as a council can make recommendations on hang tags and gates and set
policies specific to our lakes. We have the ability to do that but the, the inequity comes in my
opinion when we look at the way the dollars are being distributed and in order to be most
effective in terms of dollars coming in from the State. Distributed across county wide including
our city inspection hours, that has to be something done as a group and not just again us asking
for it or making a recommendation but a discussion and putting a plan together as a group.
15
Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015
Mayor Laufenburger: If I may. I think that I like your idea Councilwoman Ryan and not only as
it relates to AIS but I think that anybody who is passionate about anything that’s going on in the
county should be willing or should be able to express their views about how things are dealt
with. Whether it be wetlands. Whether it be highways. Whatever it might be so I think this is a
good example where if the appropriate constituents with the appropriate personnel from those
constituents come together in a cooperative and a, a constructive way I would think. Just me, but
I would think that folks at the County who are responsible for administering a program that is
effective and efficient, that they would like to have that input. I don’t know that for sure but I
think that, that’s not something that we can decide nor is it something that I believe we should
couple with the approval of the services for AIS for this year. So I would agree with
Councilwoman Tjornhom and McDonald that absolutely. If you would like to make a motion or
if anybody would like to make a motion for such a task force I would be happy to be part of that
motion going to the County but I personally would like to see it independent of the
recommendation that Mr. Hoffman is coming forward so that gives you a little bit of a sense of
where the council is so. Anybody like to make a motion at this time?
Councilwoman Tjornhom: I’ll make a motion.
Mayor Laufenburger: Councilwoman Tjornhom.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Alright. And staff has the correct motion right up, is that right?
Okay. Mr. Mayor I’d like to make a motion the City Council approves a Specialized Services
Agreement with Carver County for watershed inspectors and directs staff to continue working
with Carver County and funding partners to identify program improvements in moving forward.
Mayor Laufenburger: Thank you Councilwoman Tjornhom. Is there a second?
Councilman McDonald: Second.
Mayor Laufenburger: We have a second, thank you. We have a valid motion. Is there any
further discussion?
Councilwoman Tjornhom moved, Councilman McDonald seconded that the Chanhassen
City Council approves the 2015 Specialized Services Agreement with Carver County for
watercraft inspectors at Lake Ann, Lake Susan and Lotus Lake in an amount not to exceed
$56,099.70, for a maximum total number of watercraft inspection hours not to exceed 3,735
hours, and directs staff to continue working with Carver County and funding partners to
identify program improvements moving forward. All voted in favor, except Councilwoman
Ryan who was silent, and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
Councilwoman Ryan: Mr. Mayor, may I have an extra minute to make a second motion?
Mayor Laufenburger: Absolutely Councilwoman Ryan.
Councilwoman Ryan: I have to write it out first please.
16
Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015
Mayor Laufenburger: You can be brief and I think that the staff can.
Councilwoman Ryan: Massage my words.
Mayor Laufenburger: Probably. Probably.
Councilwoman Ryan: I’d like to make a motion that the City Council recommend to Carver
County that they develop an AIS task force to include representatives from interested parties, of
which I mentioned earlier, to work on all issues related the overall county wide AIS program for
2016.
Mayor Laufenburger: We have a motion. Is there a second?
Councilwoman Tjornhom: I have one question. This is a recommendation correct?
Councilwoman Ryan: Yes.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Okay.
Mayor Laufenburger: That the City recommend to Carver County.
Councilwoman Ryan: Yes and based on what Mr. Gerhardt said that we would make a
recommendation to the Board to try and put it on their agenda.
Mayor Laufenburger: So the motion is that the City Council approve a recommendation to
Carver County in accordance with what you said?
Councilwoman Ryan: Yes please.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. We have a motion. Is there a second? That motion failed for lack
of a second. Any other question or comment? There being none let’s move to our next item on
the agenda.
CONSENT AGENDA D(7). ACCEPT DONATION OF BALL FIELD ENHANCEMENTS
FROM CHANHASSEN ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION AND DUGOUT CLUB.
Todd Hoffman: Mayor Laufenburger, members of the council.
Mayor Laufenburger: Thank you Mr. Hoffman. Staff report please.
Todd Hoffman: Tonight we originally had a proposal before you from the Athletic Association,
the Chanhassen Athletic Association and the Dugout Club to donate four different items. At the
request of the Athletic Association and the Dugout Club they would like to remove two of those
but, from your consideration but continue forward with two others. The ones they would like to
remove are the donation of the two scoreboards projects. One scoreboard at Lake Susan and two
scoreboards at Lake Ann. Removing that from consideration but they’re asking for your
17
Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015
approval of two other projects. Concrete dugout installation at six dugouts at Lake Ann Park.
Fields, 1, 2 and 3 and then working with the City to extend the infield distance at the Chanhassen
Recreation Center fields. That’s the extent of the changes. I’ll be glad to answer any questions
and also Mr. Todd Neils from both of those organizations is here and he can answer any
questions you might have as well.
Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Hoffman you’ll forgive me but could I ask you to make those
comments relative to the information that the staff has in their packet. So I’m looking at, right
now I’m looking at what is referenced as D-7. And this would be page 2 of that.
Todd Hoffman: Yep. So Lake Susan Park ball field scoreboard donation would be dropped.
Mayor Laufenburger: So that’s removed.
Todd Hoffman: And the Lake Ann Park ball field scoreboard. The second item donation.
Fields 1 and 2 proposal for $13,319 removed.
Mayor Laufenburger: That’s removed so that’s essentially removing $8,787 and $13,319,
correct?
Todd Hoffman: Correct.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Those two are now off the table. How about that third one on that
page?
Todd Hoffman: That remains as is.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Let’s go to the next page if we can.
Todd Hoffman: And that remains.
Mayor Laufenburger: Rec Center/Bluff Creek infield expansion remains the same?
Todd Hoffman: Correct.
Mayor Laufenburger: Is that the only changes?
Todd Hoffman: Yes and then the dollar amount would then be changed from the $25,500 down
to the $3,400.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Mr. Hoffman do you support these changes?
Todd Hoffman: I do.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Any questions for Mr. Hoffman? Mr. Neils, would you like to
make a comment to the council at this time or not? Name and address please.
18
Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015
Todd Neils: Todd Neils, Chanhassen. 990 Saddlebrook Curve. Thank you Mayor and council
members for hearing me. I would like to just state the reason that we are requesting to remove
those items from the agenda and for consideration is because of the conditions that were put forth
that we did not have a time to assess prior to moving forward. If I may back track just
momentarily I would like to excuse me.
Mayor Laufenburger: By the way is this a permanent removal or a temporary removal?
Todd Neils: Excellent question. I’d like to.
Mayor Laufenburger: I’m sure you have an excellent answer.
Todd Neils: Will do what I can. I would say that I’d like to first thank the Park and Rec
Commission for their work as well as staff for their work and the time that the City Council has
done by reviewing the recommendation that we have put forth. At the time the recommendation
was made and the conditions were put upon the scoreboards we were unaware of the additional
costs involved effectively that would add approximately $4,000 to the overall scope of the
project. Funds which we could deploy in other manners. We don’t necessarily have the ability
to at will raise funds and work very hard as an association throughout tournaments and so on and
so forth to raise those funds. Further the hard wiring of the scoreboard would make them
unusable effectively because it would require a member of the team, parent or coach to stand at
the console and adjust balls, strikes and scoring which none of our parent members, coaches or
otherwise I would think would want to take on. We do have experience. There are similar type
hard wired devices at Eden Prairie. At Braemar complex which are not used. Further they
would just make it, they would not create what we had intended. We are open however to
removing the hard wiring from the scoreboard proposal and to work on a solution that allows all
parties involved to be satisfied with the project. If in fact that is the case we are happy to move
forward with the project as stated.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Well let me just make this comment that the City of Chanhassen
and the City Council appreciates all that the Dugout Club, the Chanhassen Athletic Association
does in support of our fields so thank you very much. Please take that message back to your
group.
Todd Neils: Thank you Mayor.
Mayor Laufenburger: And I was not suggesting that you know make it happen. Make it happen.
That’s your decision. We appreciate all that you do for the kids in Chanhassen and the parks and
if you can come to some agreement for something like this in the future, we welcome to have
you back so thank you Mr. Neils.
Todd Neils: Appreciate it, thank you.
Mayor Laufenburger: Alright. Any comments or questions of staff? Anyone like to make a
motion? We’ll have to adjust it based on what we see here.
19
Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015
Councilman McDonald: Can somebody put it up on the screen?
Todd Gerhardt: The donation of $3,400 from the CAA.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Take out 25?
Mayor Laufenburger: Yeah, remove $25,500. Replace it with $3,400. Is that the right number
Mr. Hoffman?
Todd Hoffman: Correct.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay.
Councilman McDonald: Well I’ll give it a shot.
Mayor Laufenburger: Alright, Councilman McDonald.
Councilman McDonald: The Chanhassen City Council accepts the donation of approximately
$3,400 from the Chanhassen Athletic Association and Dugout Club for dugout concrete for Lake
Ann Fields 1, 2 and 3 and labor to assist with infield improvements at the Chanhassen Recreation
Center. Is that one still in? Okay. Bluff Creek Elementary School with the conditions noted.
Mayor Laufenburger: That’s a valid motion. Do we have a second?
Councilman Campion: Second.
Mayor Laufenburger: Thank you Councilman Campion. Any further discussion on the motion?
Resolution #2015-21: Councilman McDonald moved, Councilman Campion seconded that
the Chanhassen City Council accepts the donation of approximately $3,400 from the
Chanhassen Athletic Association and Dugout Club for dugout concrete for Lake Ann Park
(Fields #1, #2 and #3), and labor to assist with infield improvements at the Chanhassen
Recreation Center/Bluff Creek Elementary School with the conditions noted. All voted in
favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
CONSENT AGENDA D(9). ADOPT RESOLUTION ORDERING THE UPDATE TO
THE AUAR, 2005 MUSA AREA; AND APPROVE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
AGREEMENTS.
