Public Hearings C I TY OF
CHANHASSEN
i
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 Action by City Administrator
._ Endorsed
ViDWA
MEMORANDUM �toditie+
Rejected
Date �_ ���TO: Don Ashworth, CityManager
Date Submitted to Commissiol!
FROM: Karen Engelhardt, Office Manager cl� 3 bete Submitted to Comma
DATE: August 5, 1992
SUBJ: Request for On-Sale Beer and Wine License,Guy's,Inc.,7874 Market Boulevard,
Public Hearing
The city has received a request from Guy Petersen, owner of Guy's Taco Shop, for an on-sale
beer and wine license after he moves to his new location in the Market Square strip mall. He
intends to open his new restaurant called "Guy's" sometime in early October, 1992. The
restaurant will occupy approximately 2,300 square feet,and will employ approximately 8 people.
The officers of the corporation are Guy Petersen, President; Janet Coey, Vice-President; and
Charrisse Petersen, Secretary. The Public Safety Director has completed a background
investigation on each of these officers and has found no negative comments.
City Code was amended in November and requires that a public hearing be held for all new
liquor license applications. All property owners within 500 feet of the Market Square
development were notified of the public hearing and their opportunity to comment on the
application. I have not received any inquiries since the publication and property owner mailing.
RECOMMENDATION
I recommend that the application for an on-sale beer and wine license for Guy's restaurant at
7874 Market Boulevard be approved contingent upon the following:
1. Submittal of a $5,000 surety bond that expires on April 30, 1993;
2. Submittal of a Certificate of Insurance meeting minimum state requirements which expires
on April 30, 1993;
3. Submittal of the license fee in the amount of $270.00.
tt, PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY PS-9114(11-89)
PHONE (612) 296-6434 LIQUOR CONTROL DIVISION
• 333 SIBLEY• ST. PAUL, MN 55101 -
—
APPLICATION FOR COUNTY OR CITY ON SALE WINE LICENSE N- 3 oZ ree2
NOT TO EXCEED 14% OF ALCOHOL BY VOLUME
EVERY QUESTION MUST BE ANSWERED. If a corporation,an officer shall execute this application.If a partnership,
a partner shall execute this application.
—
Applicants Name(Business.Partnership,Corporation) Trade Name or DBA f
G u, L3ls . nc . Guys
Business Address Business Phone . Applicant's Home Phone
fruNr.kE+ Sc,uAr� '87y rARrler &Jb, ((la ) 9351-aaf/ ((Q/a ) 4/7- 3608
Cityl County State Zip Code
(\_ hANIk )9 SSE n CAro mi'a,-) S5377
- Is this application If a transfer,give name of former owner License period
ig New❑ Renewal❑Transfer From 06, 1 19 9 a To Dd. / t?
If a corporation.give name.title,address and date of birth of each officer.H a Po partnership,give name,address and date of birth of ea4'h partner.
Partner/Officer pi e and Title Address
G t,L. L4 E ,�+ c - E ! o DOB
jj Ci�C 1 �C � �rCs. 9ID �E��C ecE CI• CAP:1Y Mil, '/7/57
Partner/Office Name and Title Address JPrOI✓+ COEy - V. erfs, 9/0 Nc //+7 2 ICir.& d- (iI�HN r1'1n , �3�50
Partner/Officer Name and Title Address
D B /
Ck rr; s51. P Ers£N - Sic, 4-14/97 l'iciii-
S-4-. Ci.)• 5/30l9 Th'. /a7/7J
Partner/Officer Name and Title Address DOB
CORPORATIONS
-- Date of incorporationState of incorporation Certificate number Is corporation
Y
authorized
NOto do business in Minnesota?
If a subsidiary of another corporation,give name and address of parent corporation
—
BUILDING AND RESTAURANT
Name of buildin owner I Owner's address ,SS33?
mac (C E`t' v Ssc�c-.L Lt i ci-E4 r r ' aCY) Lei, f-{.0 (3 By rnsu r f Ic. air).
Are Property Taxes deli vent? Has the building owner any connecti n,direct or indirect" R tauLartt seating capacity J
❑Yes I No with the applicant? ❑Yes No (fa(/p
Hours food will be available No.of people restaurant employs No.of months per year restaurant Will food service be the principle business?
— i I iN.m. " 9 e'in' (a1)/vac g will be open I o- ,LYes ❑ No
Describe the premises to be licensed
mFrkE+- SortiAre, 5 knee;rc rn+ P
If the restaurant is in conlu tion with another business(re ort,etc.),describe business
•
OTHER INFORMATION
— 1. Have the applicant or associates been granted an on-sale non-intoxicating malt beverage .(3.2) and/or a "set-
up" license in conjunction with this wine license? ❑Yes ❑ No we, A(sE R?Oas-�fr\5 ao'*h dace
U , w?r1E-.
