CC 1995 05 22
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 22, 1995
Mayor Chmiel called the meeting to order at 8:25 p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag.
COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Chmiel, Councilman Berquist, Councilwoman Dockendorf,
Councilman Mason, and Councilman Senn
STAFF PRESENT: Don Ashworth, Roger Knutson, Todd Gerhardt, Charles Folch, Kate Aanenson, Sharmin
Jaff, and John Rask
Mayor Chmiel: Before I call the approval of the agenda, I xvould like to indicate a change in the Minutes of
April 24, 1995, page 13 to read. Resolution #95-49A: Councilman Mason motion carried and we're just adding
the A to the number and we're going to add the following Resolution #95-49B. Councilman Mason moved,
Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded approval of the Resolution authorizing the Chanhassen Housing and
Redevelopment Authority to levy a special benefit tax pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 469.033, Subd. 6,
and all voted in favor, except Councilman Berquist who opposed, and Councilman Senn who abstained. Motion
carried.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilman Mason moved, Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded to approval the
agenda as amended by Mayor Chmiel to the Minutes of City Council Minutes dated April 25, 1995. All voted
in favor and the motion carried.
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None.
CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Berquist seconded to approve the following
Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations:
c. Approve Plans & Specifications for the Wetland Restoration and Trail Construction on Powers Boulevard
and the SWMP Water Quality Project on Lotus Lake.
e. Approval of Bills.
Board of Equalization and Review Minutes dated May 8, 1995
City Council Minutes dated May 8, 1995
City Council Minutes dated April 24, 1995 as amended by Mayor Chmiel
g. Resolution #95-54: Friendly Annexation/Deannexation of 2.7 Acres, Gedney Pickle Company Parcel.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
B. MEADOWS AT LONGACRES 2ND AND 3RD ADDITION.
Mayor Chmiel: Kate, would you like to indicate. I did receive the letter just a few minutes ago. If you'd like
to pass that on down.
Kate Aanenson: Yes, thank you. Dave Henner is representing Lundgren Brothers, has requested this be pulled
for the reason that we combined one development contract for the final plat of the 2nd and 3rd and they're
requesting that they be separate. Charles can probably speak more effectively to this issue but we believe we
can separate the two issues. It's just that some conditions don't apply to the 2nd that do apply to the 3rd and
vice versa. But they want to just final plat the 2nd I believe at this time. If they did want to final plat the
3rd, it's only good for so many days so we believe that rather than go forward, that we probably can only final
plat the 2nd but we did do it as one development contract. Maybe Charles would like to.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Charles.
Charles Folch: Mayor, members of the Council. Mr. Dave Henner of Lundgren Brothers is here tonight. He
may ~vant to just get up and brief you on...what they're requesting. I do have a copy. Their request letter seems
to be along xvith written changes to the associated page of the development contract for the 2nd Addition so just
for your information and for the record.
David Henner: Good evening Council members. My name is David Henner and I'm with Lundgren Brothers
Construction. We received the development contract Friday and saw that it was combined for the 2nd and 3rd.
We would request that xve had a development contract for each separately.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, and with all the corrections that are done within here Kate.
Kate Aanenson: We haven't done those yet. What we're saying is we could look at those but the issue I guess
that we had raised is, final plat's only good for so many days. That's why we put them together. If he's not
going to record them both, I'm not sure xvhat the reason is for separating them.
David Henner: Well, at this time we know that we're going to go forward with the 2nd Addition. The 3rd
Addition is still in doubt...The decision to go forward with the 3rd xvill be made hopefully within the next 30
days.
Kate Aanenson: I guess we xvould recommend that you final plat it at that point but maybe Roger has
something to say.
Mayor Chmiel: Roger.
Roger Knutson: Mayor. I don't think it's fair to staff or Lundgren Brothers for us to try to negotiate or re-write
a really complicated development contract tonight and separate out the 2nd and 3rd Addition. Whether that's
feasible. I don't know anything about that. It's on the Consent Agenda. I would recommend you just table this
item. Not take any action on anything tonight. We'll sort this out and bring it back to you for your next
meeting.
Mayor Chmiel: Alright, good. As per Council's recommendation, is there a motion to table?
Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to table f'mal plat approval and approval of
Development Contract .and Plans and Specifications for Meadows at Longaeres 2nd and 3hi Addition, Lundgren
Brothers. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
(Item l(d) was moved to item number 10 on the agenda.)
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: None.
City Council Meeting - May 22, 1995
PUBLIC HEARING:
VACATION OF THE UNUSED PORTION OF ALLEY RIGHT-OF-WAY~ NORTH OF LOTS 4 AND 5~ ST.
HUBERTUS, NORTH OF WEST 78TH STREET AND SOUTH OF CHAN VIEW~ JOHN PETERS.
Mayor Chmiel opened the public hearing.
John Rask: Mr. John Peters, owner of Lots 4 and 5, Block 2, St. Hubertus is requesting a vacation of the alley
right-of-way along the north lot lines of Lots 4 and 5. St. Hubert's is platted in 1887, a 16 foot alley right°of-
way was dedicated through the middle of Lot 2. The alley is unimproved and does not provide access to any of
the adjoining lots. This alley is currently used primarily as yard space by the majority of the property owners in
this area. There are no utilities within this right-of-way. The alley does serve as somewhat of a drainageway.
Staff is recommending that a drainage easement be provided over the vacated alleyway. Water drains to the east
where it passes through several culverts that go under Highway 101 or West 78th Street: The applicant is
proposing to construct a single family home on Lots 4 and 5. These two lots are contiguous lots of record and
are under single ownership and are therefore considered one lot by our zoning ordinance. The successful
vacation of this alley xvill provide additional room for the applicant to locate the home. The applicant would
need to maintain a 30 foot setback from the front property line and a 10 foot setback from the side lot lines.
What the vacation does is allow them some extra room in xvhich to locate the house. Staff is recommending
approval of the vacation.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. As I mentioned before, this is a public hearing. Is there anyone wishing to address this
specific item at this time? Seeing none, may I have a motion to close the public hearing?
Councilman Mason moved, Councilwoman Dockcndorf seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor
and the motion carried~
Councilman Senn: I move approval.
Councilman Mason: Second.
Resolution #95-55: Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve Alley Vacation #95-2 of
the alley located north of Lots 4 and 5, Block 2, St Hubertus~ with the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall pay for all recording and attorney fees associated with the vacation of the easement.
2. A drainage easement shall be conveyed to the city prior to the vacation of the alley.
Ali voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
City Council Meeting - May 22, 1995
PUBLIC HEARING:
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT NO. 4.
Public Present:
N~me
Address
Vernelle Clayton
Judy Schmieg
John Linforth
Linda Thistead
Brad Johnson
422 Santa Fe Circle
200 West 77th Street
7471 Canyon Curve
Chanhassen Bowl
241 Frontier
Mayor Chmiel: This also is a public hearing and I'd like to open that for consider approval of Tax Increment
District No. 4. Todd.
Todd Gerhardt: Mr. Mayor, Honorable Council. Under State Statute the City Council is required to hold a
public hearing to consider creating a tax increment district. Both the School District and the County have been
apprised of the action being considered tonight. The purpose of this district is to assist with the redevelopment
of the bowling center, hotel expansion, conference room space, the renovation of the Old Instant Webb building
into a 6 bay movie theater, and the redevelopment of the old Frontier Center into 22,000 square feet of retail.
The redevelopment project would also take into account construction of a parking lot, boardwalk, and also a
new facade on the Frontier Building, the boxvling center, and the old Instant Webb building. The proposed
construction of the facade, sidewalk and landscaping and parking lot improvements are estimated to be
$1,460,000.00. The incentives that would go along with the expansion of the hotel and conference center
expansion would be $289,000.00. At this time I'd like to put up a map that shows the district boundaries. To
get your bearings. Right now the current hotel is on this property. The expansion would occur on Lot 2. The
proposed conference center, meeting room space would occur in the old Animal Fair building, which is located
on Lot 1. The Frontier building is located on Parcel 250130700 and the bowling center area which would
incorporate the restaurant bar for Pauly's, 8,000 square feet of retail and the existing bowling center would go on
Lot 2, Block 1 in Chanhassen Mall. And then the movie theater complex would be incorporated on Lot 3 of
Chanhassen Mall. Parking lot improvements would be incorporated on both Lot 3, Block 1, Outlot A and B
and the Frontier Center property. I've also included in your packet an attachment 4. A cash flow analysis for
the project. Based on this information, the current value that exists today is $2,840,182.00. Taking into account
the base plan for the hotel expansion, the Animal Fair building, Frontier building, and bowling center property
and the old Instant Webb property. With the redevelopment efforts as proposed by the developers of Bloomberg
Companies and the bowling center and Country Suites, the valuation would increase up to $600,000.00. Or $6
million dollars. This would then in turn produce taxes of approximately $411,727.00. With that creating
increment which xvould be...back against the project for 20 years of $219,217.00 per year. Giving us principle
of present values over the 20 years of $1,569,146.00. On page 2 of the tax increment total cash flows, which is
still a part of Attachment 4, the second page. It follows the tax increment flows. In there, if you look at the
column that says Administrative Expense, 10% and the local government aid. At our last meeting we showed
cash flows where the city would lose...aid dollars. Working with the developers and also Sid Inman, we've noxv
put cash flows together that show no local government aided...based on a 4% return if you, that's the first 5
years of increment from the administrative, 10%. Put that in a bank and then 4% and continue to capture that
10% over the 20 year life of the history. In the year 2017 would be the first time that you'll see a negative loss
based on...noted in here is that the hotel and the conference room space would only receive the typical three
City Council Meeting - May 22, 1995
year special assessment write down policies that the HRA has given most and they're satisfied ~vith that. They
think that meets their needs... As to the remaining parcels, they would take the benefit of the increment
generated from the hotel and conference center to date and that money would be used to help write off their
expenses as part of the facade improvements and boardwalk and making this district pay itself off in 20 years.