Mayor Laufenburger: Do we have a staff report?
th
Kate Aanenson: Yes, thank you Mayor, members of the City Council. On your March 19 City
Council meeting you directed to staff to prepare resolution for the update of the AUAR. That’s
20
Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015
what the motion before you would be to approve that resolution. As a part of that, included are
the two contracts. One for Hoisington-Koegler Group at $39,000 and one for Kimley-Horn at
$51,960. Both of these groups worked on the original AUAR. Be happy to go through any of
the parts of it but I think the applicant is the one that has a few questions and I’d be happy to
answer any questions that they may have regarding the process and the recommendations of the
consultants.
Mayor Laufenburger: Thank you Ms. Aanenson. Before I ask the applicant to speak is there any
questions or comments from council? Alright, is the applicant of the concept PUD present?
State your name and address please.
Darren Lazan: We are sir. Good evening Mr. Mayor. My name is Darren Lazan with Landform
Professional Services and I represent Level 7 Development. The developer for the Quadrant
which is the development that has spurred the discussion on the AUAR.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay.
Darren Lazan: Appreciate your time to be here tonight. Have no power point. Was told I kept
you up too late last time so I will try to keep it a little cleaner this time. We’re excited to be here
and excited to have this discussion. We continue to work on the plan and bringing this
development forward. A lot of moving parts. A lot of exciting components coming together.
We did request the AUAR be updated and we appreciate that consideration and I do want to
acknowledge right up front that there’s a natural tension that occurs on all of these projects.
When an applicant is paying the bill and someone else is scoping and carrying out the studies so
we acknowledge that. I understand that that’s going to be the case going forward and I hope
that’s respected both ways and most of my comments are going to be as respectful as possible
challenging some of those scope items since my client’s the one paying the bill so we’re going to
walk through a couple of those and I think by way of just a little background. I think it’s
important to understand that while an AUAR is required along this road to approving this
project, it’s by no means the means at which a project is approved or denied. It’s simply a means
of updating a study that was done. It’s a means to assess the site’s ability to carry or to handle
development at a given scale and the mitigation measures that may be necessary to handle that
development so there’s nothing in the AUAR that says okay, we completed the study. X square
feet can be built or Y. That’s all done down range at the PUD side. That’s where you get to
have the input on the layout of the project. On the components of the project. We’ve had a lot
of use discussion. That’s where that falls most likely in the PUD so I think we get balled up in
this AUAR like it’s going to tell us what can be built here or what can be approved here. It’s
simply a means to address those infrastructure components and say, this is what can be handled
if these mitigation measures are enacted. Again by way, a little bit of background. The original
AUAR was done in 2003. It’s our understanding that was for roughly $100,000 dollars and it
took about 6 to 8 months to complete. There was one scenario studied and it was called in that
background information, it was called the worst case scenario which I think is a poor choice of
words but we’ll use their words for this study so.
Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Lazan, can I just interrupt you for a moment?
21
Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015
Darren Lazan: Sure.
Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Lazan, my assumption is that you have a few points that you want to
raise, is that correct?
Darren Lazan: Yes sir.
Mayor Laufenburger: Would you prefer that council or staff response to, respectfully respond to
each point as you make it? Would that be easiest for you?
Darren Lazan: No, I think at the end our request is that we move forward with the AUAR but we
work together so unless the council cares to get into that, into the weeds that far we would be
more than happy to do so but I think we can…
Mayor Laufenburger: But my assumption is that your recommendation at the end will be based
on all of these points, this is your recommendation. Is that correct?
Darren Lazan: This is our request, but yes sir.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay.
Darren Lazan: And I think it would be easier if we went through.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, alright.
Darren Lazan: If council maybe weighed in on what they want more detail on we can do that.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, proceed.
Darren Lazan: And as I mentioned this is an update to the original AUAR so we have an AUAR
that’s been completed. It’s fairly extensive and this is an update. Extensive amount of
development has occurred. Roughly two-thirds of the study area has been developed so that
removes quite a bit of variables from the study and there has been extensive work done on part of
the City. Not only our site but all the surrounding areas so we have a pretty decent body of work
that’s been done, not only when the study was originally done but subsequent to that with major
traffic improvements on Lyman and Powers and 212 and so forth so there’s a pretty significant
body of work associated with that. And I think most of the concern that we have today that want
to express is on the scope of the proposed AUAR that’s outlined in the packet and that applies to
both fee and structure obviously and without digging into all the details really there’s three
components that are of greatest concern. One is the number of scenarios proposed. As best I can
tell from the information I have five scenarios are proposed. An existing. A no build scenario.
Those could be combined. They may have intended to be combined but it didn’t read like that.
