Loading...
CC 1995 02 27CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING FEBRUARY 27, 1995 Mayor Chmiel called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag. COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Chmiel, Councilwoman Dockendorf, Councilman Mason and Councilman Senn q:OUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: Councilman Berquist STAFF PRESENT: Don Ashworth, Roger Knutson, Todd Gerhardt, Charles Folch, Kate Aanenson, Bob Generous and Sharmin A1-Jaff APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilwoman Dockendorf moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the agenda as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried. I~UBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: Mayor Chmiel: Are there any public announcements at this particular time? Your public announcement° Councilman Mason: I had occasion to be at the February Festival during the wonderful sunny afternoon for the ice fishing. I didn't fish. I was also there in the evening for the fireworks and the rather mushy ice skating. My congratulations and hats off to staff. Once again, it was very .well done° It was very well rum There was some semi emergency with an underwater diver and our public safety people as well as other people were Johnny on the spot and I was just, quite honestly proud to be a part of Chanhassen on that day. And I hope staff gets notice of this. Good work. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. I would also second that. I think yeah, it was. It was a lot of fun. The only trouble is there aren't too many fish in that lake. Councilman Mason: Well there wasn't much snow either but what the heck. I think people still had a good time. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any other public announcements? Seeing none, we'll move right along with the agenda. t~ONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Senn seconded to approve the following Consent Agenda items pupsuant to the City Manager's recommendations: a. Resolution #95-28: Approve Change Order No. 1 to Chanhassen Estates 1st and 3rd Additions, Street and Utility Construction, Project 93-10. b. llesolution g95.29: Accept Public Utility Improvements in Mission Hills, Project 93-23. d. Resolution #95-30: Accept Public Utility Improvements in Shadow Ridge, Project 94-15. h. Resolution #95-31: Resolution Authorizing the Conveyance of Certain Properties in Conjunction with the Development of Chanhassen Retail Second Addition. i. Resolution #95-32: Approve Resolution Requesting that Carver County Place Tax Forfeited Conservation Parcels under City Ownership. City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 j. Approve Newly Revised Southwest Mutual Aid Association Agreement. k, Amendments to City Code, Final Reading: 1) Chapter 14 Concerning Animals in Parks. 2) Chapter 1 Concerning Rules of Construction and Definitions. 3) Sale of Intoxicating Liquor m. City Council Minutes dated February 13, 1995 Planning Commission Minutes dated February 1, 1995 Park and Recreation Commission Minutes dated January 24, 1995 Public Safety Commission Minutes dated February 9, 1995 All voted in favor and the motion carried. Consent Agenda items (c), (f) and (1) were discussed at the end of the meeting. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS; None. PUBLIC HEARING: PROPOSED USE OF 1995 URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITy DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM (YEAR XXD PLANNING ALLOCATION OF $50.196.00. Public Present: Name Willard & Shirley Johnson Don Yeager Earl & Emma St. John Hazel C. Johnson Agnes Anderson Ed & Helen Clauson C.A. Pedersen Frank & Delores Mitchell Betty Bragg Ron Block Mark Littfin Sherol Howard Barb Montgomery Bernice Billison Jane Kubitz Barbara Headla Joni Danzl 1660 West 63rd Street 6310 Castle Ridge 1621 West 63rd Street 6231 Cypress Drive 6470 Oriole Avenue 7237 Pontiac Circle 3713 So. Cedar Lane 1291 Stratton Court 6320 Steller Circle 10709 Wayzata Blvd, Mpls 55305 7609 Kiowa Avenue 1005 Pontiac Lane 7017 Dakota Avenue 7281 Pontiac Circle 7492 Saratoga Drive 6870 Minnewashta Parkway 750 Bighorn Drive Kate Aanenson: This year Chanhassen will be able to benefit from a 2% rise in funding levels so we have approximately $50,196.00 to allocate. As you are aware in the past weYe exceeded what our guidelines of 15% administrative service delivery cap and in the past have been as high as 45% in that area. Based on the fact that we're put in a pool with the rest of Hennepin County, the rest of it shakes out so the fact that we're over in that City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 area seems to balance out but we are given direction to try to mgve that down closer to the 15%. The budget we're proposing tonight is moving in that direction and is down to 40%. But again we are at risk. If there is, if the 15% cap is too high, then we would have to reallocate those dollars. We're proposing funding in three areas and the Senior Commission has met and reviewed this budget. $18,000.00 would go towards the Chanhassen Senior Center operations. This pays Dawn's salary, which 50% of her time constitutes programming of the senior center. The other would be $2,500.00 for the South Shore Senior Center. They had requested a little over $5,000.00 and there's a lengthy discussion in the staff report and there are members of the Senior Commission here to discuss that if you want more details but they did review this and the fact that we're delivering similar service, we felt that that money should remain here in delivery of the Chanhassen services. Then the third component would be the ADA, the Chanhassen accessibility improvements. And because we get allocated such a small increment, we're pooling this with Year XX and XXIX dollars in order to allocate $60,000.00 towards the Lake Ann improvement. This will replace play structure that's already at the park and would meet the ADA requirements° So IYe enclosed a proposal of similar type products that would be located at the park. So this year's allocation would be combined with previous years for a total of $29,000.00. And that's what we published as our recommendation and we are recommending that to you. There is an attached resolution for your consideration of allocation. I'd be happy to answer any questions? Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Thank you Kate~ Are there any questions of staff prior to opening it? Councilman Senn: Kate, as far as the senior center operation of $18,000.00, what level did we fund that last year? Kate Aanenson: 17. Councilman Senn: That was $17,000.00 last year? Kate Aanenson: Yeah. Councilman Senn: Okay. As far as the accessibility improvements of $29,696.00, I understand that pays for the balance of what's needed to do that. What happens with the play structure that's there now? Kate Aanenson: I'm sorry. I'm not sure I'm able to answer that question. Todd basically administers this program, rm not sure if they sell it off, or maybe Don would know. I'm not sure. Don Ashworth: I'm not sure. Do you know Todd? Councilman Senn: I mean there's nothing wrong with the one that's there from use purposes and I'm just curious. Todd Gerhardt: I'm sure he's not going to sell it. He will probably put it in another park or replace another structure. Councilman Mason: Maybe over at Carver Beach. Councilman Senn: There wouldn't be any room then. City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 Councilwoman Dockendorf: But I don't think we can put any new structures in anyplace if they don't meet ADA requirements. Mayor Chmiel: Alright. Councilwoman Dockendorf: I have a couple questions. Mayor Chmiel: Go ahead. Councilwoman Dockendorf: The fact that we're at 40% admin service, is that just Dawn's time? Or what's in that category? Kate Aanenson: It's both of those. The South Shore Senior Center and Dawn's combined would fall into administrative services. Councilwoman Dockendorf: So just even staffing the senior center... Kate Aanenson: Correct. They're looking more at ADA improvements or if we were to buy land for low income housing or for the senior housing, buying the land. Those are hard costs. Councilwoman Dockendorf: And haven't we funded Sojourn in the past? Kate Aanenson: Yes, but they're no longer in this Chanhassen area so. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Oh, okay. Mayor Chmiel: Anything else Colleen? Councilwoman Dockendorf: No. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. As I mentioned before, this is a public hearing and I do have a letter that was written to me, dated the 22nd of this month from the Mayor of Shorewood and I'd like to put this into public record. And it says, as Mayor of the City of Shorewood, I would like to be on record as supporting Senior Community Services' request for $5,000.00 for the South Shore Senior Community Center. As you know, the City of Chanhassen is eligible for over $50,000.00 of funds allocated to Hennepin County communities for two reasons~ One, Chanhassen joined with a number of small Hennepin County communities to contract with Hennepin County to administer the program. None of us would be eligible for independently in that our population is less than 5,000. And two, the City of Shorewood, cooperated with the city of Chanhassen in a municipal boundary adjustment which kept Chanhassen eligible for the Hennepin County funds. The South Shore Senior Center has served our area, including Chanhassen, for over 10 years. We understand from center representatives that some 80 to 90 Chanhassen residents attend the South Shore Center. Based upon funding formula, Chanhassen's share would be $8,000.00. The 1995 program request was unchanged from 1994 at $5,000.00 or only 10% of the Hennepin County funds going to Cha.nhassen. Let me just make clarification from my understanding, I think we have something like 66 citizens from Chanhassen that attend that, rather than that higher number. We thank you for your long history of support for the South Shore Center and we look forward to your continued support and specifically request the full $5,000.00 request be honored and allocated to support the South Shore Senior Center. Thank you. City of Shorewood. Robert B. Bean, Mayor. I just want to touch a little bit on what the City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 Mayor had said. And it's true that Don and I, Don Ashworth and I, dealt with the City of Shorewood in order to acquire one resident within the city of Chanhassen that would be from Hennepin County. If we did not have one resident within our confines, we would not be able to receive those CBDG funds. But anyway, in a lot of our discussions that we had, and I asked Don about this. About the commitment that we had made to the Senior Center and in my recollection in negotiations with the city, we indicated that we would support that specific center when we did receive the funds. The receipt of those funds did come to the city now and because of the fact that we did lose all our residences in Hennepin County when Highway 5 was realigned, that's what prompted this and if Shorewood would not have been in a proper frame as to their thinking, along with us, we probably would not have received the total amount of funds. So with that I just wanted to put that back into record so everyone realizes the real thought behind what was here. So with that, as I mentioned this is a public hearing. Anyone wishing to address this particular issue at this time may come forward and please state your name and your address and we will listen to what you have to say. Thank you. Betty Bragg: My name is Betty Bragg. I live at 6320 Steller Circle, which is right on the edge of Hennepin County. I'm in the School District, Minnetonka School District and most of my dog and pony show is from that area. We come from all the out from Minnewashta and all the way back up to Lake Lucy Road and beyond. Some of these people would like to speak. I think we do go to the South Shore Center and I was a member of the Senior Commission here for a while, but I live so close there and IYe been retired 7 years so IYe already made commitments there and like so many of these others, they are my neighbors and close friends. I really wish we could continue to support that group. Many of us have meals there 3 times a week and..oprograms and so on. I think some of these people would like to just get up. Give their names. Not walk over here, and just say what it is, why they would like to stay with South Shore and why we need the funds. I don't think we could even afford to pay our cook, and we do have hot meals there 3 times a week, with what was given to usc Thank you. I'm going to introduce them... Delores and Frank Mitchell. Delores Mitchell: I enjoy the exercise program and the holiday programse Frank Mitchell: Well I'm Frank Mitchell. I live in the Curry Farm subdivision, just off of Lake Lucy Road and what I like about the South Shore Center is they've got a lot of things that aren't available here. Now for example about 2 weeks ago we had a person come out and give us a nice lecture as far as classical music is concerned, and you don't get too much of that. That person came out. They have exercise classes over there and I think you may have some here, I'm not sure but we theyYe got good ones over there which weYe attended. And of course the meals and they offer other programs. They always seem to have someone coming in there. They give you something. Either for your health or for taxes or for some kind of benefit that you can appreciate. Betty Bragg: Cliff Pedersen, I don't think wants to get up, or not. Okayc And Helen and Ed Clauson. Ed Clauson: IYe been at this senior citizen center is going to... Betty Bragg: Agnes Anderson, Agnes Anderson's statement was not picked up by the microphone. Betty Bragg: Hazel Johnson. City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 Hazel Johnson: I live in Lake Minnewashta. Have lived there for 36 years. I go 4 houses up and I'm in Hennepin County so it behooves me to...Excelsior. I'm sure as your senior center gets larger and can offer everything that we do, I probably will be attending here regularly. But we do, everyone in the South Shore Senior Center does appreciate the help that Chanhassen has given us. Thank you. Betty Bragg: Emma and Earl St. John. Emma St. John: Well Earl and I have, we live just off of the line too in Chanhassen. Have an Excelsior address like so many around us do. We were involved when the South Shore started and then I was on the commission, the first commission, Senior Commission that they had here too and I want to thank Chanhassen for all the help that they have given South Shore. We appreciate it. It is very important to us and we hope that they will continue. Earl St. John: She spoke for me as well. Betty Bragg: And I think that's it. Oh, our bus driver, we came by bus. He's from Chanhassen. Don Yeager: My name is Don Yeager and I live at 6310 Castle Ridge. Just to make a short synopsis, we need the money. Betty Bragg: And the other person here that hasn't spoken is Ron Block. Many of you know him. He's the Program Administrator of the Senior Community Services for Hennepin County. Ron Block. I'm Ron Block, as Betty said. I work for Senior Community Services and I'm here representing the South Shore Senior Center. I'm also specifically representing the 76 residents of Chanhassen who used the center in 1994. When we attended the Senior Commission, we reported to them that there were 66 we had counted but I also reported that we were in the process of trying to determine. There were a number of addresses that we were never quite sure of and at least now we are sure about another 10 confirmed. 