2. Is the applicant or any of the associates in this application a member of the county board or the city council
which will issue this license? ❑Yes ZNo
If yes, in what capacity? . (If the applicant is the spouse of a member of the governing
body, or another family relationship exists,the member shall not vote on this application.)
3. During t e p st license year has a summons been issued under the liquor civil liability(Dram Shop)(M.S.340A802).
❑ Yes No If yes, attach a copy of the summons.
1
4. Has the applicant or any of the associates in this application been convicted during the past five years of any violation
of federal, state or local liquor laws in this state or any other state? 0 Yes In No If yes, give date and details.
5. Does any person other than the applicants, have any right, title or interest in the furniture, fixtures or equipment
in the licensed premises? ❑Yes X No If yes, give names and details.
6. Have the applicants any interests, directly or indirectly, in any other liquor establishments in Minnesota?
E Yes ,gNo If yes, give name and address of the establishment.
I CERTIFY THAT I HAVE READ THE ABOVE QU lie NS AN T• ANSWERS ARE TRUE AND CORRECT
TO THE BEST OF MY OWN KNOWLEDGE. (1/Y L� TA ANSWERS
/c�
Signal fof Applicant Date , _
The Licensee must have one of the following:
CHECK ONE
X A. Liquor Liability Insurance (Dram Shop) — $50,000 per person; $100,000 more than one person; $10,000
property destruction; $50,000 and $100,000 for loss of means of support. ATTACH "CERTIFICATE OF
INSURANCE"' TO THIS FORM.
OR
11 B. A Surety bond from a surety company with minimum coverages as specified above in A.
OR
u C. A certificate from the State Treasurer that the Licensee has deposited with the State, Trust Funds having
a market value of $100,000 or $100,000 in cash or securities.
IF LICENSE IS ISSUED BY THE COUNTY BOARD, REPORT OF COUNTY ATTORNEY
I certify that to the best of my knowledge the applicants named above are eligible to be licensed. ❑ Yes E No
If no, state reason.
Signature County Attorney County Date
REPORT BY POLICE OR SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT
This is to certify that the applicant, and the associates, named herein have not been convicted within the past
five years for any violation of Laws of the State of Minnesota, Municipal or County.
Ordinances relating to Intoxicating Liquor, except as follows
Ponce,Sheriff Department Name Title Signature
IMPORTANT NOTICE
ALL RETAIL LIQUOR LICENSEES MUST HAVE A CURRENT FEDERAL SPECIAL OCCUPATIONAL
STAMP. THIS STAMP IS ISSUED BY THE BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO AND FIREARMS. FOR
INFORMATION, CALL 612-290-3496.
CITY O F
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739
_�
MEMORANDUM
TO: Karen Engelhardt, Office Manager
FROM: Scott Harr, Public Safety Direct
DATE: July 15, 1992
SUBJ: Background Investigations for Liquor License Application
The following individuals had investigations conducted on them,
with nothing being revealed that would negatively influence their
applications:
Guy Scott Petersen
Janet Lee Coey
Charrisse Marie Petersen
to PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
3
CITYOF
---
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739
Action by CttY Administrator
Endorse 1 . M
MEMORANDUM Mode
Rejecte
TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager Date — _ l
Date Submitted to Commission
FROM: Charles Folch, City Engineer ik 0)141 -
Hare s,tm;ned to comc
DATE: August 3, 1992 - - 92
SUBJ: Public Hearing on Feasibility Study for Nez Perce Drive Extension;
Approve Official Alignment
Project No. 92-6
This is the public hearing for the feasibility study on the Nez Perce Drive Extension Project
No. 92-6. The feasibility study presents two options for accomplishing the extension of Nez
Perce Drive from its current terminus in the Troendle Addition to Pleasant View Road.
The study also presents some readily known advantages and disadvantages of the two
described alternatives along with estimated project costs. The intent of the public hearing
is to afford an opportunity for local residents to acquire the information and provide input
in determining the most appropriate alignment for the extension of Nez Perce Drive. It is
not intended at this time to construct the needed roadway improvements; however, it is of
importance to approve an alignment and officially map this final road segment for such time
in the future that the abutting property currently owned by Art Owens should develop or
if the City should proceed with condemnation of the roadway.
The project consultant engineer, Bill Engelhardt of Engelhardt &Associates,will be giving
a presentation of the elements of the feasibility study at the public hearing. At the close of
the public hearing, if there are no further relevant questions or issues that need further
study, it is recommended that an alignment be approved as the official corridor for the
future extension of Nez Perce Drive out to Pleasant View Road.
ktm
Attachment: Staff report dated July 7, 1992
c: Dave Hempel, Sr. Engineering Technician
Bill Engelhardt, Engelhardt & Associates
n•
t 41 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
rm
g.