A, the Level 7 development proposal would be a scenario. The more intense development
scenario is a proposed scenario and then a scenario developed from your visioning exercise you
discussed earlier today so that’s five scenarios compared to the original one scenario that was
part of the original study. Four or five. To be fair that existing and no build should and could be
22
Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015
the same scenario. There’s approximately 13 workshops, meetings, chamber luncheons and so
forth. This is roughly 3 times what was done with the entire original study so I think we’d like
your input and we’d like some more consideration on the scope of the meeting involvement. The
workshops. Can these be combined? Can this be streamlined? Again it’s roughly 3 times the
original scope of services in there. And the other major component is the traffic comprising
roughly $21,000 of the study portion. It analyzes 7 intersections. That’s 4 more than the original
study analyzed. It didn’t make mention of the work that’s done. I think it’s fair to assume that if
you’re reconstructing Lyman and Powers was completely redeveloped, the intersection was done
with 212 that there should be an extensive body of work associated with that. It’s currently
under construction so we had hoped we could maximize those studies and move that forward.
And again that reflects then obviously in the schedule. We kind of walked through that
originally when we requested the AUAR. We’re very anxious to get it started. It really is
driving our process. The 6 month schedule that’s out there is about twice what we originally
contemplated when we met with staff in November. The fee as well is roughly twice but the
scope and the schedule right now is very concerning that we, it appears we don’t really start the
AUAR components related to the development until June and that maybe speaks a little bit to the
discussion earlier tonight about some of the visioning exercise that’s bleeding into the AUAR.
And I think probably fundamentally the heartache that we have with it as a development team is
that we are bracketing the study of the infrastructure’s ability to handle development with a no
build, which would be exactly what you see today or existing and the most intense development.
So we’re unsure as to what the, until a concern is discovered along that way where we find
limitations with the most intense development, we don’t believe we will. There really is no point
other than to expand the scope in doing the 3 steps in the middle. If the most intense
development uncovers issues related to any one of the AUAR components, maybe then we adjust
the scope. Back off and say well, the most intense development trips significant traffic concerns.
Let’s back up and analyze one other scenario that is likely to help bracket that but we believe
based on what we’ve been told, what’s been done on the roadways specifically in the past. What
you contemplated in your Comprehensive Plan that that most intense scenario will in fact prove
that the site can handle that component and normal mitigation efforts will be effective so with
that we certainly can stand for any questions but I think our request respectfully is that we break
that connection with the visioning exercise we talked about earlier tonight. That we allow the
AUAR to go forward while that parallels because we think that will be very useful input to the
next stage which is the PUD of development. That we order the AUAR tonight. Move it
forward but we work with staff to help narrow that scope. That we focus on possibly the existing
plus one or existing plus two scenarios instead of four. That we work to combine or streamline
the workshops and luncheons and other meetings that are there to be more reflective of the
original effort. And that we allow that to move forward as quickly as possible so that we can
take that feedback and help craft the PUD application that you’ll entertain at the next step. So
with that I’ll stand for any questions and certainly can dive into more detail if you folks want to
get that far into the weeds but I think we basically covered our concerns and we look forward to
your comments.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, thank you Mr. Lazan. Any questions or comments for the applicant
from council?
Councilman McDonald: Mr. Mayor.
23
Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015
Mayor Laufenburger: Councilman McDonald, yes.
Councilman McDonald: It’s not so much I have a question for the applicant yet but what I
would like to do is get a little bit of input from Ms. Aanenson to comment on those three issues
that he brought up. The number of scenarios. Number of meetings and workshops and traffic
studies in general. Can you help me understand a little bit about the importance of these? Where
the applicant fits into all this. I mean once we order this my understanding is, is that at that point
the contractor will talk to everybody and bring everybody together at the table. Is that a correct
assumption?
Kate Aanenson: Yes ultimately. I mean once you go out for review on this you have so many
days to enact it so we want to make sure that you’re comfortable with what you put out there and
receiving comments on that. So one of the things that we did commit to, Kimley-Horn has some
meetings as does Hoisington-Koegler. Working with the applicant. As soon as this gets ordered
that we’d sit down and try to set those meetings in place to make them seem less. Shorten up
that schedule so we’ve already talked to them about that. Trying to get those on the books so
we’re not duplicating meetings. Kimley-Horn and Hoisington-Koegler and Level 7
development, we can all be at the same meeting at the same time, that would be very helpful and
help shorten up the process and we certainly are willing to do that.
Councilman McDonald: Okay. And then a question for the applicant. After hearing that, the
fact that you know we are evidently willing to work with you and to try to get this thing done
because there is a time limit evidently and as you heard tonight we will separate it from the
whole thing about the visioning of what would be best for that area. Can you accept that and at
that point are we good to go as far as ordering this study?
Darren Lazan: Mr. Mayor, Member McDonald. Councilman McDonald. Certainly it’s
refreshing and encouraging to hear that we will work together to limit the number of meetings
and I think that can be done and I’m comfortable that we can move forward with that component
and work with staff to fine tune that. I think it’s important, and I don’t know that we’re going to
quantify tonight the traffic other than a good faith effort to make best use of the traffic and to
relook at the number of intersections we study and so forth but again if it’s a good faith effort to
make the best use of those studies, we’re fine. I think if we could get direction or confirmation
tonight that we could arrive at what scenarios will be analyzed I think we will have the highest
level of comfort that we can move forward and get this done.