10 confirmed in 1994. There are at least 76 Chanhassen residents who used.., of those 76 residents, some of them use it almost every day so literally there are thousands of times that Chanhassen residents use the South Shore center. We're here essentially on a matter of funding and fairness. As requested, we appeared before the Senior Commission who made a recommendation to you regarding our request. We requested $5,170.00 in CBDG Year XX funds and the Senior Commission has recommended $2,500.00 reluctantly. I think there are three reasons for their reluctant recommendation. To my knowledge, none of the Senior Commission members are among the 76 Chanhassen residents who utilized South Shore services in 1994. Sort of an out of sight, out of mind. Number two, they seem to view the South Shore Center programs as competition to those in Chanhassen, and in my opinion the two centers are complimentary. Chanhassen residents do attend both centers. What you have done in essence is have a second source of, I think enjoyment and programs for people. There are some days that the South Shore Center is not currently open and the Chanhassen center is and I know of at least one of the participants here who attends South Shore on the days it's open and comes over here and plays cards on the days that the Chanhassen center is open. I commend you for allowing or creating another place for seniors to participate in programs and set up things to do. Number three I think is the confusion and/or jealousy regarding the size of South Shore's budget in comparison to that of the Chanhassen Senior Center budget. Again viewing South Shore as competition. The South Shore Center is recognized by the Met Council as the regional senior center for the area. It has a congregate dining program and a transportation program. Both available to and utilized by Chanhassen residents. It takes dollars to operate these programs. In the motion... regarding the land deal, which you referred to, saving Chanhassen's CBDG funding connection through City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 Hennepin County. Part of that motion specifically agreed to the continued support of the South Shore Center. Approving a lower amount of funds than last year would not fulfill the spirit of that agreement. The Senior Commission recommendation is just that. A recommendation. It's up to the Council to take a broader view and to recommend funding, to approve funding of the South Shore Center at at least the same level as the current year, which is $5,000.00. It's up to the Council to do the right thing by the 76 Chanhassen residents who rely on services provided by the South Shore Community Center. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Is there anyone else? Joni Danzl: Hi. I'm Joni Danzl, 750 Bighorn Drive in Chanhassen and I'm here representing Sojourn Adult Daycare Program. I just want to verify a couple of...information. I noticed that Sojourn wasn't included in your plans tonight but I wanted to bring up 'a couple things. The Sojourn Adult Day program does have 3 Chanhassen residents. We have received a lot of help from Chanhassen in the past and are very grateful for that. Some of you don't know that...$38,000.00 van from the Minnesota Department of Transportation and we need to come up with $8,000.00 in matching funds to get that van. And so we're asking your help from the Block Grant, to get us to our goal for our van. The payoff to you would be use of that van for some of your senior activities. Sojourn has another van that...can be also used by...your seniors and other groups. So I'm hoping that you'll reconsider and put Sojourn in your plans at some point for matching funds to help us get our van. We need $8,000.00 and I respectfully request $2,000.00 from the Block Grant. Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Anyone else? Sherol Howard: My name is Sherol Howard. rm the Chairperson of the Senior Commission in Chanhassen. I don't want to nitpick and if we were competitive, we would keep track of how many South Shore people came to our center. We welcome people from all the surrounding areas. We keep no track...and I won't take up the Council's time other than to say that speaking for the entire commission, we stand behind our recommendation. Mayor Chmiel: Is there anyone else? Going once, twice. Three times. Can 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: Okay, Colleen. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Well, I'm trying to liken it to another service that we offer and I'm coming up with a Lake Ann comparison where it is our park. We fund it and yet people come from all over to use it. And with the exception like the entrance fees, we don't require, I mean we don't ask, or we don't restrict people to that. And I'm thinking along the same lines with our senior center. With what Sherol Howard just said° That we don't ask only our citizens to use it. So I guess when we talk about funding based on. Resident: Excuse me. You have to speak a little louder. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Oh I'm sorry. I should grab a microphone here. And I'm trying to balance that rationale with the fact that we don't charge or ask where people are coming from to use our senior center, with the fact that the reason we get these funds in the first place is that we, with the help of Shorewood, we have received them. So I think there's a middle ground and in requesting $5,000.00, I think the Senior Commission City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 went halfway. In trying to make a compromise. They strongly feel that there shouldn't be any funding but I think we need to recognize that without the help of Shorewood, we would not be receiving these funds at all. So I guess bottom line, I'm comfortable with the recommendation of $2,500.00. To be honest, what concerns me more is the $29,000.00 for the accessibility improvements. It's a federal requirement. That doesn't mean it can't irk me. That we have to spend that much money on ADA requirements but I guess that's all I have to say. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Michael. Councilman Mason: Well, knowing people that go to both senior centers, it's kind of awkward spot but that's I guess one of the reasons I'm up here. I guess I want to take a certain amount of umbrage with the brouhaha over the help that Shorewood gave us. That certainly is true. However, if we didn't have that help, there wouldn't be any money to give anywhere. So I think that's a bit of a double edge sword. It becomes increasingly difficult I think to give money to entities outside of the city of Chanhassen. I think the point is well taken that money that goes to South Shore is money that is not going to the Chanhassen Senior Center. Now I think, and I continue to think that we should help in some way with South Shore. It is, South Shore serves the whole area and seniors don't know community lines, just like a lot of us don't. I'm comfortable, having said all that, I'm comfortable with the commission's recommendation. I'm wondering if we do any compromising or any give and taking here, if some of the money from the accessibility fund. How much jostling around we can do there. I certainly am not in favor of, if we do up the South Shore at all, certainly I don't want it to be at the expense of the Chanhassen Senior Center. I don't, with how things are up and running in Chan, that's unfortunately one of the realities we have to face here I think. I'd also like to ask Council what their thoughts are about monies for Sojourn. Yeah, it may just be three citizens in Chanhassen but I guess I think maybe there's a bigger cause here than just three citizens in Chanhassen. So I'd like to discuss, to recap what I said, I'd like to discuss if we can perhaps take some money out of the accessibility funding but certainly not at the expense of Senior Commission. And if that fails, I'm comfortable with standing by the Senior Commission's recommendation. Mayor Chrniel: Maybe before we proceed with Mark. Don, I think you ran up to find some information regarding the playground structure. Don Ashworth: Yes, I did talk to Todd Hoffman. He informs me that the equipment out at Lake Ann is old and it really no longer meets the needs of the park. That it's equipment that's better utilized like at a neighborhood park. And again our needs out there just continue to grow so much. So what he is proposing is that the new equipment that would be accessible would go to Lake Ann. The existing equipment would go over to Chan Estates. And yes, we would make that accessible as well. Councilwoman Dockendorf: And making that accessible, is that part of the $29,000.00? Don Ashworth: Yes, as I understand it. Yes. Councilwoman Dockendorf: And is that an all or nothing deal? I mean is it $29,000.00 that we need. Kate Aanenson: If I can comment on that. There's two issues on that. One, we're already over the 15% cap. Okay, that's a risk that we take. We're thrown into the whole pool with Hennepin County and it tries to all shake out to 15%. So anything we do to increase the administration end, we're putting ourselves at greater risk° And that's why we were trying to lower that cost too. That $29,000.00 is being applied with two previous years. Year XX and XIX to get enough in order to replace the play structure. What we were looking at is the City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 concrete edging, the surface material and the play structure itself and relocation. Does $2,500.00 endanger that? We're pretty close as far as what we're trying to do so. Councilwoman Dockendorf: How real is that threat for being pulled because of our percentage? Kate Aanenson: Well it depends how the rest of Hennepin County comes in. I got a call from Carol Steiner, who administers the program and is very concerned how much administration we do have in our's so. It's a risk we took last year and we are trying to move it down. Councilman Senn: Kate, how much of that. Mayor Chrniel: Mark! Just a minute. Does that finish what you had to say? Councilwoman Dockendorf: Yes. Mayor Chrniel: Okay. Alright, Mark. Councilman Senn: How much of that play structure is actually accessible? Do you know that? Kate Aanenson: I assume it's designed to be, to meet the standards whatever ADA requirements are. Whether it's the whole... Mayor Chmiel: I would imagine it's probably fully accessible. Kate Aanenson: Yeah, that's what I would assume. Mayor Chmiel: If they're meeting all those specific requirements. Councilman Senn: Well, you know we only have to react from is the diagram or the picture in back and I mean other than one lower level entrance ramp to access the lowest level of the play structure, I mean I don't see any other way to access the other levels of the play structure. Kate Aanenson: The intent of putting that picture is to give you some indication of the scope of the project really. Councilman Senn: So this isn't the structure you mean? Kate Aanenson: It could be that one. It could be something similar to that one. It was really just to give you an idea of what we're looking at and why we need to compile that with two other years. To give you an idea of the scope of. $29,000.00 doesn't buy you a play structure. It doesn't buy you just the surface so° Councilman Senn: No, I understand that. I'm just saying, but if you look at this particular picture, you know, accessibility. Why give a very tiny portion of the structure that's accessible... Kate Aanenson: All I can say is that it meets ADA requirements, whatever those may be. That's all I can say. City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 Mayor Chmiel: There may be also bids that would go out on this as well and whether it comes in at that particular dollar, that's another question too. Don Ashworth: The bids are...taken. Mayor Chmiel: Are they? Okay. Councilman Senn: Well, I mean from my perspective I don't have a problem with the Chan Senior Center operations at $18,000.00. As far as the accessibility improvements go, I guess I'm a little bit like Colleen. That's a big chunk of funds going into one play structure and boy, that bothers me. Especially since maybe it's just a lack of information but I guess I'd be curious to see more information about that. Kate Aanenson: I guess Todd's perspective is, we have a list. The city did a study of which areas the city needs to do for ADA. This is a high volume park. It's one of our most used parks and it seemed like that would be the appropriate place to, if we were going to replace the structure to meet the standards, that'd be the place to do it. Councilman Senn: No, I understand that but we had a very long list of ADA items presented to us and we were also told that we'd have a chance to look at those in terms of prioritization in relationship to when, how and at what cost. We haven't, at least as far as I'm aware of, even addressed that exercise but I'm just saying I guess I have some questions there. I'm not sure I'm still comfortable with that or not but as far as the South Shore Senior Center goes, I guess I'm on record from last year as saying I wanted to see that phased out and I haven't changed my opinion on that. I guess my real opinion is, I think we should take that $2,500.00 and stick it in a reserve because I know we're going to have some fairly hefty financial needs as it relates to our senior center in the not very distant future, especially when we get into space use issues around City Hall, senior housing, and complimentary functions and I'm sure people...with that as well as other things but I'm willing to go with the Senior Commission in terms of the $2,500.00 this year but again, in my mind I view it strictly as a phase out. $5,000.00 last year. $2,500.00 this year and next year I see it strictly going into our senior operation. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. In looking at this letter that I did get from the Mayor. I remember when we were over at Shorewood on two different occasions. In fact I asked Don if he would get some information back from the city as to the Minutes and the commitments that we basically had made and I told Don that I, somewhere in the back of my mind, is that we had indicated that we would provide x number of dollars. Whether it was the $5,000.00. In my own mind right now I think it was. And if that was my word then, that would be my word now. Although I do agree with the senior center within Chan and the need for keeping that $18,000.00 because there's that real basic need there. And Sojourn sort of gives me some real concerns as well because that too is part of the community and maybe what I'd like to do is go out and talk to a couple of areas who I think maybe might be able to hopefully assist in that $2,000.00 so it wouldn't disrupt this any more. One, I'm thinking about the Lions or the Legion and seeing if we can't try to get some dollars from them. But as I said, my word's my bond when I talk to somebody in regard to this because we were really under pressure in losing the complete total amount of dollars. And with the assist of Shorewood, I don't want to turn my back on them but here again I would like to see us come up with the $5,000.00 for South Shore. Keep the $18,000.00 for the Senior Center operation and see what we can do with that accessibility improvements. But we do need that as well as the park. All those needs are there but we're running roughly about $4,500.00 short as opposed to what's indicated. I have a little problem with this. I really do. What's Council's feel as far as Sojourn is concerned? I think Michael you indicated your's towards that. Colleen. 10 City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 Councilwoman Dockendorf: It's an excellent program. Just given the usage that we have of it, I just can't justify funding for it. Mayor Chmiel: Other than the fact of the possibility of me going out and talking, maybe we can raise it from that aspect. Councilwoman Dockendorf: That'd be wonderful if the Legion could, Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. Well, and I'm not guaranteeing anything but I'm at least willing to go out and try thato Councilwoman Dockendorf: Yeah. TheyYe been very generous with other vehicle needs in the city. Mayor Chmiel: Yes. They have. TheyYe been excellent with all the things that weYe had within the' city. Mark. Councilman Senn: I don't have a problem with the outside approach, if that's what you're asking. Mayor Chmiel: No, I'm asking on your feeling on Sojourn° Councilman Senn: From a dollar allocation standpoint, you know given the limited resources, I just don't see it coming out of this particular money. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Well I would like to...a motion that we approve the CBDG Year XXI allocation as recommended by the Senior Commission with the Chanhassen Senior Center receiving $18,000.00, South Shore $2,500.00 and the accessibility improvements at $29,696.00. Councilman Senn: I'll second. Mayor Chmiel: Any other discussion? Councilman Mason: I take it there's no interest here in seeing if we can take some money out of the accessibility. If we can work anything out with that. With Council. Councilman Senn: Well from my perspective, rd still love to look at that but I'd like to take it and allocate it to our own senior needs as they come up now as they relate to City Hall space allocation and also tie in's with senior housing. I mean that's the way I'd allocate it if we found it. Not to South Shore. Councilwoman Dockendorf: So if it comes under bid, we'll just allocate it directly to our Senior Center? Councilman Senn: Yeah, that's what I'd like to do. Councilman Mason: Well I'd want to have some, if it does come under bid, I guess I'd like to have some debate on that. Kate Aanenson: There are regulations that we'd have to follow as far as holding another public hearing to reallocate resources but we are, as I indicated in my cover letter, this has to be in to Hennepin County by March 10th. So we need to give them some direction that meets their requirements° If you do reallocate those 11 City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 resources, then we have to hold another hearing. But right now we're just trying to get on line for the July allocation. Councilman Mason: Right, right. What I'm hearing from Council is that those, if that bid was to come in low, that we did then have some debate as to what to do with that money. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, and I guess I'm looking at it from the same standpoint that you are Michael~ If those dollars are there, that that be allocated to the South Shore Center and then move it from there. Councilman Mason: Well at this point that would certainly be my preference. Certainly we'd have some debate on that, but that would certainly be my, at this point that's where I would lean. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Is there any consideration by the motionee in regard to that? Councilwoman Dockendorf: Well I'm not sure. I mean we're making a motion with contingencies. I'm not sure that we can. Mayor Chmiel: No, you can't do that, but. Councilman Mason: I think we should maybe wait on that until the time comes. Councilman Senn: Yeah. I think we should talk about it if there is money. Councilman Mason: I mean if there's nothing there, it's a moot point anyway. Mayor Chmiel: Well, that's right. Total dollars there and what's being suggested. But I guess the thing I was looking at is if the $29,000.00 came in at $27,000.00, hypothetical. Roger Knutson: Theoretically. Mayor Chmiel: Oh, theoretically. I would see that we could still take those funds and give them to the South Shore Center. Is that your understanding? Kate Aanenson: Well again, let's go back to the issue. One, we have to hold another public hearing. We're moving money around. Reallocating. Mayor Chmiel: Right. But if we voted on this, there were dollars that were extra, then it could be allocated accordingly and we could still. Kate Aanenson: With the caveat that we're over on the 15%. So that's an issue that Hennepin County may say no, we'd rather have you spend it on ADA and that's why we're trying to put it into that. Because what we're doing is we're taking it from where we should be spending it and putting it back into admin and that's. Councilwoman Dockendorf: And the second issue is, we have a split vote on that contingency. Councilman Senn: Yeah, so I think we should just leave it until later. 12 City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 Don Ashworth: Mr. Mayor? Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, Don. Don Ashworth: Just so the Council is aware. In the bidding for the play equipment, what you do is you specify an amount. All bidders are going to be coming in with exactly the same dollar amount, $29,000.00. It's simply going to be a question of how much equipment is being provided from A versus B versus C and if the commission feels that A, B, C are better meeting our needs. So you could set that amount at $27,000.00 and that's exactly what they'll all be in at. Actually since this is a 2 year allocation, the real number is closer to. $60,0O0.00. Councilman Senn: It's actually a 3 year allocation, right? Kate Aanenson: Correct. It's 3 years. But that goes back to my other issue° What we really should be spending it on is the product. Not the admin...services. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any other discussion? Resolution #95-33: Councilwoman Dockendorf moved, Councilman Senn seconded that the City Council adopt a Resolution allocation Year XXI CDBG funding as follows: Chanhassen Senior Center Operations South Shore Center Accessibility Improvements $18,000.00 $ 2,500.00 $29,696.00 All voted in favor and the motion carried. SET 1995/96 IJOUOR LICENSE FEES. Don Ashworth: It is the time to be setting fees. City Council had tabled action on this item from our last meeting but we really do need to get those approved this evening. The resolution establishing the fees is attached to the back of your packet and we're recommending that be approved. I did have various questions from Councilman Steve Berquist. That was the note that I passed out to the Council earlier. This one here. And.you'll note in there, he had a number of questions on number 3. Karen tried to respond to his questions or she wrote in the answer that says yes, or no. Set by State Statute. Again, staff is recommending approval. Mayor Chmiel: Anyone wishing to address this issue? Seeing none, Colleen. Do you have any problems with what's being proposed? Councilwoman Dockendorf: No. Mayor Chmiel: Michael. Councilman Mason: No. Mayor Chmiel: Mark. 13 City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 Councilman Senn: Yeah. I think the wine and beer license is too low. Especially when you compare it to other municipalities. I think our fee ought to start adjusting to become more in line at least with the average of the other municipalities. Don Ashworth: You said beer on-sale, right? Or is it just beer? Off-sale or on-sale? Councilman Senn: Well, wine and beer license. Mayor Chrniel: Just as we had listed. Councilman Senn: I mean as it was listed. It was listed for us as a wine and beer license I thought. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. I guess I don't disagree with you but I sure would like to get a feel back from the people requiring these licenses. I think some of them probably are maybe not even making that $280.00. At least that's what I've been told discussing this with staff. Councilman Senn: Well, they were all told about the meeting tonight. I'm kind of surprised some of them aren't here. Mayor Chrniel: Well, but the same total dollar amount has been suggested within the proposed resolution. My suggestion would be that we pass this as it is this year but take a look at it for next year and get the input back from these people as well. Councilman Senn: Except it was the same issue that was there last year. Councilman Mason: Now I'm assuming that this 3.2 beer on-sale is from Steve. Councilman Berquist. I mean this right here. Don Ashworth: Right. Karen made that up after we had gotten Steve's questions. Councilman Mason: Well, we're at $280.00, right? Mayor Chmiel: Yep. Councilman Mason: Well I see out of the 15 listed, 9 are below us. One is $10.00. I mean it kind of looks to me like we're in the ballpark here. Councilman Senn: This is 3.2 off-sale. Councilman Mason: No, this is on-sale. Well according. Councilwoman Dockendorf: What list are we comparing to? The last one. The wine on-sale? Don Ashworth: Yeah, the wine on-sale. Councilman Senn: The wine on-sale is what we're comparing I thought, because that's what our license is equivalent to. 14 City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 Councilman Mason: Well I have something different then. I see. I see. Okay. 6 out of 13 are below us. So that means. Councilman Senn: Look at the averages is what I'm saying. If you take all of them and average them out. And especially if you look back at the data that we were given last time, as far as closer in types of municipalities, we were way below average. With one exception and I think that was Eden Prairie. Councilwoman Dockendorf: And the businesses we're looking at are basically Ahn Le, Happy Gardens, Guy's. Mayor Chmiel: Right. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Frankie's and Prairie House. Councilman Mason: Yeah. Councilwoman Dockendorf: All fairly small operations in terms of liquor sales. Mayor Chmiel: Right. Councilwoman Dockendorf: I mean they do it, not as a money maker. Mayor Chmiel: No. As a convenience for the customers. Councilman Mason: I guess rm comfortable with this rate just because of that. Just because what we're talking, 5 or 6 places. And they're obviously not big buck outfits. Mayor Chmiel: I would like to take this under advisement and look at it and see° And also find out from them how they basically do. Councilman Mason: That's fine, Mayor Chmiel: And if that need is warranted, then we move ahead and come back to it and make a change if necessary. Councilman Senn: I mean just every other fee, building and otherwise in the city weYe been raising to help cover costs and, especially when we're below an average considerably like this, I think we ought to be making some movement. I mean I'm not saying necessarily that we have to take increase but if you don't even touch it this year, then next year it's going to be even harder to touch it because if you're going to raise it to where it should be, it's going to be even a bigger lump by next year. Because I'm sure most of these other communities are probably going to be raising some percentage in relationship to where they are now. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Well what are expenses in issuing a liquor license? Doing background checks? I mean rm not sure what the. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, the costs are not that great to go through other than the fact of having the background check is what Public Safety goes through with each of them. 15 City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 Councilman Senn: It's the background check and stuff and then there's also cost related to the usage afterwards. In terms of enforcement and everything else too. So I mean you have to look at both ends of it. Councilwoman Dockendorf: People don't go stumbling out of Guy's. Don Ashworth: ...Council has considered leasing costs as a factor. I mean if you look at overall structure and why is it that you need to extract dollars as a part of your liquor licensing, it really gets back to the fact that, I mean one of the reasons that you have your police literally downtown every night is because you have so many liquor operation type of things. Mayor Chrniel: Okay. Is there a motion? Councilman Mason: I will move approval of the resolution setting the 1995 liquor license fees as is with the caveat that staff, prior to what date? Take a look at this and start making an attempt to get in line with surrounding communities. Councilman Senn: Yeah, that'd be nice to have that come back and have some discussion on it rather than the 1 lth hour. Councilman Mason: Well, and that's why I said that about the time Mark. I agree. Perhaps by what, June. No. September-October. Don Ashworth: When you're working on the revenues for the 1996 budget. That would be a good time. Mayor Chrniel: Prior to, August. Councilman Mason: Okay, that sounds. Because Mark does raise a real good point. We ought to at least try and be at the mid point on this but I would like to hear from, considering we are just dealing with a few. Mayor Chmiel: Motion on the floor. Is there a second? Councilwoman Dockendorf: I'll second it. Resolution #95-34; Councilman Mason moved, Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded to approve the resolution establishing the 1995/96 liquor license fees with the caveat that staff bring this item back before Council prior to working on the revenue portion of the 1996 budget. All voted in favor and the motion carried. INITIAL RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING 1999 AS THE FRANCHISE RENEWAL DATE. TRIAX CA B LEVISION. Don Ashworth: We were notified in error by Triax of their desire to start negotiations and that notification period really had been up for 2 years. Renewal's not for 5. The notification to us to start the negotiation doesn't really come up for another 2 years. But Brian Groggin, our consultant, did recommend that we send a letter similar to the one that he has attached dated January 31st. Basically the question is, whether or not that notice they gave us was proper. It also acknowledges that we did receive it. Councilman Senn: I'm sorry, I can't help but laugh. Is this a $400.00 letter then or what? 16 City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 Councilwoman Dockendorf: Yeah. How much money did we spend... Councilman Senn: I mean I'd like you to send the bill to Triax for their mistake in letter. Councilman Mason: Now there's a thought. Mayor Chmiel: I agree. Councilman Senn: I have a feeling that this is a $400.00 letter that will. Mayor Chmiel: 4 years prior to the agreement and the other question I have is, does it confine us just to one cable company. The possibly of looking at what we can do. And this way it could give us that commitment so I have some real concerns with this as well, and I mentioned that to Don. Councilman Senn: I think with the mistake in the letter, I would strongly advocate whatever time we paid our attorney to deal with this, that that be sent to Triax. And I think that's only fair because this has been now a 3 or 4 week process and gotten very complicated. It seems to me the first answer out of our mouth 5 seconds before I even talked to the attorney was go away, you're early, rm sorry, maybe rm too simplistic but I could read it and figure that out. I don't know why we had to spend umpteen hundred dollars on an attorney buto Councilman Mason: Settle down Mark. Councilman Senn: Well, Mike if this guy put 2 hours into it, rll bet you we're over $400.00. Roger Knutson: It wasn't me. Councilman Senn: I wasn't. He's cheap compared to the cable attorney. I'd like to follow up on it~ The other point I'd like to make and follow up as it relates to what Don said° I think as we look forward and they're getting definitely closer to 1999 now, I think it's really time that we get some sort of Cable Commission or something set up to get some citizen involvement going and how we are and what we are going to do with cable. I have never, this is one of those right up there, high issues for me in terms of phone calls° People just irritated all the time about it in terms of the problems of getting it. The response. The customer service and everything else. I think we ought to address some of those issues rather than waiting until 1999. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Michael. Councilman Mason: I guess I kind of concur with Mark about Triax footing all or some of the bill on this one. I think they are so far ahead of the, I mean I don't understand what their point was and for us to have to pay money to respond in an appropriate manner I do find I guess a little offensive, repulsive, whatever. But this letter does not tie us to Triax? Don Ashworth: I would verify that...I'm assured that it does not. Councilman Mason: Well then, yeah. Then I think the letter's a good one, and that's fine. Councilman Senn: It seems like their letter was a good attempt to try to tie us. 17 City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 Councilman Mason: Well yeah. Yeah. And I do agree with what Mark is saying about looking at our options come 1999. Most assuredly. So I'm okay with the letter as it stands. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, is there a motion? Councilman Mason: Yes. I'll move approval of the letter sent to. Councilman Senn: With the bill sent to Triax? Councilman Mason: Triax with, well I don't know. How would that work? Councilman Senn: Put the bill in the letter. Councilman Mason: Yeah, put the bill in the letter and see what they do. So yeah, I'll move approval. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, is there a second? Councilwoman Dockendorf: With as little as this issue interests me, I will second it. Councilman Mason moved, Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded to approve the letter address to Triax Cablevision regarding the renewal of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota Cable Television Franchise. All voted in favor and the motion carried. COMMISSION APPOLNTMENTS: Don Ashworth: I would like to point out the note at the top. I did get a call from Councilman Berquist saying that he would not be here this evening and he would really like to see the Council hold off on the appointments themselves. However, the Council may wish to act on the resolution establishing the commission appointment procedures, which has been attached. And I think they could move on the Southwest Transit designation. I thought there was a D. Councilwoman Dockendorf: There is? Mayor Chmiel: A, C and D. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Where though? Councilman Mason: Right here. For Matt's resignation. That's too bad. That's too bad. Councilman Senn: Oh, move on A and C you mean? Councilwoman Dockendorf: And D. Mayor Chmiel: A, C and D. And leave the commission appointments as discussion for next Council meeting, which would be what, March 13th? Councilman Senn: What's the timing on Matt's resignation? 18 City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 Kate Aanenson: He said he'd be available until April. Councilman Senn: Okay. Councilman Mason: I certainly don't have any trouble with Councilman Berquist's request. That sounds fair. Councilman Senn: I'd like to propose an amendment to A, if we're going to adopt it though. Mayor Chmiel: And what might that be? Councilman Senn: Item number 3. I don't think it's quite gotten to where we talked about it getting. Following the interview process, the commission shall. What I'd like to promote is scratch "submit its" and rather say, "shall recommend to the City Council the number of candidates equal to the number of open positions plus two". Mayor Chmiel: If we have them. Councilman Senn: Well I understand that. That's always inherent, right. But the other thing is, I don't recall, at least a desire from our part to say from which the Council may choose and confine ourselves only to that choice. I think Council should have an open end on that in terms of if they want to~ Mayor Chmiel: Okay, re-read what you're saying again. Councilman Senn: Change 3 to read, Commissions shall interview all applicants for vacancies. Following the interview process, the commission shall recommend to the City Council two more names, or two additional names, or how would I say that? The number of names necessary to fill the vacant slots, the vacant positions plus two. Mayor Chmiel: You're leaving out their recommendation? Councilman Senn: No. The commission shall recommend to the City Council, okay. The number of positions equal to the number of positions vacant plus two. Don Ashworth: Clarification. So as I read 3 right now, you would be having the commissions interviewing all candidates including, I'll call it inc~nbents, so right? Councilman Senn: No. That's already dealt with up above Don. I'm not changing that. It says up above that, or I thought. Councilwoman Dockendorf: No. The first sentence in 3. It says~ the commission shall interview all applicants. Councilman Senn: For vacancies, okay. Don Ashworth: That was the intent. You want the commission to interview incumbents? Councilman Senn: I personally don't think that's necessary but I guess I don't see that in here either way. 19 City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 Councilman Mason: I think Council should but I don't think the commission should. Don Ashworth: The 1990 version had in there, let's see. Councilman Senn: See the only thing is, if they don't, how do we hold them to a recommendation of the number of positions plus two? And then say can't, then you don't interview the incumbent. I suppose that could still be part of the recommendation, even though they're not interviewing them. Councilman Mason: Yeah. Yeah. Councilman Senn: Okay. That would be a fair way to put it. Yeah and again, what we're saying wouldn't disallow that... Don Ashworth: The previous wordage was, incumbents who are re-applying for their position do not need to be interviewed by the commission members and should not be involved in the interviews and selection of their competitors. They do need to be interviewed by the City Council. Councilman Mason: See I think all of that should be in there. Councilman Senn: I think it should be left in. I agree. Councilman Mason: Yeah. They shouldn't have anything to do with the interview process at all. Councilman Senn: Maybe put that back in as number 4 and then just change number 3 to reflect that and then it's up to the Council how many people they want interviewed. Councilman Mason: Yeah. I think so. Mayor Chmiel: You have four items then. Don Ashworth: Got it. Councilman Mason: You know I don't know if, and I guess I'd kind of like this on public record, and I don't recall whether this discussion was at a work session or not. I know we had it. That one of the issues I think Council is feeling is if we just go on the basis of any one single commission's recommendation, it's only natural that the commission would choose people that tend to agree with the people that are on that commission right now. And I think quite honestly Council is perhaps looking for not necessarily unanimity in discussion but yet diversity of opinions from which we can gather information from and that's why I think Council needs to take more control over the interview process. And I think we're accomplishing that by asking more than just the number of the people. Councilwoman Dockendorf: I would agree with your outcome. I wouldn't agree with how you got there. I'm not certain that the commission isn't looking for additional points of view as well. Councilman Mason: Well that could be. 20 City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 Councilwoman Dockendorf: And that Council doesn't have a, also have suffered from the same, you see things my way, so. Councilman Mason: Well, that's entirely possible. I guess the difference there is that we're elected and they're not and quite honestly they're not accountable like we are. I mean obviously I am not saying for a minute that there's anyone on the Planning Commission that does not think they're accountable. What rm saying is, when you have a non-elected body making appointments, it's easy I think for anybody, any body, any group of people, to choose people that happen to agree with their viewpoint. And I would hope that as elected officials we're in a little different position and we're perhaps able to see that a little differently. Councilman Senn: I think you have a better chance of achieving greater diversity. Councilman Mason: I would hope so. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any other discussion? Councilwoman Dockendorf: What do we have for item (c)? Do we have an additional person that we're considering for Southwest Metro? Councilman Mason: Well Councilman Berquist isn't here tonight° Mayor Chmiel: If you're not present, that's what happens. Councilwoman Dockendorf: I'm very happy to sit again. They want one additional. Mayor Chmiel: We had one individual from the community who was on there. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Dale has declined. Councilman Mason: Because of health isn't it? Mayor Chmiel: Right, yeah. He does have a problem. Councilwoman Dockendorf: So do we have anyone else? Mayor Chmiel: Not to my knowledge. Councilman Senn: We haven't asked though either~ Councilman Mason: Why does Southwest feel the need for it to be another Council person? Councilwoman Dockendorf: We don't. Mayor Chmiel: No, they're not saying that. Just to have two representatives on that particular commission. Kate Aanenson: That was the indication I was given from Diane. That their preference was a Council person. If not, then somebody at large would be fine. 21 City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 Councilwoman Dockendorf: No, the preference is not a Council person. Kate Aanenson: That's the indication Diane gave me. Mayor Chmiel: I think you get a better mix looking at it from the city standpoint. Councilman Mason: Let's float an ad in the Villager and see what happens because I would like to see more people involved. And Steve's lucky... So with the resolutions for appointment procedures, what you read is back in? Right Don? Mayor Chmiel: Yes. And with clarification what he had on number 3. Councilman Mason: Shall submit equal to the number of vacancies plus two more, right? Good. Don Ashworth: I'll put that in the next administrative section just to make sure that we did what you told us to do. Councilman Senn: And move on C. Councilman Mason: And D. Councilman Senn: No, not B. Councilman Mason: D. As in Dog. As in Matt Ledvina retiring. With all due respect to the people that are waiting to see whether they're being appointed or not, I'll second approval of A, C and D. I think it's only fair to Steve to wait 2 more weeks. Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the resolution establishing commission appointment procedures as amended, to appoint Councilwoman Dockendorf to the Southwest Metro Transit Board and advertise in the Villager for an additional member; and to accept the resignation of Matthew Ledvina from the Planning Commission. And to table the appointments to the other commissions until Councilman Bentuist returns. All voted in favor and the motion carried. CONCEPTUAL AND PRELIMINARY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO REZONE 89.59 ACRES FROM AGRICULTURAL ESTATE. A2 TO PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD]: PRELIMINARY PLAT CREATING 1 BLOCK WITH 47 LOTS AND 20UTLOTS AND ASSOCIATED RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR A RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY DEVELOPMENT CONSISTING OF 465 DWELLING UNITS (13 TWIN HOMES AND 4 FOURPLEX BUILDINGS]: SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR 5 FOUR UNIT TOWNHOUSES: LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF HIGHWAY 5 AND GALPItN BOULEVARD. GOOD VALUE HOMES. INC. (BETTY O'SHAUGHNESSY PROPERTY,. AUTUMN RIDGE. Bob Generous: Mr. Mayor, Council members. The applicant, as you said, is requesting conceptual and preliminary approval for a planned unit development. Apparently the first part of this development consists of a 46 unit townhouse project in the southeast comer of the site in the upland areas. This area is designated for low density residential and to facilitate this the applicant needs to transfer densities from the upland portion of the property on the west side of a major wetland complex on the site, to the upland portion on the southeast portion of the site. Access to this property is through the proposed south Highway 5 frontage road, which is at 22 City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 the intersection, south of Highway 5 across from where the new elementary school is going in. This is the designated collector road in the city's comprehensive plan. Staff has worked extensively with the applicant to minimize the grading on this site to help maintain as much of the landform of the property as possible. There is a major wetland complex in the middle of the site. It's approximately 44 acres in size. The city is looking at developing this as a major open space park complex with a trail system that would run around the perimeter of the wetland area. The property to the west is Opus Development. It's a planned unit development for an industrial office park. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Bob, could you orient me? I'm missing where we are. Bob Generous: This is Highway 5. Galpin. The proposal in tonight is just for this area. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Okay. Bob Generous: Timberwood is, well the entrance... Trotter's Ridge is to the south. This portion of the trail system is in place as part of the Trotter's Ridge development. And staff is working with the underlying property owner to come up with an acceptable purchase price for the property. We do have, staff is recommending approval of this development. We do have a modification. There are two outlots. We're recommending that there be a change to Outlot A to represent the upland portion on the east side of the wetlands outside of the parkland. That will be developed in the future and that would come in too for a separate public hearing. And then Outlot B would be all the property on the western 2/3, approximately 2/3 of the property that would be included in the parkland. If you have any questions, rd be happy to answer them. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Do you have any questions Colleen? Councilwoman Dockendorf: I do, and I'd appreciate you bearing with me just nmning through them. On your summary I do appreciate the fact that you don't want uniform building colors and I noticed that you're proposing gray and white which is exactly the same as we're going to have kitty comer, or may have kitty comer with the Lake Ann Highlands. And I think youYe got that in the recommendations. Bob Generous: Well we put in that they provide a pallet of color options for. Councilwoman Dockendorf: For each unit. I mean each building complex. Bob Generous: Yeah. For the purchaser and the applicant does have samples of the different colors that he does have available. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Great. Just so long as we get a variety in there and it's not all uniform. The 2.2 acre in the southwest comer of the site. It's being dedicated as open space. Is that wetland now? Bob Generous: No, it's upland.. Councilw.oman Dockendorf: That's the upland. Bob Generous: Well it's a portion of the upland. Councilwoman Dockendorf: And that's just going to be a passive park? 23 City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 Bob Generous: Right, it will be open space. Part of the trail system might go through it. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Okay. And when we talk about the reasons for the rezoning to the PUD, some of the reasons that we list is development consistent with the Comp Plan. Preservation of desirable site characteristics such as wetlands, topographical features. Sensitive development in transitional areas and more efficient use of land. I'm unclear in what we wouldn't be getting if this were a regular. I mean it seems like all those recommendations we would get those anyway with a normal. Bob Generous: We're getting the dedication of that open space. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Okay. So that's the real trade-off? Bob Generous: Right. Kate Aanenson: And the transfer of the density to try to keep it all in that, try to keep that passive park area left natural instead of trying to do degregation of wetland mitigation. Try to keep all the density in a confined area. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Okay. The tree and landscaping looks great. Mass grading I assume we can't get around. Bob Generous: We're worked to keep bringing it up. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Okay. I know that we went through this and Charles explained what Galpin was going to do. We're dropping it 10 feet approximately at the high point? Charles Folch: That stretch of Galpin is probably about an 8 foot cut from where it is now and that will carry through all the way up to Trunk Highway 5. That portion from Highway 5 to about 800 feet south won't be done at this point in time. That will have to wait until the total Highway 5 project is completed. Councilwoman Dockendorf: So that whole intersection will be lowered. Charles Folch: Ultimately in the future it will be. Councilwoman Dockendorf: So it's not just the bump where it goes up on Galpin? Okay. Thanks. Let's see° They're constructing an 8 foot wide asphalt trail. Is that on McGlynn Drive? Bob Generous: No. It would be adjacent to the wetland. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Oh, okay. Good. No, I'm not. I'm sorry. I'm not done. If I can get my comments in here along with my questions. Mayor Chrniel: Okay, keep going. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Condition 19. I'm not sure, you're talking about working with Southwest Metro for a bus stop shelter. I'm not sure that this size development would warrant that. 24 City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 Bob Generous: Originally they had come in with both sides of the road and there was a higher density on the northern portion of this plat. Councilwoman Dockendorf: So it may make sense in the long run? Bob Generous: Right. When they put in there, I don't know how many units. 150 units to the north. It might be good to have a cut out or something in there° Councilwoman Dockendorf: Okay. I think that's it. Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Good. Thank you. Michael. Councilman Mason: Well it obviously has been, it looks like things are pretty well thought out here and I appreciate both the staff and Good Value. It's always nice when the work is done up front. That's nice. The landscaping is great. I was really pleased with that. One question, one comment. About the streets and the funding. What's the deal with that? Kate Aanenson: Charles, do you want to comment on the 429 and the status of the city's bonding? Charles Folch: Basically at this point in time, well I guess it goes back for a number of years now weYe been undertaking a great deal of public petitions, public improvement projects averaging anywhere from $6 to $8 million a year in improvements and that of course brings us to a point now where we're certainly carrying a heavy debt load. With regards to 429 projects for this year, we basically have set up the project that we feel we can do financially. In the past weYe been able to order a project, go ahead and let a contract and then a year or so later when we get to assessment time, we go back and we'll bond for the project and we'll basically reimburse the cash flow that weYe been using with city funds. But because we have so many projects out there now, we really feel we have to take the position where we actually have to bond for the project first° We really don't have the cash flow ability to keep upfronting these projects initially so with that in mind, we have to prioritize what we can do each year now. And for this year, with the spring bonding that we just took 2 weeks ago, that pretty well is the funding for the projects for this year° That would involve either local dollars to help support the project. Councilman Mason: So where does this project stand with that then? Kate Aanenson: I think what you're asking is they have the ability to build the roads themselves and that's what we're saying. If they would like the project to seep they can wait in line until the city has the resources to do it or they can step up and do it themselves. Our recommendation is that if they want to go forward, that they should do that. They have one year on the preliminary plat. Councilman Mason: Okay, okay. My other comment is, IYe kind of been on record before as saying I think light pollution is something that nobody's dealing with and I really would like to know why there needs to be exterior lighting with photo cells on the outside of it. Kate Aanenson: Street lighting or building? Councilman Mason: No. Well, I'm assuming. 25 City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 Mayor Chmiel: For street lighting. Councilman Mason: Well, but it says lighting is proposed for the exterior of the building as well as the standard street lighting. Now obviously the standard street lighting, fine. But I'd like a discussion about lights for the exteriors of the building. I guess my quite strong feeling is that we don't need lights going on all over the city just because it gets dark automatically. Mayor Chmiel: Safety factor basically is what it really what it deals with. Councilman Mason: I don't know Don. I mean Carver Beach doesn't have lights and I kind of like it that way. Mayor Chmiel: Nor do we. Councilman Mason: You know, and even in the 8 years IYe lived here. I mean there's just so much light at night. Councilman Senn: I agree with you because I mean, if you need it you should have a switch to turn it on and off. Councilman Mason: Well, that's kind of how I grew up. And maybe they can convince me. I mean I'm not, I guess I want to hear what's going on with that. I would think the street lights would be enough. That's all I have to say. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Mark. Any questions you had of staff?. Councilman Mason: No. Councilman Senn: I share your concerns of lighting. But other than that, I guess it's not specific to this project. I think Colleen and Mike have covered most of the issues. One thing I'm a little bit uneasy about is, it seems like lately we've had a lot of these projects coming through and maybe it's just that these types of projects are being clustered now and all the single family were clustered at another time. But I'm getting real uneasy with this feeling that lately weYe been approving a lot of, call it attached single family homes but in some form of multiples. Most of them so far that weYe seen I think have been upper bracket. This one, as I understand it, is going to be more of a moderate bracket. From $110 to maybe $169, which pleases me if that's true. I guess that's one thing I'd like to confirm. But secondly, I think it would be a real good idea, or at least I think it would be a good idea at this point to kind of just put some overall perspective together of how many of these projects we do have out there in relationship to. Kate Aanenson: We did put that together. I appreciate you calling this afternoon. Just to give you some background on that. When we updated the comprehensive plan back in 1991 we looked at a housing element and we gave an allocation of what percentage should be single family. What percentage should be multi-family so anything that's coming in has been guided for that so we are consistent with those guidelines. And Bob did pull some numbers together and we're still below what those guidelines were and I'll let Bob share with you what research we did pull together quickly for you but we're still consistent with our overall housing goals with that mix. 26 City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 Councilman Senn: But in addition, I mean the other part that I'm trying to get at, other than the mix, is the pricing. Kate Aanenson: Sure. Well let me talk about that. First of all Mission Hills is doing very well and they're starting at $75. I think weYe got a pretty good mix. If you look at the Oaks, those started at $75 and now they're going with the second phase, it's going back to the Planning Commission° Excuse me, that'd be the third phase. I think those are starting to move up in price. They started at $75. I think they're predominantly under the $90,000.00 but this next phase they're going with a little bit different product. The one on the top facing Saddlebrook are going to be closer to $120. Predominantly Mission Hills is lower end. I think we're actually seeing the price, I think weYe seen a pretty good mix. If you go down to Lake Susan, those ended up, Prairie Creek ended up being the upper end. Closer to the $200,000.00. So actually I think weYe seen a pretty good mix in price range and this one falls somewhere inbetween. So there's two components I guess to your question. One, the price range and then are we staying consistent with our housing guidelines in the comprehensive plan and we believe we're still under that and if you want additional information, Bob did pull some numbers together on that if you're interested. Councilman Mason: Could they maybe go in the administrative packet next time or something like that. I mean I don't need to hear them now but rd kind of like to see. Kate Aanenson: Yeah. WeYe got that data that we gave, that Bob put together. Past, present and future. We kind of had to massage some of that but some of those numbers are there. Councilman Mason: That would be interesting to see that. Councilwoman Dockendorf: And I believe you gave the...Lake Ann Highlands° Kate Aanenson: Yeah, that was in that report too. Yeah, Bob put that in there. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Would the developer like to approach Council and show us what you're talking about. John Peterson: Mayor, members of the Council. I'm John Peterson. I'm President of Good Value Homes. I'll just try to comment on the staff recommendation items that I think need a little bit of discussion and then IYe jotted down some of the questions that youYe raised and I'll try to answer those also. Staff recommendation number 3 regarding the frontage road. The inability I guess you could say of the city to participate in the 429 assessment policy is a bit troublesome for us. We will, it-impacts the feasibility of the project. It is not impossible for us to construct it as...project but there are some issues on the street that's this wide and it's beyond the normal residential street in terms of it's width and...and so I think probably at some point we're going to have to do some talking about that and there may have already been some discussions regarding some kind of city participation in that at some point but that's a bit troublesome and it caught us a little bit by surprise. That we couldn't go on a 429. But one of the things that makes it somewhat more feasible is the fact that Betty O'Shaughnessy and Good Value Homes, that there are really only two property owners involved. It isn't a matter of assessing it to a number of properties and that makes it somewhat more feasible. Item 4, rma little bit concerned about it. I didn't mention it at the Planning Commission and I wish, I forgot frankly. This is the position that we're in with this development. There's a rather major wetland crossing that the city would like to have, you'd like to continue that frontage road to the west to the Opus property. In my recent experience with the Department of Natural Resources in almost identical situations, we have not been able to get the permits. But weYe had a lot of discussion with the staff and we are led to believe that we can get that permit~ 27 City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 All of the work that weYe done up to this point, weYe spent thousands and thousands of dollars on engineering, is all at risk when it comes to you getting that permit across that wetland. And that also is a troublesome component to us. If it turns out that the DNR's position remains as firm as it has been with us and our experience in other localities and can't be achieved, then I really don't know where we go. Then we have a rather major problem. I would have preferred that this approval would have been granted without that contingency. That is, if you can't get the permit, then you don't have a collector. But we still have a development but you don't have a collector. That would have been my preference. I should have, and I'm just raising these few issues but weYe made huge progress with your staff and the number of issues on this project was, is substantial and most of them have been taken care of but that's one that we have not quite been able to come to grips with totally. We can go on to item 21. Full park dedication. I did mention this at the Planning Commission and it's not something that they normally deal with but I indicated at that time that I would be bringing it to you. The Park Commission is asking that we give the normal park dedication. That we give a 20 foot easement for a trail. And that we construct the trail at our cost. And the original staff recommendation was that we pay the full park dedication. That we give the 20 foot easement and that we get three bids to construct the asphalt trail and that that amount, that the amount of that bid be deducted from our park dedication. I feel strongly that asking for full park dedication of land and the construction of the trail is unreasonable. Now I did not appear before your Park Board to make that point unfortunately. I don't know if that would have made a difference or not but I'm asking you that we be required to pay the park dedication and that we give you the easement for the trail and that we build the trail but that we be reimbursed from the park ftmds for the cost of that trail. We had a minor skirmish early on between the townhomes and this nice wetland. It would be our preference to not have a trail of course but I'm sure you hear that from developers all the time. Mayor Chmiel: All the time. John Peterson: Yeah. So we lost that one but we understand the benefit of a trail also. Just a couple other issues that are not in the staff that were raised. I wonder if Mr. Generous, if you could turn on the overhead for just one moment please. It may, right about where Outlot B is in the, it would be the west central part of the plat, there is all this space in that area. In fact I'll walk over. This land in here is upland. It made sense to me to make the exchange to give a density credit for that type of upland but we lost that argument at the staff level I think. It's a different kind of upland so the question was, how you categorize upland and does it have to be the same type of upland. I guess my point is that there is also a substantial amount of wetland in that area where Outlot A is now. Now it's marginal soils. It's not easy to build on and it will never be built on. But the piece of property that weYe exchanged is a very nice piece of wooded land that the city will be able to get. The building colors, we can do this any way you like. I brought with me samples and one of the things that, one of the ways that we can't do it is the way I think staff, what I read in the staff report, it said let the individual buyers decide what colors their units will be. I may have misread that but I think that's what it said and I don't think, that is not the way we would like to go. We would prefer to go with one color. Not because of the cost. We think it looks better. We think it makes a nicer neighborhood but we have, if you would like us to select, or if you would like to select a color for our units, that's fine. They would be taken from a pallet something like that. And I'm a little unsure what kind of involvement that you want in that process. But you see that these are basically earth tones and they run from the grays to the beiges. Cream color units. And we can do any of this. But it would be our preference to go with the same color. It was my understanding on the question of exterior lighting, which was raised here, that we would not have street lights. That the only lighting provided in the neighborhood would be at each garage, and that was the reason for the photo cells, and that would be neighborhood type or lighting from each of the units. I have with me Derrick Passe, if you have other 28 City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 specific questions about the engineering. Or Betty O'Shaughnessy is also here to answer questions about the balance of the property and I of course would be happy to answer any other questions you would have, Mayor Chmiel: Good, thanks. Okay, does Council have any questions? Colleen. Do you have any questions regarding some of the items that were brought up as well? Councilwoman Dockendorf: Well, I wish Todd Hoffman were here so we could get an answer on our SOP is on trail fees plus construction plus dedication. Kate, can you pinch hit? Kate Aanenson: Well I guess we're left with what the recommendation was from the Park and Recreation Commission. Cotmcilwoman Dockendorf: So you don't know the history? Oh, you do Bob? Bob Generous: Well the Park Commission said the same thing. What are we getting out of this planned unit development? Councilwoman Dockendorf: Oh, so it's part of the PUD agreement° Bob Generous: So, because we're allowing them to transfer the density and do that. They can also build the trail. Councilwoman Dockendorf: I had one more thing. I guess I agree with Mr. Peterson that let's not leave it to the perspective home buyers to pick the colors, which would mean we'd strike the last sentence of condition 20° You guys can pick them as long as there is a variety. I don't believe in the° Kate Aanenson: I guess that was our intent is that there be a, for the buildings. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Right. Well yeah. But let's do it in advance as opposed to, yeahc I don't have anything else. Mayor Chmiel: I don't think we want to put our two cents in and start designing and having colors and stripes and whatever else. No. We're not in that business. Michael. Councilman Mason: Well okay~ Now I don't know what's going on with the lighting. The staff report it says street lights and the photo ceils. Kate Aanenson: Maybe Charles can comment. It's typical on a collector street that we would have street lights every 200 to 300 feet, I believe on Galpin. Those would be private interior streets and I'm not sure what° Charles Folch: The segment of McGlynn Road that the city is putting in, that will have the cortin lighting that you see off of the downtown. Spacing is probably somewhere in the 150 to 180 foot range. It'd be 25 foot high. That's been our theme for collector type roads. Kerber's that way. Audubon's that way. All the Lake Drive segments, they have lighting. If we are to have a continuation of McGlynn Drive as a collector road to the west, we would expect that we would maintain a similar lighting theme along McGlynn Drive. At this point, we're not proposing any lighting theme on Galpin Boulevard with the project that the city's undertaking 29 City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 basically because Galpin itself, at this point, well even after our project it would still maintain more of a rural atmosphere, if you will, to the roadway. So there isn't any lighting proposed on Galpin with the County project. Mayor Chmiel: Are you looking at 175 watt? 200 watt, for the lighting? Charles Folch: Actually they will be 250's I believe. Mayor Chmiel: 250. You can go as much as that. Directional kind of lighting. Prisms contained. Charles Folch: Pardon me? Mayor Chrniel: Prisms contained within the heads of those fixtures. Charles Folch: Right...and in the cases where there may be some impacts with adjacent residential property, there's a back shield that they can put on each of the luminars so that the light is directed strictly towards the roadway and not, control the back lighting, the lumination that occurs. Mayor Chmiel: Although you may have some people who like to read their newspaper by that light and not turn on their own house lights. Yes. John Peterson: Excuse me. Just a clarification. I didn't mean to imply that there was a problem from our perspective with the street lights on the frontage road. I was thinking about street lights within the subdivision within the private streets. And our private streets and the association itself is the portion of our development that I thought would be lighted by our lights on the front of each home. I don't know if that clarifies that. Councilman Mason: I want to go on record as saying, it seems if residents want lights on, they'll turn them on and I quite honestly live next door to someone that has a photo cell and it drives me nuts because it shines in my window and they're not, I mean if I want a light on, I turn it on. If I don't, I turn it off. I guess I'd like to know, I mean I want to move on this tonight but item 21. I hear what Mr. Peterson. Mayor Chmiel: Can I just clarify something? What you're saying with that light that