At this time I would open, suggest you open it up for citizen comment.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any questions of Todd? Prior to opening it up to the floor. If not, is there anyone
wishing to address this proposal that's going forth on the Tax Increment District No. 4. State your name and
your address.
Brad Johnson: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. My name is Brad Johnson. I live at 241 Frontier Trail. I
don't want to add very much more to what Todd had to say from a technical point of view because there's a lot
of things but I would like to place it in the process that we are currently in. We have a number of
commitments from people who are interested in providing, upgrading the bowling alley. They're interested in
bringing in Pauly's...Dinner Theater, including the Frontier Building itselfi We have, as our process, but we
normally do that once the district is created and that's where we are. We kind of know what we like but we
don't have a lot of specifics except.that we can answer questions relative that you may have. Some of you
wonder what the total cost of this total private improvements are going to be and we anticipate that to be around
$3 million that will be contributed by individuals...project itself. We've been working on this now as long as
I've been in Chanhassen, which is approximately 10 years. As you're aware this was supposed to be scheduled
for the original tax increment district and I think...purpose of doing that district years ago. Which was about 22
years ago. It just never got done because there's enough raw land in town where people tend to build there,
much like we had north of 78th and in both cases a lot of money. On the north side of 78th Street, a
considerable amount of money had to be... I'm here to answer any questions...HRA concept more in detail. The
process through the Planning Commission and back to you guys. As to what...
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Are there any specific questions that you may have at this time?
Councilman Berquist: Are there any solid leases? You indicated that there are a number of people interested in
committing money in their efforts.
Brad Johnson: The lease is about ready to be signed by Pauly's. We have the bowling alley people, as far as I
know, are in the final negotiations. They're trying to decide whether they want to buy the building or lease the
building.
Councilman Berquist: Now Pauly's want to simply move the bar over there?
Brad Johnson: He's not just going to move the bar there. It's more to create something like a...and he's going
to invest a million dollars into a new restaurant. So it's not exactly a bar. About 9,000 square feet of a new
restaurant. We have a well known supplier of soft ice cream that has indicated that they will sign a lease there
as part of that...boardwalk's a very attractive thing. We're seeing a real interest from people that we didn't used
to have, obviously.
Councilman Berquist: But ho~v solid is the movie theater development?
City Council Meeting - May 22, 1995
Brad Johnson: Very solid. They're not here tonight. We thought. We're moving too slow as far as they're
concerned...We've had a lot of technical stuff to the development and I think staff's done a very good job with
that and kno~v where we are...so I think we're close.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any other questions? Thank you. Is there anyone else wishing to address us?
Fritz Coulter: My name is Fritz Coulter at 7615 Frontier Trail. I listen to all the wonder things that were said.
I didn't understand any of them because they weren't in English. But I guess my question, I've never understood
these tax increment finance districts. It appears to me, and...is that the money that is generated by the taxes are
paid back, paid off with improvements so that money then which normally would have gone to taxes like the
school district, the city, the county, does not go there. So as a direct result of that, my taxes are kept a little bit
higher because the businesses are not paying taxes to the city, the county and the school district. Is that
correct? Then I am unequivocally opposed to any more tax increment finance districts in this to~vn.
Don Ashworth: The problem you have, especially with the district, or an area like the, around the area of the
bowling center, is the property owner can get $3.00, $4.00, $5.00 a square foot just leaving the property just as
it is. Leasing it out to the storage firm, who's in there now Todd? Global Moving. And that's all that's going
to be paid in taxes because if you try to renovate that property. Knock down the buildings. Put something else
on there. Have that individual responsible for paying it, they're just not going to do it. It becomes cheaper to
go out to an area xvhere there's simply vacant land. Build whatever it is that you're going to build. So you
don't have to contend ~vith an existing structure. In this instance, the tax increment, the $4.00 that is currently
being paid, if that's what he's getting per square foot for that facility and that taxes are based upon that amount,
will continue to be paid to the City, School and County just as they have been for the past 10, 15 years. The
amount of ne~v increment, you're correct. Is going to take and go back to insure that those renovations do occur
and that the individual, by making those, can realize literally the same number of dollars that they currently are
for just renting it out for any type of use. Storage. In my mind, this is the perfect example of xvhy you have a
tax increment district. You don't need to do a thing, in which case the existing owners will simply continue to
have uses in there that are inappropriate xvithin your downtown area and which do not generate any significant
tax. Then they'll just continue to pay. In fact what ~vill happen, as it did in the downtown area. The amount of
taxes generated just keep going down and down and down because nobody wanted to locate a business, or even
improve their business as long as Hanus kind of had that junk yard on main street. As long as you had 4-5
inappropriate businesses, nobody would improve them. So I mean, it becomes very hard for me to understand
comments like Fritz' that gee, the school district and the county and the city lost all this money because of the
tax increment district, because you'd have exactly what you have down there, or had down there at that point in
time had you not created the district. Again, if the Council makes the decision not to create that district, those
properties will sit there exactly the same way they have for the last 15 or 20 years. And they'll continue making
the same tax payment, or probably lower because again the property will continue to get further run down and
further run down and further run down~
Todd Gerhardt: Mr. Mayor, if I can answer Fritz' question about... Right now if development as to occur there,
it xvould create $411,000.00 in new taxes. Of that $411,000.00, $192,510.00 goes back on the tax roles because
you have to re-certify the current tax increment district that these properties are in. By re-certifying them, you
have to create a base value as the values are created. So $192,510.00 goes to the city, school district, the
county and all the other districts. The amount of increment that this project would create that would go back to
help offset the parking lot improvements and the boardwalk is $219,217.00 a year. So that's the assistance that
you're giving back to these property owners to redevelop this area over a 20 year period.
City Council Meeting - May 22, 1995
Fritz Coulter: So you mean $219,000.00 for 20 years?
Todd Gerhardt: Correct. And they're up fronting the cost to put in the facade, parking lot and the boardwalk
system in and they'll get $219,000.00, which takes into account 9% interest. Based on what our estimates of
that facade, boardxvalk, parking lot improvements is $1,450,000.00~
Fritz Coulter: So to draw an analogy. If my house were in a tax increment finance district, if I put a new roof
on my house and it would increase my taxes, I'd get the money back from the city to pay for the new roof on
the house?
Todd Gerhardt: Yes.
Fritz Coulter: I'd like to apply for a tax increment finance district in old town Chanhassen. We've got some
really run down pieces of property over there and they're going to stay that way because we need the moneyc
Don Ashworth: I agree with Mr. Coulter entirely. I think we do need to address housingc If tax increment
districts could be created to help us improve the standard of a number of our housing within the community,
and especially some of the older areas ~vithin the community, staff would be the first one to stepping in saying,
I think we should do this. Unfortunately it's not a vehicle that's currently available to you. But otherwise again,
xve do have a problem as it deals xvith providing affordable housing xvithin this community. Somehow that issue
is going to be addressed, has to be addressed. I like Fritz' idea. Unfortunately, we don't really have the
statutory authority to do it right now.
Councilman Berquist: What Fritz doesn't mention though is the increase in taxes that his abode his going to
generate because of the increase in value that the new roof means.
Fritz Coulter: I'm already realizing that. I did that last year and my taxes went up last year already..~
Todd Gerhardt: ...These guys are paying twice as much in taxes and they're going to try to offset that by
bringing in more uses and jobs and they're going to have to work hard to justify the increase in taxes...They
may get it back but they pay for it.
Mayor Chmiel: If we didn't have some of the districts that we've had, and some of them are going off the
books in a few years, your taxes xvould probably run a lot higher than what they basically are because all the
industrial and commercial kinds of development that we bring into this community offset your taxes by a great
amount, as well as mine.
Fritz Coulter: Well I realize that but I just don't feel that Dayton Hudson and Byerly's are two companies that
are in such dire straits that they need a tax increment finance district and have their taxes...to me doesn't make a
lot of sense. As I understand the tax increment finance district was to renovate those areas in town to be
renovated and the renovation I saw...and building a hole. And basically what's going to happen to Pauly's.
Probably also so what was Chanhassen when I first moved in no longer exists. The Chanhassen now will start
from the Dinner Theater and go west from there. It just, to me it's extremely frustrating because I think Mr.
Johnson brought up a point. I think...is already a tax increment finance district. Am I wrong on that? In other
words, there's been a period of time where they haven't been paying nothing extra. Now we're going to extend
it what, another 20 years? It doesn't make a lot of sense to me. If it wasn't a tax increment finance district,
why wasn't it done during the time period it was in there instead of doing all these tax increment finance
City Council Meeting - May 22, 1995
districts for Target and Byerly's and Instant Webb and United Mailing and all those areas. We lost sight of
what the tax increment finance district was for. Was to renovate downtown Chanhassen, and all it's been used
for was to generate new businesses on vacant land. So I'm just opposed unequivocally to any more tax
increment finance districts in this town. I don't know what the total tax base that is in the tax increment finance
district but I know it's keeping my taxes inordinately high. And I mean there were several articles in the paper
last year and Chanhassen was one of the larger communities with tax increment financing in the whole state.
Mayor Chmiel: True. And if everybody would have done as Chanhassen has done with their tax increment
financing, the whole State would have been better off as well.
Fritz Coulter: I think there would have been an uprising down at the State Capitol like you would never have
seen...people stating they'd be better off. They'd be xvorst.