Councilman McDonald: Well I guess with that, isn’t that part of your discussion with Kimberly-
Horn? I mean from what you’re bringing out here I would think that they would even agree with
you that yeah we go no build to maximize it and then at that point if that’s what creates a
problem they’re going to back off. You know I can’t speak for them or anything such as that but
as I understand the process you know you would have input into all of that with them and I
would think that in order to again cut the time down yeah, you reduce the scenarios to try to get
at a good answer.
24
Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015
Darren Lazan: I think that’s an excellent point and we would be very excited to work in that
manner. I think again if we could have just a little bit of summary clarification that we’ll work
together to address those three I’m more than happy to take that under direction and move
forward.
Councilman McDonald: Well I guess I would turn back to staff Mr. Mayor and just kind of ask
that you know in outlining that, isn’t that the way it works? Is that once we give this over to
Kimberly-Horn that they will in good faith you know again try to work through this the most
efficient manner possible?
Kate Aanenson: Correct. I mean we’re helping them. We’re the governmental unit supervising
this project so we’ve already talked to both parties on that. Trying to streamline those meetings
and the like so yes, in good faith but I think just to reiterate. One of the issues that came up
during the concept PUD was some of the traffic concerns in the neighborhoods so I’ll let Paul
Oehme, the City Engineer talk about that but we want to make sure that we are looking at some
of those, the SRF looked at all the external traffic. Didn’t look at the internal traffic and that’s
one of the things we want to make sure that our residents that raise that as concerns that we are
addressing that so…
Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Oehme before you talk about traffic, let me just clarify here. Mr.
Lazan brought up three primary issues. The number of scenarios. The number of workshops. I
take that to mean the number of meetings. And number three is the traffic and it sounds to me
like you agree that cooperation regarding the number of meetings and workshops is something
that can be addressed.
Darren Lazan: Yes sir.
Mayor Laufenburger: Would you agree on that? Okay. So let’s, before we go to traffic let me
just clarify. The number of scenarios. Mr. Lazan, you’re suggesting a no build scenario and a
max build scenario, is that correct?
Darren Lazan: Mr. Mayor I think we could start with a no build and a max build and very
quickly in the effort identify whether any intermediate, and I would suggest our proposal would
be a great intermediate. It’d be somewhere right in the middle of the no build and the max but
we start with those two and then meet again if we have an issue and expand the scope if that’s
necessary.
Mayor Laufenburger: Just to clarify for the council. As I read the packet and the Hoisington-
Koegler Group proposal it specifically, very clearly identifies three scenarios and from those
three you identified five so I’m, you don’t have to explain.
Darren Lazan: It’s very simple. The two are existing and no build which have been added to the
traffic and send to the engineering component so that’s the three development scenarios and as I
said sir it lays out like it’s two more scenarios but really existing and no build should be the
same.
25
Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015
Councilman Campion: And Mr. Mayor I was confused as well.
Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Campion.
Councilman Campion: And I was just thumbing through it. In Exhibit A I see what I think he’s
talking about.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay.
Councilman Campion: It does read like five.
Mayor Laufenburger: I stand corrected Mr. Lazan. So now let’s talk about traffic. Mr. Oehme
you want to, do you have some comments that you want to share with us regarding traffic
studies?
Paul Oehme: Sure Mayor Laufenburger, City Council members. So as Ms. Aanenson had
indicated when we were going through the public process identifying, or through the project here
we did hear from concerned residents in this area about traffic and the need to look at the traffic
for this particular development in greater detail. The intersections that we identified are mainly
internal intersections that we want to look at and specifically for pedestrian movements,
crossings and such by city parks and at specific intersections as well too so that, we felt is a high
priority for the City to look at in this study is the traffic and make sure that we’re doing our due
diligence and trying to cut down as much as we can on cut through traffic so.
Mayor Laufenburger: Kate you want to add anything to that?
Kate Aanenson: No but I mean certainly it doesn’t mean we won’t sit down with Kimley-Horn
and take a look at that and see if there’s ways that, if there’s other information out there we’ll
always, you know we’re willing to look at that and but we just want to put that out there that we
picked those intersections because of the input we received but certainly willing to work on that.
Paul Oehme: And Mayor if I can too. I mean the contract specifically for the traffic with
Kimley-Horn it is a time and materials not to exceed amount so you know they’re only going to
bill us for what they have incurred in their costs so obviously we’re not going to be passing any
more than what Kimley-Horn is going to be billing us to the developer so I just want to make
sure everybody’s aware of that.
Mayor Laufenburger: Alright. Let me move to other council members if I can. Any other
questions or comments for the applicant or staff?
Councilwoman Ryan: Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Laufenburger: Councilwoman Ryan.