CITYOF
A CHAN' EASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739
MEMORANDUM t/A IDR
Modified_
TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager Rejectei
Date 7'X '7,;-•
Date Submitted to Comml110011
FROM: Charles Folch, City Engineer
DATE: July 7, 1992 Deb Submitted iD COOS
SUBJ: Receive Feasibility Study for Nez Perce Road Extension; Call Public Hearing
Project No. 92-6
Attached is the feasibility report conducted by Engelhardt & Associates for the extension of Nez Perce Drive
from its current terminus in the Troendle Addition to Pleasant View Road. Two options for this improvement
have been presented. The first option proposes to construct Nez Perce as a through street out to Pleasant View
Road with a realignment of Peaceful Lane connecting into this new segment. This would provide more of a
continuous north/south movement between Pleasant View Road and Lake Lucy Road.
The second option proposes to connect Nez Perce Drive to Peaceful Lane as a T'intersection. With this option,
the segment of Peaceful Lane between Nez Perce and Pleasant View Road would also be upgraded to the City's
standard urban roadway section.
The feasibility study presents some readily known advantages and disadvantages of each alternative along with
estimated project costs. Alternative A (Nez Perce as a through street) is estimated to be approximately S5,000
less than Alternative B. At this point it would be staffs recommendation to call for a public hearing on this
feasibility study whereby any issues concerning these two alternatives could be discussed and addressed
accordingly. It is not intended at this time to construct the needed roadway improvements; however, it is of
importance to approve an alignment and officially map this final road segment for such time in the future that
the abutting property currently owned by Art Owens should develop or if the City should proceed with
condemnation of the roadway.
It is therefore recommended that the City Council receive the feasibility study for the extension of Nez Perce
Road, Project No. 92-6, and call a public hearing to discuss this report be called for Monday,August 10, 1992.
ktm
Attachments: 1. Location map.
2. Feasibility study.
3. Memo from Paul Krauss dated April 7, 1992.
4. Letter from Randy L. Bauernfeind dated April 10, 1992.
t PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
n O n O
o O O
co N
N I 1
CHR/S TAM S
1P1161 ' LAKE ar
_, yis (.140.,
. NO SCA'-.!
III . ..1(74.01iiiii, .: i .
_,
-,,*gi 4 Ill, la
It 1r1t •
. ino,ftill
Mil awl.= m bt
•
OrA
s .\\\.�\\\\,L
aiimall. 3111 T;;;;" i i• ;; ^::: , -
:�, \,\ ..\ \. .
e .. \\\
ik= 4.,),cr::::::,,,:::, ,,,;, ,
lawilrew/ffir r.m.,„-:aa -,A),; - , art Alk_Am -
-ssw Avr . voe:-.:-.m.Nt-:.'
i all Ur % ; : ,q4T, --Nine grikiiii gieirom
r ST_ 44.riN - - iii4. E Lij ' th' I g" Fr lk i
*It* • 4 . -CCI '-a 1-4,74. (0
0 likair '-'x 4 q •• .. 161 .1116pft\ftiftw ..igh -
. Ar 1 111 rimilm
°:) iiialdrurig.. .. 4
O
VP -
44 " I 0.- wIrerivtd. :
kP SHENENDO �' QIII— V /4. 44,./ q •
Q.�■JCIRCLEilis A, Ea
ki
- � •
OV
A IMERRY1101114 IL%a "LIV
7Flig. =� C REE I1 , _
LOCATION MAP
�u v, i;t3C I TY T F
1 CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 Aodon
endorsed
✓ pc
MEMORANDUM sod
TO: Charles Folch, City Engineer
Dale ScDmktbd to CommisslM
FROM: Paul Krauss, Planning Director7L
pate Submitted to Courd
DATE: April 7, 1992
SUBJ: Authorization of Preparation of Feasibility Study for Extension of Nez Perce
Drive through the Owens' Property to Pleasant View Road
Over the past two to three years, the subject of providing a street connection from Nez
Perce to Pleasant View Road has been repeatedly dealt with by the Planning Commission
and City Council. During the review of the Vineland Forest plat in 1989, the City Council
adopted a concept that would provide a long term connection through adjoining properties
to serve this need. The road was constructed up to the west property line of Vineland
Forest, but ultimately must go across the adjacent Troendle property and Art Owens'parcel
_ to make the connection. Last year during the review of the proposed subdivision of the
Troendle property, this road connection proposal was again reviewed and upheld, and
appropriate right-of-way taken. During this review, area residents asked the Council to
make the connection to avoid local traffic impacts; however, this proved to not be possible
at that point in time since the adjoining Owens' parcel was in bankruptcy and was not
proposed for subdivision at that time. Consequently, the developer of the Troendle
Addition was required to place $10,000 on deposit with the city, which is the Troendle
Addition's share of completing the street across the Owens' parcel. This money is being
held by the city to be used towards the ultimate connection.