Councilman Berquist: I think your viexvs are short sighted but I respect your right to give them.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Well and I would take issue only with this piece of property. I mean you could
almost s~vay me on a lot of other of our TIF districts but not this one. This one needs it.
Fritz Coulter: Well sorry I disagree with the Council members, and I would disagree with...also.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. We appreciate that. Anyone else?
Judy Schmieg: My name is Judy Schmieg and I live at 77th Street and I guess I'd have to agree with Fritz
because he's just part of the citizens out there and...the business has been getting all the attention but everybody
is feeling like that...xvhen are you going to stop these TID's. You knoxv we don't know that because it can ,just
go on and on and on. And yeah, all of...and pay no taxes...so that has been happening. And I think Don, your
answer that your property, if we don't give it to them, that property will get worst. That's kind of like saying,
Chanhassen that property, the value's going down. I mean I wish the assessor was here. All our's is going up
because Chanhassen is so great to live here and you're telling Fritz that, you know that property, the value's just
going to go down and there won't be any new taxes. That's not true. This town very definitely will take care of
that piece of property. So I just ~vanted to let you know my feeling on this and I think the people are feeling
frustrated with their current taxes. We've got school issues, business issues and stuff. Fritz brings up a good
point. There should be a limit on it. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Good, thank you Judy. Anyone else? If seeing none, may I have a motion to close the public
hearing?
Councilman Mason moved, Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor
and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
Mayor Chmiel: Steve, do you have any questions?
Councilman Berquist: I spent quite a bit of time with Todd on the phone today. I think I've pretty much
exhausted my questions.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Colleen.
City Council Meeting - May 22, 1995
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Ah no, I haven't any questions. I would reiterate my concern however, and we'll
get into it more when we look at the specific, what it's going to look like. I've said it before and I'll say it
again. It could either look great or it's going to look really gawdy so we have to be very careful.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Michael.
Councilman Mason: None. My questions have been answered.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Mark.
Councilman Senn: I spent a lot of time talking to Todd over the last few days too and also the developer today.
I'd like the concept so I mean I don't have a problem supporting creation of the district but it seems to me when
we create these districts, there's a lot of perceived approval that goes with it and all we're doing is we're creating
the district and I don't want any perception that we're approving anything beyond creating the district at this
point because I have a number of, I'm going to say at least in my mind, serious questions and reservations about
the details of this project which is information we don't even have before us at this point~ You know, if some
of the properties in this district have been off the tax rolls already for the last 15-20 years. I'm not comfortable
with this district going out another 20-25 years. I'm not comfortable with the total dollars. I'm not comfortable
with it being as far outside of our TIF policy as it is, which is 3 years included back in in terms of
improvements. This is 10 times I think. I'm not comfortable with paying the private party's interest on their
money through the public subsidy. I'm not comfortable with the public cost it's at as a result of the pressure put
on our public system and stuff. I mean these are all questions I think we need to address and we need to talk
about and we need to ansxver as we go fonvard in this process and I don't want to perceive tonight that we're
just automatically saying, this thing's going to be umpteen million dollars and it's going to be for 25 years
because it's not what, at least as I understand it what we're voting on tonight. If it is, I'd like somebody to
educate me as such but I believe we are only voting on the creation of a new TIF district and nothing beyond
that.
Mayor Chmiel: Todd, do you want to address that.'?
Don Ashworth: I guess I would generally agree. I think you do have items in there that are anticipated expense
items but as xvith anything else, we bring back the detail associated with that and Council ends up at a separate
point in time approving that. All bonding has to come back through.
Todd Gerhardt: We aren't buying a bond for anything.
Don Ashworth: That's true too.
Todd Gerhardt: The next process for the redevelopers is to come back through the city process for site plan
approval. That means taking the design of the facade and boardwalk and parking lot. Public access to the site.
Traffic studies. Making sure that it meets all of the criteria of the plan... With this the HRA would enter into
redevelopment agreements with the bowling center people, the Dinner Theater people and Bloomberg
Companies and the Frontier Center. I xvould not, I don't -know what else I would come back to the City Council
on, unless you wanted to have a joint City Council/HRA to discuss the redevelopment agreements which would
call out minimum market values on buildings. It would call out eonditions...do to their site. That is typically
the process that it goes through. The uniqueness of this program is...these individuals did half of the taxes that
they pay each year back to help offset their up front costs of putting that facade on and constructing that
City Council Meeting - May 22, 1995
boardxvalk and putting in the parking lot based on the site plans the City Council xvould approve. Right now
I'm estimating that to be $1,460,000.00. You're talking about trying to getting...entities to make sure that Russ
Pauly makes $900,000.00 to a million dollars worth of improvements inside the building. We can do that as
part of the private redevelopment agreement that loans...but I've got to think that if you approve it tonight,
you're approving the budget for this project.
Councilman Senn: We're not going to get another chance at looking at the finances, the economics or anything?
Or the private investments or the...development agreement. All xve're going to get is site plan review?
Todd Gerhardt: Correct. The HRA will be approving the private redevelopment agreements xvith... They are the
agency that would administer the fund.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any other discussion?
Councilman Berquist: So the HRA will have the detail that...Mark xvas looking for.
Mayor Chmiel: Which will also be available to Council.
Todd Gerhardt: You receive an HRA packet but right now the new plan is... that ~vould go to the hotel. Which
would go to the retail. Which would go to the bowling. Which would go to the movie theater based on that 20
years. And the percentage share of the...motel and conference center and cinema ~vould capture 38% of those
and the bowling center, Pauly's and the retail would capture 36% and then the Frontier building xvould capture
26% of those revenues after...and that's based on your percentages of $1,460,000.00 in improvements for the
boardwalk, facade and parking lot based on benefit back to those three entities. So they...
Councilman Senn: So essentially the hotel/conference segment of this project is the only segment that
effectively will pay for itself under the 3 year policy?
Todd Gerhardt: Correct. And it would be, but they're the ones with less of the burden. The hotel expansion's
got a vacant piece of land. They don't have to contend with an old industrial building that...concrete paneling.
And right now they're...conference room space and keeping the existing space...based on valuation with the
building on there than probably... They sell it at land value, then they will probably tear down that building and
build a more efficient conference center than trying to deal with the existing building the ~vay it is .... to get
handicap people into that building, you need that boardwalk system. ADA and building codes will not allow
people to get into the bowling center and Pauly's...retail and movie theater... The parking lot situation, as it is
right now, it's perfect for the moving company. They don't need a paved surface but if you're going to try to
renovate the Frontier Building and a portion of Instant Webb, you're going to need that parking lot for the
movie theater... It's been a goal of the City Council I think and the HRA to see that as a redevelopment area...
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any other questions? Hearing none, is there a motion?
Councilman Mason: I make a motion to approve the Tax Increment District No. 4.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second?
Councilwoman Dockendorf: I'll second it.
10
City Council Meeting - May 22, 1995
Mayor Chmiel: Motion to, it's been moved and seconded. Any other discussion?
Resolution #95-56: Councilman Mason moved, Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded to approve the Resolution
creating Tax Increment Financing District No. 4 and the Redevelopment Plan. All voted in favor, except
Councilman Senn who opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of 4 to 1.
AWARD OF BIDS: 1995 STREET REPAIR & SEALCOATING, PROJECT 95-2.
-Charles Folch: Thank you Mr. Mayor, members of Council. On Thursday, May 11, 1995 bids were received
and opened for the 1995 street repair program. A total of 2 bids were received. Typically two bidders submit
each year for this program. The low bid this year was received from ASTECH Corporation out of St. Cloud
with a bid of $169,839.84. This is under the 1995 budgetary amount of $172,000.00...State Aid Maintenance
and Park Maintenance budget. So ASTECH has performed the contract in years past with the city. They've
performed satisfactorily and therefore it's staff's recommendation that this year's project be awarded to them in
the amount as stated.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Thank you Charles. Any questions?
Councilman Berquist: Who's the third company that normally this type of work?
Charles Folch: A company out of I think the southern part of Minnesota. Out of Rochester and they have yet
to, in the 5 years I've been here, they have yet to bid. It's usually Allied and Astech that bid the contracts in
Chanhassen.
Mayor Chmiel: Any other questions?
Councilman Senn: Move approval.
Councilman Mason: Second.
Resolution #95-57: Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded that the 1995 Street Repair Program
Project 95-2 be awanled to ASTECH Corporation in the amount of $169,839.84. Ail voted in favor, except
Councilwoman Dockendorf who was not present to vote, and the motion carried.
PRELIMINARY PLAT OF OUTLOT B AND BLOCKS 5, 6, 7 OF OAK PONDS 2ND ADDITION INTO LOT
1, BLOCK 1~ OAK PONDS 4TH ADDITION; AND SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A 63 UNIT SENIOR
HOUSING BUILDING, CARVER COUNTY HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY; AND
APPROVAL OF JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT BETWEEN CARVER COUNTY HRA AND THE CITY OF
CHANHASSEN FOR A MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING REVENUE BOND PROGRAM.