26
Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015
Councilwoman Ryan: Ms. Aanenson, when Mr. Lazan refers to, a couple times original effort
and initial conversations, what is he referring to when he talks about time frames with 6 months
versus 3 months and initial agreements of numbers of scenarios? What is that?
Kate Aanenson: I think we had some initial conversations about what could potentially be a time
frame and a dollar amount.
Councilwoman Ryan: And so if for the, the proposed motion, I know we’ve verbally
commented on making some of these changes but the motion says approving the professional
services agreements which Mr. Mayor was referring to at the three scenarios. The time line and
schedule and you know the meetings and workshops. I guess I’m not comfortable without a
change to a services agreement that has been discussed with, I mean do we typically change
service agreements before we vote on them? I mean this is an agreement that would be signed at
the end of the night and from just the brief conversation that we’ve had there’s been a lot of
changes already so how does that typically?
Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Gerhardt.
Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, City Council members. The agreement in front of you is a maximum
contract. It’s an hourly rate with a not to exceed dollar amount. So typically when we get into
professional service contracts, not just with private developers but with well contractors. Water
treatment plant studies. It’s usually a not to exceed amount because there’s so many unknowns.
They may come back and say you know we’d like to look at a traffic studies if we go this way.
What this agreement does is gives us the most flexibility. We’re going to work with the
developer. We’re not going to require everything that’s in the agreement. I think everybody has
kind of said that tonight and I’ve got to believe Landform has entered into these with other
communities. It gives staff and the developer the most flexibility so we don’t have to keep
coming back to council saying can we do one more study in this area. It’s not to exceed $90,900
and you know its amazing how two engineering firms kind of get together and they kind of agree
on what’s the best method to study something. I’ve seen this multiple times over the last 5 years
and it is kind of a trust thing but if you would like to eliminate things in the contract we can
always bring something back to you so it’s not to an exceed amount and I think there’s been
clear direct tonight that you know some of the meetings won’t be needed.
Councilwoman Ryan: And just to follow up on that because I, unless I didn’t hear it I haven’t
heard an issue with the dollar amount. It’s the time line that’s I believe of issue and the fact that
the AUAR update schedules in this document, that we would be voting on is again concerning
because this is laid out and I want to make sure that everybody’s in agreement with the timeline.
Todd Gerhardt: Yeah. And what the timeline, you know the consulting engineers get together
and talk about it. And the planners. Don’t want to forget the planners. But when there’s certain
meetings that won’t be needed that will reduce that timeline and if there’s other things that we
can study upfront, like the concerns regarding Pioneer Pass Park. Maybe we can hold off on that
and concentrate on the Quadrant information first and bring that as kind of Phase I of the AUAR.
So concentrate on the stuff that Scott and their group needs to move ahead and feel comfortable
with what’s occurring in and around the area.
27
Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015
Councilwoman Ryan: And how does that relate to then what we would be voting on tonight?
Todd Gerhardt: I think this agreement gives both of us the flexibility to flex the schedule. It’s
kind of open ended but I think we’re trying to give them the assurances that we’ll concentrate on
their portion of it and that will be discussed at the first meeting with the consulting engineers.
Kate Aanenson: Can I just add too? I think the other thing that, this is verbatim Minutes. We’re
on the record stating what our intentions are and in good faith it’s on there so it’s both our goals
to keep this moving forward in a timely manner and we want to work together on that so.
Mayor Laufenburger: I would also add, let me also add too that we’re, both organizations have
people who are very experienced in this sort of thing so when we say that we’re going to approve
this, essentially what we’re doing is we’re, we as a council are giving our permission to move
forward with this process in an efficient and an effective way recognizing that this is most
expensive, longest term scenario. Notice I didn’t use that 5 letter word Mr. Lazan. So with the
intent on both parties, given guidance by the council to speed things up and do it for less money.
Councilwoman Ryan: And so would it make sense then to vote on moving forward with the
AUAR and voting on that and then asking for the services agreements to come back after they’ve
been revised?
Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Gerhardt.
Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, City Council, I think that would delay it 2 weeks. You know you do
have on the first page of the professional service contract scope of services. City retains HKgi to
provide professional services described in the contract. HKgi must complete the services
specified in the contract document before November 1 and then we also have, which one is it
again Roger?
Mayor Laufenburger: 3 is not to exceed.
Todd Gerhardt: Not to exceed.
Roger Knutson: Paragraph 2 is scope of services.
Todd Gerhardt: Yeah the scope of services. So we can reduce the scope of services at any time
so.
Roger Knutson: Maybe I could suggestion.
Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Knutson.
Roger Knutson: If we could amend paragraph 2 to make you more comfortable. It specifically
says, right now it says the City retains HKgi to provide the professional services described in the
28
Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015
Contract Documents. The next sentence would read, the City retains the right to reduce the
scope of professional services.
Mayor Laufenburger: Is that an implied?
Roger Knutson: I just think putting it in there would be a good idea, that’s fine.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay.
Councilman Campion: Now what?