When the Troendle Addition was approved,the City Council asked that this item be brought
back up within 18 months and while this time period has not fully lapsed, recent events have
caused us to reconsider this condition. We have held discussions with a representative of
Frank Beddor, who is seeking to purchase a portion of the Owens' parcel. It is our
understanding that the Owens' parcel would be coming out of the bankruptcy protection.
— What is not clear at this point is when the city would be in a position to take the right-of-
way through the subdivision process, in fact at the present time, it looks more and more like
we may have to go in and condemn the final piece of right-of-way. Based upon this, I think
it would be useful for the city to take a portion of the $10,000 fund and undertake a
feasibility study for the roadway extension. This would be highly useful in defining a
�, PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
Charles Folch •
April 7, 1992
Page 2 —
centerline,which has never been done for this route, as well as engineering and construction
requirements, and costs. At the very least, this would allow us to officially map the route —
to protect it from development even if we do not proceed with construction immediately.
Secondly, the cost of the study would not be wasted since it is necessary to do one before
we could build the road however the right-of-way is acquired. I would urge the Engineering —
Department and the City Council to undertake this action as soon as possible so that we
may be in a position to assure that the final link of this road is constructed in a timely
manner.
CITY ENGINEER'S COMMENT —
As Paul has expressed in his memo, it would be of great benefit for the City to define and _
officially map the alignment for this last segment of Nez Perce Drive through the Owens
property connecting with Peaceful Lane and ultimately Pleasant View Road, particularly
since there seems to be at least one party interested in purchasing this land. It would be —
appropriate to use the $10,000 dedicated from the Troendle Addition to perform this study.
I will be meeting with Bill Engelhardt later in the week to discuss a number of issues. It
is my intention to also provide him with the necessary information to prepare a cost —
proposal for the sutdy which I can present to the City Council on Monday night. It is
therefore recommended that authorization be given to prepare a feasibility study for the
extension of Nez Perce Drive through the Owens property to Pleasant View Road at a cost —
not to exceed $10,000 and that Engelhardt & Associates be assigned the project engineer.
ktm
APR 13 1oq�.
CITY 0.
April 10, 1992
Randy L. Bauernfeind
6361 Fox Path
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Chanhassen City Council
Chanhassen Municipal Building
690 Coulter Drive
Chanhassen, MN 55317
RE: Connection of Nez Pierce Street to Pleasant View Road
Dear Chanhassen City Council Members:
I noticed that one of items on the April 13th Chanhassen City Council
agenda is a discussion concerning a feasibility study to connect Nez
Pierce to Pleasant View Road. As a resident of Chanhassen, I am writing
this letter to express my concern with connecting Nez Pierce to Pleasant
View Road. Connecting Nez Pierce to Pleasant View Road would
significantly increase the amount of traffic on Pleasant View Road which
is already extremely over traveled. Pleasant View Road has become a
"shortcut" for getting from one side to the other side of Lotus
Lake/Christmas Lake. This "shortcut" mentality has caused many
— commuters to travel at speeds in excess of the posted speed limit and at
speeds which are clearly unsafe for this road.
As you are aware, Pleasant View Road is the only passageway from County
Road 17 to Highway 101 between Highway 5 and Highway 7. The road was
never designed to carry the amount of traffic that it is currently
handling. The road is very narrow with numerous blind curves, steep
drop-offs to Lotus Lake, and has no shoulder or walkway. In addition to
the limitations of this road, the road surface has deteriorated a great
deal over past couple of years due to the amount of excess usage.
A tremendous amount of residential development has taken place on both
the east and west ends of Pleasant View Road over the past couple of
years. As a result of increased traffic generated by new development,
Pleasant View Road has become a very unsafe road to travel by vehicle
let alone trying to walk or bicycle on. In my opinion a four-lane
freeway would be a safer place to walk or ride a bicycle. Development
which is planned for the future will only generate more traffic on this
road if a plan is not developed which will reduce the usage of this
road.
Page 2
A plan for Pleasant View Road should be developed which would reduce the
amount of usage and which would give people who jog, walk and bicycle an
opportunity to enjoy this scenic drive and an opportunity for Chanhassen
to retain its small town atmosphere. The commuters that currently use --
Pleasant View Road as a shortcut should be re-routed to Highway 5 and
Highway 7 that are designed to handle commuting traffic at commuting
speeds .
I would appreciate if the Chanhassen City Council would take my concerns
and suggestions under consideration before allowing additional access to
Pleasant View Road and for future planning discussions.
Sincerely,
Randy Bauernfeind