Public Present:
Name Address
Judy Schmieg
John Linforth
Cindy Schallock
200 West 77th Street
7471 Canyon Curve
7501 Canyon Curve
11
City Council Meeting - May 22, 1995
Mary & Tim Anderson
Julie Frick
B. Port~vood
Matthew Hoffman
Greg Hromatka
Bernice Billison
Albin H. Olson
Sherol Hoxvard
Stephen E. Rademacher
Tim English
Jane & Carl Kubitz
Dorothy Mclntyre
Marion Stultz
Mel& Jacki Kurvers
7550 Canyon Curve
Carver County HRA
Leonard, Street & Dillard
931 Saddlebrook Trail
7580 Canyon Curve
7281 Pontiac Circle
406 Santa Fe Circle
1005 Pontiac Lane
203 1/2 Chan View
203 Chan Viexv
7492 Saratoga Dr.
110340 Geske Road, Chaska
110340 Geske Road,//203, Chaska
7240 Kurvers Points Road
Sharmin Al-Jarl: Mr. Mayor, members of the City Council. This item appeared before you on May 8th. The
City Council reviewed and tabled action on this application. One of the main issues of concern by the City
Council, as well as the neighbors to the north of the subject property was the height of the building. The City
Council directed staff and the applicant to investigate other options to reduce the height of the building. Five
different scenarios have been prepared by the applicant. The conditions of approval in this staff report are
general and apply to all the different scenarios xvith the exception of condition number 12 which would have to
be adjusted according to xvhich option you select. And at this point I ~vould turn it over to Frank Dunbar who
would go through the options and answer questions you might have. Thank you.
Frank Dunbar: Mayor, members of the Council. We met with the...organization and the neighbors and
presented these five schemes and if you want, I can go through all five of them quickly. Or I can talk about 1
and 5... I think you'll recall, this is the exterior, expression, color wise and everything that we're still looking at
and when we were here last time we talked about number 5. Or our original scheme, okay. So this would be
the original scheme. Four stories all the way around and the building would be four story. This would be the
three story concept and the change is, it's obvious. It's shorter and it's wider. Now what we've tried to do to
mitigate some of the concerns that seniors had with the shorter, wider building is the travel distance to the
elevator from the farthest unit. And so by relocating the elevator, that increased distance in the interior from the
farthest unit to the elevator has no~v been increased by almost 12 feet. So we had to relocate the elevators
~vithin the structure of the facility. We have in Scheme 5, left the units the same. Exterior expression the same.
It's simply a shorter, wider building. We do have, and I need to point this out. We do have a substantially
larger retaining wall and xve've moved the building approximately 20 feet north. And we've widened it so we
do have side yard variances that we're going to need as opposed to the four story building. So in widening it,
we do have some variances on the side that we need and we have a much larger retaining wall. Now the staff
report indicates 16 feet. I think we've now gotten it down to around 12 feet but we're continuing to work on
that because...a lot ~vith the neighbors, we need to try to minimize that impact. We're even looking at
staggering them. I don't think that's going to have a visual impact from the distance they are but we're going to
look at that as well. Economically, with the two additional units we...We can do either one for generally the
same economics because the two additional units on the three story scheme allo~vs us some greater revenue and
so that offsets the additional cost. So that's really xvhere we stand. We've tried to minimize the impacts to the
building. With the distance, we're getting it down to 12 feet. I think that would be an advantage for the four
story. Shorter distance to the elevator internally. Three stories, it's wider and closer to the neighborhood on the
north. I think the staff report did a good job on page 3 analyzing the differences that the two different design
12
City Council Meeting - May 22, 1995
schemes have. Maybe I can respond to an3, questions that Council has. I think the staff report did a good job
in describing it.
Councilman Berquist: Julie Frick had written a letter on the 16th of May that says, please be aware that a
change in plans will cause an increase in the construction price. So that now is not the case?
Frank Dunbar: I think we've worked that out contemplating that we can move expeditiously. And one of the
issues I should bring up before you discuss it. That if the fifth scheme was the one that you preferred, that does
require some variances and we would have to come back before you to get those variances. We were
contemplating and holding the contractor to a June 1 start. We could go now and close this thing on June 8th
but that would mean from now until June 8th we'd have to work pretty diligently so we didn't lose a lot of time=
This is good construction time. We'd like to maximize it is essentially it. So if that was the alternative you
selected, xve would like some strong recommendation from the Council that the variation would be granted. !
understand that it's not binding but it'd at least allow us to work to pull that closing for June 8th in
contemplation at your next Council meeting, those variances would be before you and approved.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: So we don't have an actual date on this?
Frank Dunbar: I do have an actual date on both, and the two extra units allows.~.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any other questions?
Councilman Mason: Wasn't our next Council meeting on the 12th?
Mayor Chmiel: Right.
Frank Dunbar: It's on the 12th?...
Don Ashworth: Unless the Council set a special for June 5th, which is a Monday. I don't know if it's a holiday
or anything. And I don't know if you still need requirements for notification for variances.
Kate Aanenson: Yeah, we need to ask the City Attorney on thisc Whether or not we'd have to go to the Board
of Adjustments...probably first or go strictly to the City Council.
Roger Knutson: It'd go to the Board of Adjustments.
Kate Aanenson: And they would meet on the 12th and it would be appealed right up to the City Council on the
12th.
Don Ashworth: But could not a Board occur on the 5th as well?
Mayor Chmiel: Special meeting.
Kate Aanenson: If we can meet the 10 days public hearing.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, we do have a work session that particular day. It's a joint Council and Public Safety.
That's at 5:30.
13
City Council Meeting - May 22, 1995
Kate Aanenson: It looks like we can possibly make the 10 days, I'm not sure.
Mayor Chmiel: Well if that's the specific case, Roger. Is there any problem with having the Board of Appeals
and Adjustments, or Adjustments and Appeals holding their meeting prior to Council?
Roger Knutson: Not at all.
Mayor Chmiel: As long as it's notified and noticed in the paper.
Roger Knutson: You can do that.
Mayor Chmiel: 10 days prior to that perspective. There's enough time frame from now until then. This being
Monday. Yeah, we'd still have enough time frame if we got it in, no we wouldn't.
Roger Knutson: It depends on his publication deadline.
Kate Aanenson: No, that's what I'm saying. It doesn't make the deadline because the paper comes out on
Thursdays so you back it up.
Mayor Chmiel: Unless you were to, Dean when do you put your paper to bed?
Dean Trippler: Wednesday at noon.
Mayor Chmiel: If we can get it to him before that, that would give us enough time. Come out on Thursday the
26th. So that'd be 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7. Nope, there'd only be. 7, 8, 9, 10, 11. Yep, that'd be enough.
Don Ashworth: But again, that would only occur if you ,,vent this other option.
Mayor Chmiel: Right, yeah.
Frank Dunbar: If the original concept was preferred, that would require no change...
Mayor Chmiet: Okay. Any other discussion?
Councilman Berquist: One other point of discussion. I've had a couple of conversations with some people that
may or may not be directly involved in the construction of the project tonight. I 'know that when we go from a
5 story to a 3 story, there are savings to be gleaned as far as electrical. As far as mechanical goes. And we
increase the footprint and yet the contractor can do it for the same amount of money. It begs the question, how
much are we really paying. Are we paying too much? I understand that you're comfortable with the proposal.
It's been in place for 3 months now and that on a cost per unit it seems to be as competitive as you've seen in
recent years.
Frank Dunbar: Absolutely. And the comments you made were absolutely true but we have a much bigger
footprint so those dollars didn't offset any electrical savings with the wiring footprint. We had a lot of costs in
coming out 20 feet because of shoring up that wall .... wall and engineering wall according to City Code
measures to hold that back. It's going to cost a lot more money. That 12 foot wall that's being built there has
14
City Council Meeting - May 22, 1995
got a lot of money involved in it. So these bids that we're getting are falling in ~vith what xve're getting across
the board.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. The other points that we have to look at then is, either go with the 4 floors or the 3.
Colleen.
Councilxvoman Dockendorf: Well xve have a letter here saying, Senior Commission recommends the original
scheme and I'd just like to -know why. Would anyone like to address that?
Mayor Chmiel: Sharmin, do you have any?
Sharmin A1-Jaff: At the time when the Senior Commission made that recommendation, there were issues
concerning the distance at the elevator to the site, as well as the deadline of June 1st that they had to meet.
These were some of the concerns of the Senior Commission.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: So I'm curious to knoxv whether that's a non°issue to them~ Does your preference
stay the same now however, for the original scheme?
Mayor Chmiel: I think the Commission is still looking at the original scheme for 4 floors as opposed to 3~ Is
that correct?
Councilman Senn: I'd like to, can you.
Mayor Chmiel: Let's go to Mike next.
Councilman Mason: I guess I wouldn't, if somebody in the Senior Commission wouldn't mind, I'd kind of like
to hear what their concerns are because I quite honestly am not sold on 1 or 5 right now and I want to get as
much information as I can. With what I've heard now about, I 'knew that one of your issues was the distance to
the elevator and I certainly shared that. Now that they've changed that, I'm wondering what the other concerns
are.
Sherol Howard: I'm Sherol Howard. I'm with the Senior Commission. Another concern, we were told that
when you put a U in a building, if you have some...as if they didn't face each other. The one comer is...with
the public area so the revenue would be down now. Just tonight I was told that 2 additional apartments would
offset that cost. You may have an apartment ~vithout a balcony, which_.less appealing to anyone who's going to
live there. We also xvere concerned about the additional walking area from the elevator. And...within 10 feet of
the western line, which certainly won't be very appealing to the people that are building the townhouses there.
Of course that's going to be... We just all and all felt the original plan was the better plan. Any questions that I
can answer?
Mayor Chmiel: Colleen, does that answer ~vhat you?
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Yes it does. I appreciate it.
Councilman Mason: Thanks Sherol.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Anything more Mike?
15
City Council Meeting o May 22, 1995
Councilman Mason: Ah no. I've got a few things to talk about but in terms of asking of any questions.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Mark.
Councilman Senn: No. Mike asked my questions.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Well I guess we're going to look at what the overall portion is, either 3 or 4 and the
determination is going to be there and I think that is going to require some discussion by probably each of us.
And Steve.