Mayor Laufenburger: Just a second. Councilwoman Ryan and the entire council, we meet
second Monday and the fourth Monday of every month and I think that if we put too many
restrictions on the City staff and the developer to come to us for check points that will naturally
put a length of time on it. My experience for the last 4 years and Councilwoman Tjornhom and
Councilman McDonald for much longer than that, we have seen that the professional staff that
we have in place, with the experience that they have in place. The number of years and the
projects that they’ve been involved with they will always, they will always do their best to insure
that they’re spending the City taxpayer’s money wisely and efficiently so I, my view is that I
would be in favor of giving them the approval to manage the program the way they have shown
us to manage programs in the past. That would be my perspective. Any other council members
for comments? Mr. Lazan, did you want to have a closing comment of some sort?
Darren Lazan: I would, thank you. You know we certainly appreciate the effort to nail down the
scope. Everybody wants to be clear upfront and had we had the time I would love to have a lot
more discussion and go back and revise those but I think you know in the interest of moving it
forward and making the best use of your time so we’re not back here again if we, I think given
the content of the discussion today if we could approve the contracts as amended by the City
Attorney or as proposed by the City Attorney with the understanding that we’re going to have an
initial charge meeting or initial scope meeting and if for some reason at that point we’re not able
to come to an agreement on the reduction to the scenarios, the workshops and the traffic, maybe
then we’ll come back and bother you but we would like to move it along and I think I’m hearing
tonight that there’s an interest in doing so and I think that’s probably the best and most
expeditious route.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, thank you Mr. Lazan.
Todd Gerhardt: Mayor.
Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Gerhardt.
Todd Gerhardt: One other item that wasn’t included in the staff report is that after the initial
scope meeting with the consulting professionals and Level 7 that $90,900 check be escrowed
was not included in the motion.
Mayor Laufenburger: So you want to make sure that that’s included in the motion?
29
Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015
Todd Gerhardt: But only until after that scoping meeting is completed and they feel comfortable
with the scope. And same thing with the contract should be signed after that scoping study
meeting with the consulting professionals and Level 7.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Comment or motion from council member.
Councilwoman Ryan: Mayor may I have, make a clarification then to what Mr. Gerhardt just
said? So for the proposed motion based on what Mr. Knutson had suggested that adding to the
motion about that $90,000 held in escrow as well the contract won’t be signed until after the
initial charge meeting.
Todd Gerhardt: Yep, the scoping study.
Councilwoman Ryan: Scoping study, okay.
Todd Gerhardt: Yes. So then everybody would leave that meeting feeling comfortable on the
vision going and still giving each party the flexibility to add or subtract to the contract.
Councilwoman Ryan: Okay, thank you.
Mayor Laufenburger: Anybody else comment or motion?
Councilman McDonald: I’ll do a motion.
Mayor Laufenburger: Councilman McDonald.
Councilman McDonald: Okay I would propose that the Chanhassen City Council adopts a
resolution ordering the update to the Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) for the 2005
MUSA area and approves Professional Services Agreement with Hoisington.
Mayor Laufenburger: Hoisington.
Councilman McDonald: Hoisington-Koegler Group Incorporated and Kimley-Horn and
Associates Incorporated. And that we also add to this motion that there would be a $90,000
escrow amount after the scoping meeting and also that the contract would be signed after the
scoping meeting and all parties are in agreement with scope.
Mayor Laufenburger: And related to Mr. Knutson’s comment about paragraph 2 of the
Professional Services Agreement.
Councilman McDonald: Also add Mr. Knutson’s suggested improvement to number 2.
Mayor Laufenburger: We have a motion. Is there a second?
Councilwoman Ryan: Second.
30
Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015
Councilman Campion: Second.
Mayor Laufenburger: Councilwoman Tjornhom, I’ll give that to you.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: I didn’t even say anything.
Mayor Laufenburger: Excuse me.
Todd Gerhardt: You’re the Mayor. You can do that.
Mayor Laufenburger: I’ve got a bad ear over here. I think I guess it was Councilwoman Ryan
who said second. Thank you very much. So we’re, the motion is the language as it shows on, in
our packet with the addition of the payment and contracts to be, escrow payment and contract to
be signed after the initial scoping study and the language that the City can reduce the scope of
the contract at any time.
Todd Gerhardt: Correct.
Mayor Laufenburger: Any comments? Or discussion.
Resolution #2015-22: Councilman McDonald moved, Councilwoman Ryan seconded that
the Chanhassen City Council adopts a Resolution ordering the Update to the Alternative
Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) for the 2005 MUSA Area; and approves professional
services agreements with Hoisington-Koegler Group Inc. and Kimley-Horn and Associates
Inc. with the addition that the contract be signed and $90,960 escrowed after the scope of
services meeting is held, and with the addition to number 2 of the Professional Services
Agreement to add the sentence, “The City retains the right to reduce the Scope of
Services.” All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
Mayor Laufenburger: That motion carries 5-0. Thank you very much staff and thank you very
much Mr. Lazan and team.
APPOINTMENTS TO THE PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION.
Mayor Laufenburger: This is the appointments to the Park and Recreation Commission. Over
the last several weeks we, the City Council and the Park and Recreation Commission has
conducted interviews for the open slots on the Park and Recreation Commission and first of all I
want to say thanks to all of the citizens that made application. We at the council are always
pleased to see people willing to invest their time and their energy in improving the City of
Chanhassen regardless of what commission it is and I’m pleased to make this in the form of a
motion. That we appoint Jim Boettcher and Julie Hougham to each, appointing each of them to a
3 year term on the Park and Recreation Commission. And also appointing youth representative
Lauren Dale as the youth representative for a one year term on the Park and Recreation
Commission. And that is a motion. Is there a second?
31
Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Second.
Mayor Laufenburger: Councilwoman Tjornhom said that one. Any comments or discussion?
Mayor Laufenburger moved, Councilwoman Tjornhom seconded to appoint Jim Boettcher
and Julie Hougham to 3 year terms and Lauren Dale to a one year term as the youth
representative on the Park and Recreation Commission. All voted in favor and the motion
carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
Mayor Laufenburger: That motion carries 5-0. Thank you very much and thank you again to all
of the applicants. We’re excited to move forward with all of the commissions and we have I
believe one more commission to appoint at our next meeting. Okay.
COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS.
Mayor Laufenburger: Any council member wishing to make a comment or presentation?
Councilman McDonald.
Councilman McDonald: Yes Mr. Mayor. This past weekend I attended an event known as the
Red Bird Rally and there was evidently some great news, big news that came out of the rally as
far as town baseball and its future and things we’re trying to do to help town baseball flourish in
Chanhassen and many other cities. And actually I would refer to the Mayor for the details
rdth
because I have already forgotten the date except it’s what June 3 or 4.
Mayor Laufenburger: You’re right, you have forgotten the date already. Thank you Councilman
McDonald. Yes, I am very pleased to announce that the Chanhassen Red Birds have been
th
invited to play in the inaugural Town Ball Classic to be played at Target Field on June 27 at
12:00 noon. This will be, this is sponsored by the Minnesota Twins and more importantly by
ESPN 1500 radio. The first manager for the Chanhassen Red Birds in the new era of the
Chanhassen Red Birds is a gentleman by the name of Chris Reevers who’s a radio personality for
ESPN 1500 radio. He is a, he’s on the sports show. He’s also on with Joe Soucheray and others
and he continues to have a very fond place in his heart for the Chanhassen Red Birds and it was
he who went to the President of the Minnesota Twins, Dave St. Peter and suggested a Town Ball
Classic made up of three games. Two Class C teams followed by two Class B teams followed by
th
two Class A teams so on June 27, following the Patrick Reusse Radio Hour from 10:00 til noon,
the Chanhassen Red Birds will play the Faribault Lakers in the Class C version of the Town Ball
Classic followed by a Class B game at 3:00 and then a Class A game. This a weekend that the
Minnesota Twins are on the road so this is an exciting opportunity. Most exciting for the players
of the Chanhassen Red Birds that will get a chance to actually take the field at Target Field but it
will also be a great opportunity for this community to get behind town baseball in a big, big way.
We’re already thinking about ways to incorporate Southwest Transit providing bus service down
to the game from Chanhassen so we’re excited about the possibility and this is just another way
that amateur baseball in Chanhassen will experience great excitement. Great growth and
hopefully building the following for the Chanhassen Red Birds so thank you Mr. McDonald for
giving me an opportunity to make that announcement.
32
Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015
Councilman McDonald: My pleasure.
Mayor Laufenburger: Councilwoman Ryan, yes.
Councilwoman Ryan: Will the voice of the Red Birds be able to announce the game?
Mayor Laufenburger: I’m told Councilwoman Ryan, I’m told that the games will be broadcast
on ESPN radio so what’s most important is that the sound, the crack of the bat be heard. Not the
voice of the Red Birds so that’s yet to be determined. Okay. Any other council presentations?
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS.
Todd Gerhardt: Just a couple of things. Sheriff Jim Olson will be attending our next meeting to
introduce Eric Kittelson, our new Lieutenant. Eric started here oh about a week and a half ago
and he’s done a great job. I think you’ve seen a couple of his text messages and that’s something
Eric and I are working on together is to try to get word out there regarding incidents going on in
the community and so and he’s just done a great job of working with the night time deputies and
being involved and showing up at some of the incidents so really excited about Eric’s
involvement in Chanhassen. Secondly want to thank the Lions group sponsoring their pancake
breakfast at the fire station this past Sunday. A good turnout and always fun to see the kids
having fun and crawling around on the fire trucks and it’s a big event. A lot of planning goes
into it. Not just on the Lions side but also our volunteer fire department so big thanks to both of
those organizations so that’s all I have.
Mayor Laufenburger: Alright, thank you. Any questions for Mr. Gerhardt?
CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION.
None.
Councilwoman Tjornhom moved, Councilman McDonald seconded to adjourn the
meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. The
City Council meeting was adjourned at 8:40 p.m.
Submitted by Todd Gerhardt
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
33