Councilman Berquist: 1 or 5?
Mayor Chmiel: Either 1 or 5, yeah.
Councilman Berquist: Welt, my biggest bone of contention all along has been the sheer enormity of a 5 story
building looking out over the north side of toxvn. And that hasn't changed. Scheme 5, while being the lowest
of 3 stories, I think is probably, if you were to do a rendering of all 5 of them, I think I would probably think it
was the most attractive. As far as the setbacks go, the setback from Kerber will be the greatest. It will be
xvithin 10 feet of Scheme 1. Whereas the other schemes put it much closer, except for Scheme 2. Contrary to
what the representative from the Senior Commission said, referencing we don't have to be concerned about the
townhomes that are going up next. Part of the process of being up here is to try to consider everyone, believe it
or not and xve're trying to consider you and the neighbors to the front and ourselves and the neighbors across the
street and everyone else. Sometimes it's not particularly easy to consider everyone. If I had to make a decision
on 1 or 5, I think I would most definitely opt for 5 xvith the variances included.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Is that it?
Councilman Berquist: Yes.
Mayor Chmiel: Colleen.
Councilman Berquist: Without going into a lot of detail, I see Scheme 5 as a better option.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Michael.
Councilman Mason: Well, I think for expediency sake, I would concur with Scheme 5 but I'm concerned about
the variance issue. I'm concerned about the Senior Commission and what they feel is the best proposal. Seniors
will be the people that are living in it and yes, I understand the neighbors will be looking at it. I think those of
you who read the Council Minutes extensively knoxv what I said two weeks ago, and that still stands. 10 feet.
A 10 foot setback is pretty close to a property line. And I will reiterate what I said about this whole area being
30 seconds from doxvntown. It is a downtown area. I share the concerns about 40 feet as opposed to 44. I
guess I don't know that I would know the difference between 4 feet. Quite honestly I think I could live with
either one but I prefer Scheme 1 right now. For the reasons I stated 2 weeks ago and tonight.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Mark.
16
City Council Meeting - May 22, 1995
Councilman Senn: My overall concerns xvere the sheer mass of the structure and also a good question on the
number of units that we were trying to put on this parcel. I also thought the neighbors had a very legitimate
issue over, not knowing that something of this mass or number of units would basically be there when they built
their homes there. I really see Scheme 5 right now I think as a good win/win as far as the neighborhood and as
far as the seniors go. I'm not seeing anything in terms of, it's going to be a real detriment as far as the effect on
the actual senior housing... As far as the townhouses to be built, ! think there's some issues there but there's also
the freedom on choice there. They will 'know it's there when they buy and they can then make a decision on
whether they want it there or don't want it there, which I think is very different than the decision the neighbors
are facing... I think 5 is the ~vay to go.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Well I'm not going to go into a large dissertation on this. I like Scheme 1 from the
opening. It may have been a little bit intrusive as far as structure is concerned but the location for that
particular facility for all the basic needs that we were looking at. And I too have sort of concurred with the
Senior Commission and some of their thoughts behind what they're really looking for. I think what we really
have to consider into a lot of this is, not so much what we see in this as much as what the seniors see and what
they think is going to be more accommodating to them and their basic needs. The additional height is, and
conceivably could be a given problem as far as the aesthetics are concerned from the adjacent properties but I'm
not sure after a period of time how much more that intrusion's going to be there and going to be a real problem
for everybody to look at. Sometimes within the eye of the beholder, it's what you see is what you get and I
think in this particular instance, after as I said, a period of time, that will all blend in. The only other thing too,
if there were a lot of deep concerns for those heights, everybody's got an opportunity to develop their particular
site to what they see is going to be best and of course Council's going to judge that this evening. I think the 4
stories are probably, in at least my, I call it a 4 story. I don't call it a 5. And at least my opinion is the way
that I feel we should have gone with choosing that specific site. Is there any other discussions?
Council~voman Dockendorf: I'd just like to add that I would have no problem with the 4 story, Scheme 1.
However, we are getting an additional 2 units that we can lease out to seniors in the community and I think
that's an important fact and I sincerely believe that Scheme 5 does look better. So I would move that we
preliminary plat of Outlot B, etc, ere, with Scheme 5.
Councilman Senn: Second.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Excuse me, and included in that motion, a staggering of the ~'etaining walls with,
put some plantings inbetween.
Roger Knutson: Mayor, if I could? Is that subject to approval of the variances then?
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Yes.
Roger Knutson: That would be the conditions of it.
Mayor Chmiel: As far as Council is concerned, the variances would be acceptedc Is that what you're more or
less saying? Or to take that as?
Roger Knutson: I'd presume you ~vouldn't be talking about this unless you were sympathetic to the variances
but that's an assumption.
17
City Council Meeting - May 22, 1995
Mayor Chmiel: Alright. Okay, Mark you seconded that motion?
Councilman Senn: Yeah.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. I'll call the question on this.
Councilwoman Dockendorf moved, Councilman Senn seconded to approve the preliminary and final plat to
replat 2.2 acres from Outlot B and Block 5, 6, and 7 of Oak Ponds 2nd Addition into Lot 1, Block 1, Oak
Ponds 4th Addition and Site Plan Review/495-3 for a Senior Housing Building as shown as Scheme 5 with
staggering of the retaining walls, on the plans dated May 1, 1995 and subject to the following conditions:
The Senior Housing Building shall conform to the design and architecture as selected by the City Council.
The architectural detail such as exterior materials, window design, railings, etc, shall comply with the plans
submitted May 1, 1995. The garage entrance structure facing east shall utilize the same brick material as
the building.
2. Fire Marshal conditions:
a. "No Parking Fire Lane" signs shall be deterred after revised site plans are submitted and reviewed.
b. A ten foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants. Fire hydrant locations are acceptable.
The driving surface over the below ground parking garage must be designed to support the weight
regulations of the Fire Department aerial platform truck. Weight requirements are available from the
Fire Marshal.
3. Applicant shall be responsible for relocating the existing landscaping and street lights and replacing any
sidewalks impacted by the site construction.
The applicant shall provide a detailed erosion control plan in accordance to the City's Best Management
Practice Handbook. The plan shall include rock construction entrances, erosion control fences, and
revegetated schedules. The grading plan shall be revised to incorporate the storm sewer improvements
proposed with the site development. In addition, the plans shall maintain 7 1/2 feet of cover over the
watermain along Powers Boulevard.
5. The driveway curb cuts will need to incorporate pedestrian ramps to facilitate the existing sidewalks on
Kerber Boulevard and Santa Vera Drive.
6. All retaining walls in excess of four feet in height will need to be engineered per building codes.
Wetland buffer areas shall be surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's xvetland ordinance. The
City will install wetland buffer edge signs before construction begins and will charge the applicant $20.00
per sign. The applicant shall submit a letter to the City documenting that there will be no alterations to the
wetland as a result of the project.
18
City Council Meeting - May 22, 1995
8. Type I erosion control fence shall be employed along the west, east and south side of the site. Type III
shall be maintained along the north side of the construction limits. All erosion control measures shall be
maintained until the site is fully revegetated and removal is authorized by the City.
9. Construction access to the site shall be limited to the proposed curb cuts. Rock construction entrances shall
be maintained until the driveways have been paved.
10. Park and trail, site plan and subdivision application, building permit, and sewer and water connection fees
be waived as this is a public project.
11. The applicant shall use a mix of native prairie grasses and shrubs such as sumac rather than sod along the
northern slope.
12. The building shall be relocated to be consistent with the PUD compliance table:
Hard Surface Coverage 40%
Setback from Collector 50 feet
Internal Public Street 30 feet
External Property Line 30 feet
Internal Private Streets NA
Overall Density 9.6 units
13. On top of the entryway into the underground parking, utilize the same railing features that surround the
building.
Ali voted in favor, except Councilman Mason who opposed, and Mayor Chrniel was silent The motion carried~
Councilman Mason: And I would like to make a comment.
Mayor Chmicl: Go ahead.
Councilman Mason: I think anyone that 'knows me 'knows that my vote in opposition is not a vote against
senior housing. I question some of the reasons that were presented to not have them on that spot. However, I
am extremely gratified that we will finally have some senior housing in this city~
Mayor Chmiel: Good, thank you.
Don Ashworth: Mr. Mayor?
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah Don.
Don Ashworth: Clarification of the motion. Docs that also then include ~vith it.
Mayor Chmicl: We also have the joint powers agreement to go to as well.
Don Ashworth: Right, but setting a special meeting date to hear the variances for June 5th?
19
City Council Meeting - May 22, 1995
Mayor Chmiel: June 5th.
Don Ashworth: Can I make that assumption? Or do you xvant to handle that under work session' items?
Roger Knutson: It shouldn't be a work session. It has to be official...
Mayor Chmiel:' No, it has to be, yeah right.
Roger Knutson: Just so the record is clear, I think you could have a motion setting that date.
Councilman Senn: Yeah, we could have the work session still that night.
Roger Knutson: Oh sure.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, can we have a motion as well for having that as the variance meeting and also the Board
of Review as well. Or Adjustment and Appeals.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: I'1t move that.
Councilman Mason: Second.
Councilwoman Dockendorf moved, Councilman Mason seconded setting June 5, 1995 as a special City Council
meeting to discuss the variance requests for the Senior Housing project. All voted in favor and the motion
carded unanimously.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, we go to item 5(b). Approval of joint powers agreement betxveen Carver County HRA
and the City of Chanhassen for Multi-Family Housing Revenue Bond Program. Is there a motion?
Councilman Mason: I move approval.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: I'll second it.
Resolution #95-58: Councilman Mason moved, Councihvoman Dockendorf seconded to approve the Joint
Powers Agreement between Carver County HRA and the City of Chanhassen for a Multi-Family Housing
Revenue Bond Program subject to final editing and approval by the Cit3' Attorney. All voted in favor and the
motion carded unanimously.
Don Ashxvorth: Point of clarification. I did pass out the new Draft #4. I would like to take and reiterate that
that is still not final. The primary thing that you are approving is the, to insure that the City of Chanhassen is
properly protected in the financial controls associated with this facility. Some of the sections in here are very
close to the ending point but I think Roger will be the first to say that he wants to take and see a couple of
these yet clarified. It'd be very minor amendments. I'll put it into your next packet but I do want everyone to
know that xve're not just carte blanche approving 4B or draft 4. It will be some...
Mayor Chmiel: No, okay. Okay, with clarifications with that, and the second would agree.
Roger Knutson: Any problem, we'll bring it back to you and tell you about it.
20
City Council Meeting - May 22, 1995
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. We've got it. Amen.
REQUEST FOR AN OVERNIGHT EVENT AT LAKE SUSAN PARI~ AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY.
Mayor Chmiel: Jerry was not able to be here this evening. Don.
Don Ashworth: Approval is recommended.
Mayor Chmiel: It seems like, I talked xvith Jerry this afternoon.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: I think everyone did.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, he said he'd call each of the Council people and I really don't see any problem with this
either. Is there a motion?
Councilman Berquist: I motion approval.
Councilman Mason: Second.
Councilman Berquist moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the request from the Carver County
American Cancer Society for an overnight program at Lake Susan Park All voted in favor and the motion
carded unanimously.
PRELIMINARY PLAT OF 7.29 ACRES INTO 34 SINGLE FAMILY TOWNHOMES~ AND SITE PLAN
REVIEW FOR 9 BUILDINGS OF 3 AND 4 PLEXES; EAST OF POWERS BOULEVARD JUST SOUTH OF
LAKE SUSAN HILLS DRIVEl LAKE SUSAN TOWNHOMES 1ST ADDITION~ JASPER DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION.
Sharmin A1-Jaff: Mr. Mayor, members of the City Council. I will briefly go through a background of this
development. Lake Susan Hills was platted in 1987. There were 3 parcels that were designated for medium
density which allows up to 8 units per acre. There are 2 ordinances that regulate this subdivision. The first one
is the PUD regulations and then you have the underlying zoning which is the R-8. There has been one issue
that we have been facing with all three developments that we have processed in the past that had the 8 units per
acre and those are Outlot C, which is the Prairie Creek Development. Powers Place and now the proposal that
you have before you. The hard surface coverage has always been below what is permitted in an R-8 district.
We've had 30% coverage, 31% coverage, and with this one we have 27% hard surface coverage. One more
time, the ordinance in the R-8 district permits up to 35% hard surface coverage. In order to get coverage that
meets what's permitted in the PUD for Lake Susan Hills, the applicant would have to build up. In the past
you've always recommended approval of increasing the hard surface coverage to meet the'required 35%. And
now with the proposed development, briefly the issues that have been raised. The applicant is proposing to
build 9 buildings. Total of 34 zero lot line parcels. When staff first wrote this proposal, the report on this
proposal we shortly after that met with the applicant and we resolved many issues that were raised in the staff
report. The first one being the location of a retention pond. The applicant agreed to locate a retention pond
that would take the drainage from the existing development to the west of the subject site. This pond would be
located south of an existing wetland and along a drainage and utility easement. It would require shifting the
landscaping around but it's something that we can work with the applicant on. The second issue was the hard
surface coverage, as mentioned earlier. The applicant is proposing a 37% hard surface coverage. Staff is
21
City Council Meeting - May 22, 1995
recommending a 35% hard surface coverage. The applicant has worked out a revised plan. On the previous
plan we had a turn around area which comes off of the private street that services the development. That
section of the private street has been eliminated. One of the buildings xvhich has 4 units has been broken into
two buildings and that basically reduces the hard surface coverage from 37 to 35 to meet the ordinance
requirements. The buildings are attractive and have quite a bit of variation within their design. Staff is
recommending that additional architectural elements be added to the rear elevation. Staff is recommending
approval of this application with conditions outlined in the staff report. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thanks Sharmin~ Does the applicant wish to address this?
Marty Campion: Good evening Mayor and members of Council. My name is Marty Campion. I'm a civil
engineer with Otto and Associates, project engineer for the two Jaspers. I'd like to point out a couple of items if
I may. I'll just put this on the stand. As Sharmin had mentioned earlier, we met pretty extensively with the
staff and revised the plans from what shows on this model. And the major revision occurred in this area where
we took out the stub street, shifted the units over and rounded off that intersection or that corner and most of
that, or all of that was done to accommodate, after meeting with staff and hearing their concerns with the runoff
coming from off site and not being treated prior to entering the wetland. We were able to reconfigure the site
and construct a pond in this area xvhich will not only serve our development but also the treatment of the runoff
from the off site. So aside from that change, this lot is pretty much intact. It then makes the changes, going
from a 3 unit. Adding a unit here and two 2 unit buildings as was shown on the overhead and the reason is for
the storm water treatment pond in that area. But we have met a couple of times with staff and tried to resolve
some of the issues that came up preliminarily and I think we've addressed all of their concerns and if there are
additional concerns or questions, I'd be happy to answer them.
Mayor Chmiel: What's the separation betxveen those buildings from one unit to the next?
Marty Campion: I think with the new plan the minimum separation xve have is approximately 10 feet, plus or
minus.
Mayor Chmiel: The one that you have up front, where you have the 4 and the 3 units, which are closest to the
pond.
Marty Campion: This.
Mayor Campion: Right.
Marry Campion: Could you put that overhead up Sharmin? The overhead reflects the revision to the site plan.
What xve have now is a 4 unit and then two 2 unit building as it comes around the corner there as opposed to a
3 and 4 unit, as you'll note on the overhead.
Mayor Chmiel: Sharmin, with this PUD, what are we really getting? What are we really getting as far as the
city's concerned?
Sharmin A1-Jaff: The zoning is in place already. As part of the overall planned unit development for Lake
Susan Hills we had parks.
Kate Aanenson: Lake Susan Park.
22
City Council Meeting - May 22, 1995
Sharmin Al-Jarl: Correct. Lake Susan Park. We had quite a few parks dedicated to the city. We've got the
trails. Can you think of others?
Kate Aanenson: Yeah, this framework ~vas all established when the original Lake Susan came in and as the
single family developments occurred, that's where we got a lot of the amenities as far as the trail connections
and park preservation and that's...and these were the pockets that were left over as part of the higher density. So
it's not really that we're looking at the trade off as we traditionally would in considering the PUD zoning
because the zoning's in place under the circumstance so that issue doesn't factor into it, although it was put into
place with the original framework of the PUD.
Councilman Berquist: Is Jasper looking at this as simply a continuation of the project directly to the north of it?
I mean aesthetically will it be the same or are you going to mix it up a little bit or will they be distinct
neighborhoods or architecturally similar?
Jim Jasper: I'm Jim Jasper. I think architecturally similar would be an accurate statement. The interior
materials will certainly be similar. There will be...We like to vary the colors to give the units a little bit of
individuality. Vary the architectural details on them. Legally they will become separate projects. There will be
two separate homeowners associations. They will operate independently. These units are slightly larger than the
ones across the street. Price point is going to be $15,000.00 to $20,000.00 higher.
Councilman Berquist: Which puts it at xvhat?
Jim Jasper: Base price of.
Jay Jasper: $175,000.00 to $225,000.00. In reality, we may have a base price a little bit lower than that but
that's what... The Prairie Creek project is...just under $200,000.00 which is a little bit different than we had
initially planned in our marketing. We thought they'd be at... This is a different floorplan. It addresses a need
for issues so that they will have a different feel than Prairie Creek. It's a different floorplan.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Well that ~vas my number one question because I think you did an excellent job
with the townhomes to the north. I really like the variations and diversity of them. There's a park right to the
south of that long line...so there's not, you haven't received a lot of comments from neighbors I would assume~
Marty Campion: There were some comments from these neighbors I believe. This is a park and I believe
there's a trail scheduled for the south property as well as the one on Powers Boulevard.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: That's all the questions I have.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Mike.
Councilman Mason: I concur with Colleen. I think what you folks have done before looks good and I'm just
figuring this will too. And this has nothing to do with you folks at all but affordable housing. What are we
going to do? And again, this is completely different from your issues, don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to tie
in with anything here but I'm hearing you talking about, you wanted to start out at $170,000.00 and everyone at
$200,000.00. You 'know we're, what are we going to do as leaders of this city? And maybe that's...and I agree
Mark but xve keep saying that and boy, no. It looks good. I like what you're doing.
23
City Council Meeting - May 22, 1995
Jim Jasper: Can I make a comment about that because from a developer's perspective, this may be a little bit
different than your's might be. We firmly believe that developments are market driven and Chanhassen is this
upscale...but the other part of that is, and it's very difficult to address but one of the things that drives the
development's ability to build affordable housing is the land use requirements, as you well 'know. I'm not saying
anything new but just to reiterate a developer's complaint I guess and that is, when you talk about increasing
density. Being more liberal with setback requirements. Being a little more creative in how you lay buildings
on the piece of land and everything. The immediate rap is, well he's just trying to get more money out of a
piece of land. The struggle from a developer's standpoint is that in Chanhassen, as an example, the value of raw
land is so high that there isn't a ghost of a chance of doing affordable housing without either a subsidy or else
some significant changes in the zoning requirements and I'm not sure that you want to do either one of those.
So I don't 'know if Chanhassen is going to be the place where you can get affordable housing. It doesn't happen
from a development standpoint. It can't.
Mayor Chmiel: Well much of the Metropolitan Council's basic affordable kind of housing within communities
by the grants that they're going to be able to be making. Not only the grants but also the expansions of the
highways. And if you don't have those kinds of things within your community, you're the last one that's going
to be looked at. The basic needs, as far as we're concerned, for 212 and Highway 5 are there no~v. As you
well know, just...I just don't believe the traffic that flows bright and early in the morning and even at 8:30 and
9:00. There's constant flo`,v of traffic coming from the ,,vest.
Jim Jasper: I think it's unfortunate that there has been some emphasis on mandating that every community have
a diversity of housing because that's not the nature of how people live. And for Chanhassen or any other
community to have housing for every economic level, .just because a Metro Council mandates that, to me is
that's all...
Mayor Chmiel: Right, I agree. Thanks.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Appreciate your comments.
Councilman Berquist: I've got one more quick question regarding highways. When County 'Road 17 is turned
into a parkway, 4 lanes with an island, will there be, and I suspect you've addressed this. Will there be any
encroachment, further encroachment? There will not?
Sharmin A1-Jaff: No.
Marty Campion: We've talked to BRW, xvho is working on the design of County Road 17 and construction will
impact this small area of our site and that's being addressed in our phasing of the landscaping. In the Planning
Commission meeting xve discussed how to accommodate that and the way that was discussed was to berm here,
berm here and hold off where the grading will encroach on the property until after County Road 17 has been
complete and then address that.
Councilman Berquist: How has that been received by your perspective buyers? On the developments that are
immediately north of there.
Jay Jasper: To Powers Boulevard?
Councilman Berquist: Yes.
24
City Council Meeting - May 22, 1995
Jay Jasper: Ironically it slowed sales. When we get our berming done on Prairie Creek and our landscaping
and all that done, I don't think it will be a major issue so with some units in back... It's what is available in the
area...if xve had all walkouts to a pond you 'know, that would be great but.
Mayor Chmiel: Any other discussion? There's one thing that I noticed on your plantings. You're putting in
some Marshal Ash. I'd like to see that be a seedless Marshal Ash rather than the other because of the fact that
they're dirty and cause a lot of given problems. So if we could make that as a change with that. Okay, is there
a motion?
Councilman Senn: I move approval.
Councilman Mason: Second.
Mayor Chmiel: Move approval for the.
Councilman Senn: Staff recommendation.
Mayor Chmiel: Preliminary plat okay, of 7.29 acres into 34 lots. Okay.
Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the Preliminary Plat of 7.29 acres into 34
lots and one outlot (PUD/487-3) and Site Plan Review #95-7 approval of 34 units (10 structures) as shown on
the plans dated March 20, 1995 and subject to the following conditions:
1. Amend the PUD contract to state the impervious surface coverage of the site cannot exceed 35%.
2. The townhome units shall conform to the design and architecture as proposed by the applicant in their
attached narrative. Introduce some variation among the rear of buildings through the shape of windows,
adding louvers, adding dormers, or color~
3. The applicant should submit a street lighting plan for staff review and approval. A lighting plan shall be
submitted for the interior private streets.
4. A cross access easement shall be conveyed to all thc lots for use of the private street.
5. Park and trail dedication fees shall be paid in lieu of park land dedication~ The PUD contract requires no
trail fees and 1/2 park fees.
6. Plans shall provide one visitor parking space per 6 units.
7. A revised landscaping plan shall be submitted xvhieh provides berming along Powers Boulevard (CR 17)
and Lake Susan Hills Drive. The agreement also states that the applicant shall provide $500.00 of
landscaping per multiple family unit. The applicant shall provide the city with a cost estimate for the
required landscaping.
8. Fire Marshal conditions:
25
City Council Meeting - May 22, 1995
a. Install "No Parking Fire Lane" sign on all private roads in compliance with Fire Prevention Policy #06-
1991 (copy enclosed). Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location.
b. Submit proposed street names to the Public Safety Department, Inspections Division for review prior to
final plat approval. The plat must be revised to include the approved names after their revie~v.
Fire hydrant changes - contact Fire Marshal for additional fire hydrants and their specific locations. A
10 foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants. An additional fire hydrant shall be
installed at the new "T" intersection. The remaining fire hydrants shall re relocated with equal spacing.
Fire hydrants shall be placed a maximum of 300 feet apart. Contact the Chanhassen Fire Marshal for
exact locations.
9. Building Official conditions:
10.
11.
12.
13.
a. Submit soil reports to the Inspections Division. This should be done prior to issuance of any building
permits.
b.
Furnish details on each size of dwelling unit. These details should include exterior dimensions,
overhangs, exterior openings and proposed optional additions. Designate which unit will be constructed
on xvhich lots. These details must be supplied prior to preliminary plat approval.
All areas disturbed as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restored with seed and disc-
mulched or wood-fiber blanket or sod within txvo weeks of completion of each activity in accordance with
the City's Best Management Practice Handbook.
All utility improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the latest edition of the City's Standard
Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed utility plans and specifications shall be submitted for staff review
and approval. The streets shall be constructed in accordance to the City's private driveway ordinance for
multi-family zoning (Ordinance No. 209). Radii at all intersections shall be 20 feet. The street width shall
be xvidened to 26 feet from back of curb to back of curb. Issuance of permits and inspection of the utility
lines will be performed by the city's Building Department. The streets and utilities, except the ponding
areas, storm sewer outlet and pipe systems, shall be owned and maintained by the homeowners association.
The applicant xvill need to incorporate cross access and maintenance agreements in the homeoxvners
covenants to provide access to all the parcels.
Wetland buffer areas shall be surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The
City will install wetland buffer edge signs before construction begins and will charge the applicant $20.00
per sign.
The applicant shall provide detailed storms ewer calculations for 10 year and 100 year storm events and
provide ponding calculations for stormwater quality/quantity ponds in accordance with the City's Surface
Water Management Plan for the City Engineer to review and approve. The applicant shall provide detailed
pre-developed and post developed storm~vater calculations for 100 year storm events and normal water level
and high water level calculations in existing basins and individual storm sewer calculations between each
catch basin segment will also be required to determine if sufficient catch basins are being utilized.
26
City Council Meeting - May 22, 1995
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
The applicant shall enter into a site development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial
security to guarantee compliance with the terms of the development contract.
Applicant will meet wetland rules and regulations as stated in Corps of Engineers section 404 permit, the
State Wetland Conservation Act, and the City's Wetland Ordinance.
The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, i.e. Carver
County Highway Department, Watershed District, Metropolitan Waste Control Commission, Health
Department, and Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, and comply with their conditions of approval.
The applicant shall include a drain tile system behind the curbs to convey sump pump discharge from the
units which are not adjacent to a storm pond or wetland. The applicant shall report to the City Engineer the
location of any drain tiles found during construction and shall re-locate or abandon the drain tile as directed
by the City Engineer.
The appropriate drainage and utility easements should be dedicated on the final plat for the ponding areas
lying outside the right-of-way. The easement width shall be a minimum of 20 feet wide. Consideration
should also be given for access for maintenance of the ponding areas.
No berming or landscaping will be allowed ~vithin the right-of-way or utility and drainage easements
without approval by the city and the applicant shall enter into an encroachment agreement.
The lowest floor elevation of all buildings adjacent to storm water ponds or wetlands shall be a minimum of
3 feet above the 100 year high water level. The proposed stormwater treatment-pond shall be relocated to
the south end of the wetland.
The proposed storm water ponds must have side slopes of 10:1 for the first ten feet at the normal water
level and no more than 3:1 thereafter or 4:1 throughout for safety purposes. The pond shall be sized to
accommodate the storm runoff from Lake Susan Hills West 2nd Addition which drains into the wetland
from the south.
Water quantity and quality connection fees will be based in accordance with the City's SWMP requirements.
Credit for SWMP fees will be evaluated at the time of final construction plan review.
23. The final grading plan shall be revised to incorporate the following:
Relocation of the stormwater treatment pond to the south end of the wetlands. The stormwater
treatment pond shall be expanded to accommodate runoff from Lake Susan Hills West 2nd Addition~
The applicant shall be credited against the storm fees for the over sizing of the stormwater pond.
bo
The applicant shall work xvith the staff on the site grading to minimize the amount of earthwork to
create the building pads. This may result in limiting the type of dwellings to ramblers and/or lookouts
on the east and south ends of the project.
c. The drainage pattern and site grades adjacent to Powers Boulevard shall be compatible with the future
upgrading plans for Powers Boulevard.
27
City Council Meeting - May 22, 1995
d. Berms shall be incorporated around the perimeter of the site adjacent to Powers Boulevard.
e. Grading shall be eliminated within the wetland buffer strip areas. Erosion control fence shall be placed
outside of the buffer strip.
24.
The street pavement design shall be reviewed and, if necessary, redesigned by a professional soils engineer
after review of the subgrade. The applicant shall submit to the City within documentations from the soils
engineer that the street design will meet or exceed a 7 ton design.
25. The utility construction plans shall be designed to extend sanitary sewer for the entire site from the existing
stub provided in Lake Susan Hills Drive.
26.
Many of the proposed lot lines encroach upon the building setback line. The lot lines should be modified
to avoid encroaching into the building setback areas. No decks or any portion of the dwellings may
encroach into the City's drainage and utility easements.
27. Upon completion of the utility improvements, the applicant shall supply the city with as-built construction
plans.
28.
The applicant shall take the necessary steps to prevent trash and debris from blowing into neighboring
properties and dispose of it properly.
All voted in favor and the motion carded unanimously.
APPOINTMENT OF COUNCIL MEMBER TO THE PARKLAND ACQUISITION AND DEVELOPMENT,
TRAIL CONSTRUCTION AND OPEN SPACE PRESERVATION TASK FORCV,.
Mayor Chmiel: Steve, would you like to volunteer for that particular?
Councilman Berquist: I told my wife this was coming up tonight and said I'm probably going to be named to
this and she says, why? I said, because.
Council;voman Dockendorf: New kid on the block.
Councilman Mason: Because ;ye like you.
Councilman Berquist: I'd rather do this than Southwest Metro Transit.
Council;voman Dockendorf: Well back at you.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there a motion?
Councilman Mason: I'll move.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second?
Councilwoman Dockendorf: I'll second it.
28
City Council Meeting - May 22, 1995
Mayor Chmiel: It's been moved and seconded. All those in favor.
Councilman Senn: Don, just a quick question. When will we have the opportunity to review the other
applicants and stuff?. I mean what kind of time line are we on for that?
Mayor Chmiel: Well I think Todd is pulling that together right now to seeing those who are interested and also
some from the commission and I'm sure we should get that back, all this is doing is appoint someone from
Council at this specific time. The rest of them will be appointed before us to see who they're going to
Councilman Senn: Is the process set up that each of the commissions is going to make their recommendation to
us then and then Todd's going to come in with a list from the general public, or what?
Don Ashworth: I'll make a note to have Todd put out a memo to you stating ~vhat his thoughts ~vere.
Councilman Senn: Okay.
Mayor Chmiel: Good.
Councilman Mason moved, Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded to appoint Councilman Berquist as a Council
repnesentative for the Parkland Acquisition and Development, Trail Constmcfion and Open Space Preservation
Task Force. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously~
COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS: None.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: SET WORK SESSION DATES~ CITY MANAGER.
Don Ashxvorth: Okay, the first one I noted was the Beddor/Chanhassen litigation.. Starting that like at 7:00
p.m.. Maybe you xvant that more like 6:30. This would be for our first meeting in July. So, and that should be
shortly after the appeal period ends so it'd be starting maybe at 6:30-7:00 on July 10tN
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Is this really an issue? I mean it seems like a~
Councilman Senn: Apparently the attorney thinks so. He asked for a meeting.
Mayor Chmiel: We won the war but.
Roger Knutson: Well just, there are two parts to the litigation. Hopefully, subject to what the Supreme Court
may or may not do. If they're asking you to do something. That part of the litigation. The environmental part
is over. The condemnation part of the litigation is still pending so there is pending litigation to talk about.
There's no need to talk about what's already been decided.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Okay. But we're talking 15 minutes~
Councilman Senn: Okay, so we're talking about 7:00 then that night?
Don Ashworth: 7:00.
29
City Council Meeting - May 22, t995
Councilman Mason: We'll get some kind of notification on this, won't we?
Don Ashxvorth: Well, I'll redo the attached schedule.
Councilman Mason: I mean xve're talking July. Well, that's a leap of faith...
Don Ashxvorth: I'm assuming that the City Council, Council had a priority for meeting with the Planning
Commission and had set that as the first one. Unfortunately we weren't able to make that date as of, I think it
was originally set for May 5th, or even earlier than that. April something. Does the Council wish to pick out a
date for the joint meeting xvith the Planning Commission2
Councilman Berquist: Sure.
Councilman Mason: For when?
Councilman Senn: July 17th? Well that's the next one.
Councilman Mason: Well when's the, there's got to be a Council meeting in there some day.
Don Ashworth: The t0th is a Council meeting.
Councilman Mason: Oh, so xve're going to...I get it.
Mayor Chmiel: What have we got on for the 19th of June?
Don Ashxvorth: 19th of June is an off Monday and we had set out, I'm looking at June 5th. I don't see a June.
You haven't set a June 19th.
Councilman Mason: The special session's going to be at 5:302 Or the work session's going to be at 5:30?
Councilman Berquist: The work session starts at 5:30.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Well let's do the work session first and then the...
Councilman Mason: Just because I've already got a meeting on that night that's going to go from about 4:00
until 5:30 or 6:00, if xve could do the special session a little bit later, I'd appreciate it. On the 5th.
Kate Aanenson: To get clarification. First you have to have the Board of Adjustments meeting first.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: So they can meet at 5:30 and then we can meet after.
Don Ashworth: My thought would be to do the Public Safety like a 6:30. Potentially Board of Equalization
primarily at the same time. Then do the actual Council meeting at 7:30.
Councilman Mason: Didn't we just get a notice from Scott saying he xvanted to do the Public Safety meeting at
5:30.
30
City Council Meeting - May 22, 1995
Councilman Senn: 5:30, yeah. He's got his commission set up at 5:30 for us.
Don Ashworth: Oh, okay.
Councilman Mason: On the 5th.
Councilman Senn: So if we do that from 5:30 to 6:30, then we can do your special meeting.
Don Ashworth: Okay, so you want the special meeting to start..Okay, so what about, I think the Mayor
suggested June 19th for Planning Commission.
Mayor Chmiel: How does that set with everybody?
Councilman Senn: I'm gone.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Anybody else going to be gone?
Councilwoman Dockendorf: No, I'll be here.
Councilman Mason: When are Council sessions? Is that the 12th and the 26th then?
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah.
Councilman Senn: I thought you were gone.
Councilman Mason; I very xvell may be. I am out of town on the 12th for sure and I might be on the 19th.
will be gon~ on that Council meeting on the 12th.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay.
Don Ashworth: And the other items, I just simply wanted the Council to be aware that we continue to get
correspondence regarding organized collection and the other item was, interviewing Planning Commission
candidates. I suggested that we start at 7:00 p.m. on June 12th. The question is, can you get 3 interviews done
between 7:00 and 7:30.
Kate Aanenson: But we have 3 Board of Adjustment items that night too. They're already
Councilwoman Dockendorf: I don't feel the need to interview. I'd like to get these appointments done as soon
as possible. These people applied in the beginning of April.
Mayor Chmiel: Well, that's probably true.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: We drag these out seemingly long.
Councilman Senn: Well we drag it out for a reason. I'd like to see the other applications too yet, I mean I
thought we xvere going to receive the whole packet of applications and one with their recommendations.
31
City Council Meeting - May 22, 1995
Councilman Berquist: Yeah, I did too.
Councilman Senn: They were going to recommend 3 for, and 2 more for each position open.
Kate Aanenson: There's only 1 so.
Councilman Senn: I understand but I'd like to see all the app's myself.
Don Ashworth: So 7:00 on the, what did I just get through saying, June 12th?
Kate Aanenson: Well, that doesn't conflict with the Board of Adjustments then2
Don Ashworth: I think we only lose one Council member for that, right?
Councilman Senn: I can just skip Board of Adjustments.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Or you can give the people a call and interview them over the phone.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, either or, true. Okay. What else? That's it. Alright.
Councilman Berquist: Okay, it's 7:00 on the 12th for an interview.
Don Ashworth: And then that item will appear on that same June 12th, regular City Council agenda.
Councilman Berquist: When are we going to get all 9 applicants? In our next Admin packet?
Don Ashworth: Yes.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, item 10.
Kate Aanenson: Can I get a clarification on that? Do you want to set up appointments for all 9 people?
Councilman Senn: No, no, no. Just see the applications.
Don Ashworth: It would not make it, if we started at 7:00 and did all that.
Councilman Senn: And then, are you going to meet the 19th?
Don Ashworth: 19th is xvith the Planning Commission, right? Isn't that what you said? Planning Commission.
I(D). APPROVAL OF YEAR END TRANSFERS.
Mayor Chmiel: By the way, in the portion that Para has made out new, I thought that was quite ,,,,'ell done. I
liked that. The clarification.
Councilman Berquist: The...recap?
32
City Council Meeting - May 22, I995
Councilman Senn: Yeah, the check register.
Councilman Berquist: You like that better?
Councilman Senn: Well, how would I say this. Once you get used to it, ! think you'll like it better but at first
it's confusing as hell to follow given to what we're used to...
Don Ashworth: So even under mine, City Hall expansion. I had a meeting with the two architects and our
construction manager. A luncheon meeting and I think that $20.00 some dollars and so it picked up the entire
expense portion for the $361.00 xvhere the line share of that is actually on that auto thing. But it shows it as
City Hall expansion but it didn't have anything to do with, well I guess it did have to do. 20 of the $360.00
had something to do with City Hall.
Councilman Senn: But there was another $16,000.00 item in there for City Hall expansion.
Don Ashworth: Oh yes but I'm saying, there's some glitches associated with this so it just picks up the first
item on an invoice. So if the first item is tool parts for $12.00, it will list tool parts. If the next item was a
major engine repair for $400.00, the whole thing will come up $421.00 and it will show as tool parts. It makes
you think that we bought $420.00 worth of tool parts= We've got some fine tuning to do.
Councilman Senn: Okay. I pulled l(d), the same reason I pulled it last year. Simply to have the opportunity to
vote no because I'm not going to vote for the transfers of $730,000.00 from the general fund to City Hall
expansion. The same reason as last year.
Councilman Mason: Move approval of item l(b).
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Second.
Resolution #95-59: Councilman Mason moved, Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded to approve the Year End
Transfen as presented. Ali voted in favor, except Councilman Senn who opposed, and the motion carried ~vith
a vote of 4 to 1.
Councihvoman Dockendorf moved, Councilman Mason seconded to adjoum the meeting° All voted in favor and
the motion carrie& The meeting was adjourned at 10:15 p,m,
Submitted by Don Ashworth
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
33