comes on and goes off, and it does it intermittedly during the evening. Councilman Mason: Oh no. No. It's a photo cell and it's on. No, it's not a motion. Now if they want to have motion cells, fine. But I guess I don't know why we need. Well. Mayor Chrniel: No, that wasn't my... Councilman Mason: And I'm not knocking the developer here. I just don't understand why we need lights on all the time. I disagree with that. Councilman Senn: If we do, I'd rather see street lights. Councilman Mason: Well yeah. But I would like, I guess I'm not saying I necessarily agree but I do, I'm also concerned with what Mr. Peterson has to say about having to do the park and trail fees and build the trail. I mean if that is standard practice, and yeah. I know there's a trade-off in the PUD there so I don't know. 21 I 30 City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 guess I think is open to some discussion but other than that, what about Mr. Peterson's concern about number 4. About the collector. Kate Aanenson: I can comment on that. That's a collector street. The Planning Commission got into that discussion of whether or not that street should go through and always that was our intent, especially with the development of the Gateway project. That that street function as a collector street. Allow movement without having to get onto Highway 5. If those people want to get over to the School property to do recreation or whatever, they don't have to get out onto TH 5. It's our objective to make that continuous connection all the way to TH 41 on McGlynn Drive. As far as getting permitting, we worked with the DNR in having it staked. Certainly if he couldn't get the permits, the project couldn't go through. That's the access to the project. How else would it be serviced? I'm not sure. Maybe Charles has additional comments on that but that is the access to get into that project. We have worked with the DNR. We think there's good dialogue there that we do the requirements. The 2:1 mitigation and that will come about. And this project has been in the works, there's been several different versions of it but we believe that through our dialogue with them. there's an understanding of what we're trying to do with this project and we believe that they'll be able to accomplish that objective as long as he stays within the requirements. Councilman Mason: Okay, that's fine. That's fine, Mayor Chmiel: Any other questions? Councilman Mason: No. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Mark. Councilman Senn: Kate, as I understood it as it relates to density now, okay. I thought overall, given the PUD we ended up less than we could have under simply applying normal densities without the PUD. Is that not correct? Am I not being clear? Councilwoman Dockendorf: As I understand thiso_we're at 3.99° Bob Generous: They need to transfer. They'd have to lose some units on the southern, south of the frontage road to make it work without a PUD. Councilman Senn: Okay. So we're picking up more density by going with the PUD? Bob Generous: In that one area, yes. Councilman Senn: Well I know in the one area. I'm saying overall. Kate Aanenson: No, we're consistent. The maximum is 4. Bob Generous: Right. It's consistent with the. Kate Aanenson: Comprehensive plan. The 1 to 4. Councilman Senn: Consistent or below. 31 City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 Bob Generous: Yes. Councilwoman Dockendorf: .01 below. Councilman Senn: Okay, but my point is the developer is not picking up additional density as a result of the PUD. Councilwoman Dockendorf: It's just a transfer. Councilman Senn: Correct. And it's basically an allocation or transfer within the site area and I'm sorry, but I side with him in relationship to the park and dedication fee. Because just as one we had in here a couple weeks ago. I think that's beginning that you ask a little bit too much. I mean if we want it, I think they ought to get credit for it. And I think that's only fair. Again, if there were a trade-off that we were giving more density or something, then I could see turning around and asking for it. But when it's basically ending up being a wash, I don't see why we should be...because it's a PUD we should be getting something more and then ask for something more than we really deserve. Let's see here. Yeah. No, so I mean everything else I think my questions have been addressed. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Councilman Mason: Well, can we move on this with discussions to continue on item 21 then? Mayor Chmiel: I would suggest that's where we're going to go right now. Kate Aanenson: Yeah, it would have to come back before you for final. Mayor Chmiel: I think we have to look at item 3. Item 4. That was brought up. And item 21. And we've addressed the colors and so on and that's not a major concern. Councilman Mason: Well with that then, I'll 3, 4 and 21. Councilwoman Dockendorf: I'm not so concerned with 3 and 4. Councilman Senn: I'm not either. Councilman Mason: With what Kate said, I don't have an issue with 4. I mean it sounds like that's going to work. Councilman Senn: Yeah, I agree with Colleen's suggested change on 20. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Oh yeah, 20. Strike the last sentence from 20. Councilman Mason: And the developer was okay with that, right? Right. Councilwoman Dockendorf: So I think the only one that is up for consideration or further discussion before final plat is item 21. 32 City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 Mayor Chmiel: Item 21 is a major issue. Councilman Mason: Yep. And the photo cells. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Okay. No, I think it's legitimate. Councilman SeIm: I guess I'd like to see a true look at, is that a better way to go or street lighting a better way to go. If the real issue is lighting and security, why not give it some, rm going to say more order or more character than slapping a bunch of wall packs up on garages. I'm sorry. Councilman Mason: Well whatever, yeah. And my issue is, I guess I don't think we need all those lights in the city so, but I don't think. Mayor Chmiel: Maybe what we should do is ask the developer as to the reasoning for that. John Peterson: That's interesting. The reason we proposed the photo cells is because we most often are required to do it. Councilman Mason: Oh really? John Peterson: Right. In most cities they say how's it going to be lighted so we are increasingly, in our experience, putting them on more and more. But I prefer the photo cells to the street lights frankly. I think it looks more like a lit neighborhood than a big flood light. There are a lot of lights and I think it looks okay. I think it looks good in fact. The individual property owners are then paying for...but the city is not. But at any rate, if we could do this, just exactly the way we would like to do it, we would say we would like to put the photo cells on. Our second choice would be to not have to have neither photo cells nor street lights. Our third choice would be to have street lights. Mayor Chmiel: The basic portions with other communities that are looking at it, I think they do look at it from a safety aspect. And it's true. It does provide a certain amount of safety for a lot of people~ Councilman Mason: What's the crime rate in Chanhassen Don? Mayor Chmiel: Well, it isn't what it is right now but what it maybe might be. And we don't know what that's going to be either. Councilman Mason: Well yeah but so flick your light switch. Mayor Chmiel: Well that's tree. I think they can do that and I'm not talking..° Councilman Mason: Right, no. I understand. Mayor Chmiel: But I think the whole basic behind those kinds of lights is a safety aspect and that's all I can say. Councilman Mason: Well I think NSP wants the money. 33 City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 Mayor Chrniel: I'm not even thinking for that aspect. I sold all my stock. Councilman Mason: Oh, I'm just kidding you. Mayor Chmiel: But it really is. It does provide people with that security portion that some people really look for. Talking dark streets. The Mayor's house has had break in's into vehicles two different times and so...well baloney they do. But I do have a motion light now but it's after the fact. But I'm saying that some people do have that aspect of it. Councilman Mason: Well I guess I think you know, I don't believe I'm going to say this, of all people but we talk about government regulation and now we're going to mandate that everybody in this neighborhood, whether they want a light on or not, has to have a light on. Mayor Chmiel: They can have a choice too. They can always change it. Councilman Mason: Well, that's true too but they won't, would be my guess. But that's like I said. That's not going to stop this project. I personally like choice number 2 myself. But that can maybe come later. I'll make a motion to move conceptual and preliminary planned unit development, etc, etc, with. Mayor Chmiel: No, before you go that, do you want to approach 217 Councilman Mason: Well I was going to say, with discussions to continue on item 21 and will be decided upon before final plat approval. And I would also like that motion to add that at least one Councilmember does not want to see photo cells go up in this development. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Councilman Senn: Second. Mayor Chmiel: Moved and seconded. Any other discussion? Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Senn seconded to approve the Conceptual and Preliminary Planned Unit Development to rezone 11.4 acres from Agricultural Estate to A2, Planned Unit Development, PUD, for that property located south of McGlynn Drive which is shown as Block 1 and open space dedication~ preliminary plat creating 1 block with 47 lots, and two outlots and associated right-of-way for a residential low density development consisting of 46 dwelling units consisting of 13 twin homes and 5 fourplex buildings, and site plan approval for the five 4 unit structures, subject to the plans dated December 20, 1994 and the following conditions: Depending on scheduling of the frontage road, the applicant may incorporate construction of the retention pond into the overall development plans and receive credits towards their SWMP fees. Detailed storm sewer calculations for a 10 year storm event along with ponding calculations based on Walker's PONDNET methodology along with pre and post runoff conditions shall be submitted to city staff for review and approval prior to final plat consideration. , The applicant will be responsible for the appropriate water quantity and quality fees based on the City's Surface Water Management Plan. Staff has estimated the proposed development would be responsible for 34 City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 . o . . 10. 12. an estimated water quantity and quality fee of $21,997.00 and $10,517.00 assuming 9.2 acres of developable land. The applicant may be credited against these fees for portions of the mmk storm system or water quality improvements they install as a part of the overall development in accordance to the City's SWMP. Staff will review the final construction documents and determine the applicable credits, if any. The applicant shall petition the city to construction the frontage road within the development from Galpin Boulevard to the wetlands in conjunction with the overall site improvements. The frontage road shall be constructed in accordance to State Aid standards. Plans and specifications will be submit to review and approval by the Minnesota Department of Transportation, State Aid office. The applicant shall dedicate to the city at no cost the frontage road right-of-way. Subdivision approval is contingent upon the city receiving the necessary permits and approval from the governmental agencies such as DNR, Army Corps of Engineers for extending the frontage road across the wetlands to the Opus parcel and awarding a bide The applicant will be required to enter into a PUD development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial security and administration fees to guarantee compliance with the conditions of approval. The applicant shall design and construct the street and utility improvements in accordance to the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed construction plans and specifications for the public improvements shall be submitted to city staff for review and approval. The applicant shall provide a copy of the covenants for review and approval by the City and shall be filed at the County with the final plat documents. The applicant shall provide "as-built" locations and dimensions of all corrected house pads or other documentation acceptable to the Building Officialc The applicant shall apply for an obtain all necessary permits from the regulatory agencies such as the MPCA, Health Department, Watershed District, DNR, Army Corps of Engineers, MnDot, and Carver County Highway Department. The applicant shall report to the City Engineer the location of any drain tiles found during constructiom The applicant will comply with the City Engineer's direction as far as abandonment or relocation of the drain tile. The applicant shall develop a sediment and erosion control plan in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook (BMPH). Type 1II erosion control fencing will be required around the wetlands. The site may also require additional erosion control fence on the slopes and/or temporary sediment basins. Drainage and conservation easements shall be dedicated over all wetland areas within the subdivision including outlots. Wetland mitigation measures shall be developed and subject to approval by the. City. The mitigation measures shall be completed in conjunction with the site grading and restoratiom 35 City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 13. The final plat shall be contingent upon MnDot's State Aid office approving the street alignment for the east/west frontage road. Construction plans shall be revised accordingly as a result of the State Aid review process. 14. Wetland delineation along the western portion of Basin A should be re-evaluated. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. The applicant must meet City, State, and Federal permitted requirements for wetland alterations. Staff recommends that the wetland permit applicant combine the proposed project and the frontage road as one project. The developers and/or property owners shall waive any and all procedural or substantive objections to the special assessment resulting from the City's public improvement project for construction of the frontage road including but not limited to hearing requirements and claims that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the property. The private streets/driveways shall be constructed in accordance with the City's private driveway ordinance for low and/or medium density zoning. The applicant shall provide sanitary sewer services to the existing property lines of the three homes on the west side of Galpin Boulevard. The applicant shall be reimbursed their fair share of the cost to extend service to these homes when the parcels hook up to the sewer system. The applicant shall work with Southwest Metro Transit in the provision of bus stops/shelters within the development. The applicant shall submit additional information and more detail on issues such as tree preservation calculations and a Woodland Management Plan, perspectives from Highway 5 towards the development and building materials, textures, roofing treatment, and color schemes. Full park and trail fees shall be collected per city ordinance. This item will be clarified between the applicant and the City's Park Director prior to final plat. The applicant shall dedicate a 20 foot easement for tail purposes as identified on the preliminary plat for Autumn Ridge dated October 18, 1994. The developer shall construct an 8 foot wide asphalt trail per city specifications within the trail easement. This construction shall be completed in conjunction with street construction. Final alignment of this trail shall be staked by the developer and approved by the Parks and Recreation Director and City Engineer. Submit street names to the Public Safety Department, Inspections Division for review and approval prior to final plat approval. Adjust property lines to permit openings and projections in exterior walls or confirm that no openings or projections are planned. This must be done before preliminary plat approval. A ten foot clear space shall be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e. street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, NSP, NW Bell, cable television transformer boxes. This is to insure that fire hydrants can be quickly 36 City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 located and safely operated. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance Sec. 9.1. Fire hydrant placement shall be submit to review by the Fire Marshal. 27. 28. 29. The canopy coverage calculation needs to be verified by the applicant in order to determine the adequacy of the proposed Landscaping Plan. The tree preservation plan must be revised to accurately reflect existing tree canopy and proposed tree removal. A legal document shall be recorded combining the proposed 2.19 acres of dedicated open space to Block 1 of the development. This document shall also specify that all development rights for the dedicated open space have been transferred to Block 1 and that no future development of the dedicated open space area, with the exception of public trails, shall be permitted. A variety of neutral colors for siding be made available and presented to the City Council along with the proposed building materials for the construction of this complex. All voted in favor and the motion carried° APPOINTMENTS TO CENTENNIAL COMMISSION. Councilman Senn: I had a few comments if I could. Mayor Chmiel: Well, I'd like to have Todd first address this before any comments. Todd Gerhardt: Mr. Mayor, Honorable Council. Attached is a proposed list of Centennial Committee volunteers. Staff has met with most of these individuals over the last 2 months. WeYe had three meetings. At these meetings it's basically everybody's been kind of sharing their history of what Chanhassen has been in the last 100 years and weYe also discussed some potential events trying to piggy back onto city events on the celebration of May 5, 1996. The group has been talking about a parade. Possible ice cream social. Some historical demonstrations. Butter chum. Things of that sort. The group has talked about establishing a logo~ TheyYe asked that Karen and I put together to solicit citizens in the community to present or design logos for the official centennial logo. We will probably try to get an ad in the paper next week and look at review of those logos about a month from now. The group would also be interested in establishing some type of historical book or magazine. We're setting aside a day where citizens would come into the senior center and bring pictures from home and then we would take those pictures and scan them onto the computer and then do a computer image magazine, book. We feel that this is the best way to do it because most people won't part with their pictures for more than one day. And Dave Hanley who weYe been working with has volunteered to come in that day and do this free of charge. Some other things, they want to, they're just getting started. There's nothing concrete. WeYe been throwing ideas all over the place but they'd really like to try to have some kick off here in May to try to recognize that we'll start the celebration one year from that date. Another key thing that they really were interested in doing was nmning 100 years ago today articles in the newspaper and that we would establish some type of subcommittee that would be responsible to get articles to Dean and the Chanhassen Villager. And then pick from people in the community or from the Carver County Historical Society to talk about what happened 100 years ago today. With that, the City Council had directed us to bring back a list of committee members. This is not a commission. It's a committee of volunteers and have you, as a group, recognize those individuals to serve on that board. Mayor Chmiel: Goode Okay. 37 City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 Councilman Mason: A couple of quick questions. Do we have, at the risk of mentioning another neighboring city, i.e. Eden Prairie. They have a historian that has written a wonderful book on, and going back pre-white settlement. The whole thing and I wonder if there would be anyone in this committee or if we could find some sort of city historian that would be willing to undertake a project like that. Todd Gerhardt: Well, we've got bits and pieces out there. Karen and Bev have been working on the history of the Chanhassen Cemetery and then Marlin Stene who sits on the committee has interviewed 16 families that were founders of the Chanhassen area, so he has a substantial amount of history. He also serves on the Carver County Historical Society so he has access to their information. There's also the Golden Book from St. Hubert's that has collected a lot of history and there's also another book from Excelsior that has a lot of history. And what we want to do is to pull from bits and pieces of those and the Eden Prairie one would be a good one if they even talked about anything about Chanhassen. Councilman Mason: Yeah, I don't know but I know they put together a lot. I would hope that, and I think this is an excellent project. It will be fun. I love reading stuff like that. I would hope that it encompasses all the people that lived in and around the area at the time. Mayor Chmiel: It more than likely will. Todd Gerhardt: It's really fun to go to these meetings to hear some of the history and Marlin's research. You kind of had the Catholics down in this area and Miunewashta was kind of the Lutherans and people would segregate in different areas based on religion and farming and the lakes and things like that. And the factors they played and just how this city became a city too so they'd be recognized to get a liquor license. And that came 5 days I think after the city passed a resolution... Councilman Mason: Alright, good. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Is there any other discussion? Councilman Senn: Todd, is Marlin kind of the one steering the committee or? Todd Gerhardt: That's one thing the group, the last two meetings we've been instilling in them that there needs to be a leader and that Todd and Karen and I are not going to be the leader of this group. It should be somebody outside of the city and they haven't designated one yet so. I think Marlin would make an excellent candidate but Chuck and Ursula Dimler now have volunteered. I would hope that the groups would get together and start talking and find out who they feel comfortable with as a leader. But we had a lot of new members at our last meeting so something will come out of that at our next meeting. Mayor Chrniel: Don't forget to make a plug for additional members that come aboard. Todd Gerhardt: Yeah. I mean there's going to be a need for much more than this. Councilman Senn: Yeah, that's kind of what my comments were headed towards because I really would like to see us, I mean you're starting already to get quite a list. I mean youYe got about 20 people here now which is good. I mean we need much, much more than that but in formalizing this committee, you know which is what I think we should do, I think there's a couple other elements we need to do too. And I'd really like to see us either undertake an exercise here shortly to set a budget or at least have the group come back with the 38 City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 recommended budget very shortly so we can start setting the parameters on this one way or the other. I would also like to strongly suggest or see some way for the committee to really get going on setting up a...you start ending up with 20 people at every meeting. You know, I think you're going to end up into real problems. I mean it'd be nice to see a steering committee and a bunch of program committees that can really dig in and I think we'll attract more people with special interests going into various areas. Mayor Chmiel: I think the people that we have on that committee already are leaning in that direction and os it's moving forward with it. Councilman Seim: Okay. Well again, I'd just like to see that strong suggestion come up and formalizing the committee. Thirdly, I guess I'd like to strongly advocate in relationship to us formalizing the committee9 that we appoint a Chair or Co-Chairs for that committee. Personally I'd like to see Marlin and A1 appointed to co- chair but that's just my opinion. Because I think they'd do a good job on it and provide some good leadership to the committee. And let's see. I guess last, but not least, I'd like you to add me too because I'd like to volunteer and get active in it too. I don't know if anybody else on the Council wants to but rll be happy to be the... Councilwoman Dockendorf: I think it will be fun too. Mayor Chmiel: I think if everyone participates in it, it's going to make that function what it's supposed to be. Todd Gerhardt: We'll send you notices when all the meetings are and add you to the list. Is that the Council's prerogative to designate the Chair and the Co-Chair or do you want the committee to. Mayor Chmiel: No. Let the committee choose their own. Councilwoman Dockendorf: That's my opinion as well~ Councilman Senn: As long as they do it~ Councilwoman Dockendorf: Yeah. Like Mark said, they need some structure around it. A budget. Things like that. Councilman Senn: See it's been going on several meetings now and IYe been intentionally kind of staying out of it for a reason. But it's really not taking any structure yet so I'd like...hasten that process a littleo Todd Gerhardt: Yeah. The first two meetings we had, we had probably 5 to 7 people there. The last one we had, at least a dozen there so. Councilman Senn: Well, but that complicates your process more than helps it at this point. The more people you get involved. Todd Gerhardt: It does. And a lot of them were first time so of course they want to give their history of Chanhassen. But I did hand out, everybody does have a copy of Contact the League of Minnesota Cities and they sent them helpful information in establishing this type of committee and planning for this event. And in there they discuss this establishing a budget committee, marketing committee, safety committee and then of 39 City Council Meeting ~ February 27, 1995 course a hierarchy, co-chair, treasurer, secretary, that would oversee the operation. So at our next meeting it will be on an agenda to designate both for a chair, co-chair and the rest. Councilman Senn: How long do you think it would be before you come back or before some type of a tentative budget could be proposed? Todd Gerhardt: I would say. Mayor Chmiel: It's going to take a couple, 2 to 3 meetings yet I think. Councilman Senn: No, I understand. I'm just kind of looking for some type of time line that we can peg. Within a few months you think? Todd Gerhardt: Yeah. April, May, June timeframe would probably be realistic. TheyYe been pretty creative in how to figure out money and if they go along with a lot of the city events, Todd said that he could include a lot of the marketing in with his city events. So the one big program that would be'the May 5th program that we would have to really establish a marketing budget on that day. But once that committee gets together, they'll start honing out. They might need some seed money to get going on selling t-shirts and the sweatshirts with the logo and that kind of stuff but they're hopefully going to do that to make money too. Mayor Chmiel: I guess the major concern was getting a band. Making sure that they start looking at that right now for a year from now. Todd Gerhardt: I had contacted both school districts to see if the band would be available. Mayor Chmiel: Floats. Parades. Whole bunch of things. Councilman Senn: IYe talked to a couple of fairly large corporations, or I mean companies in town. I mean they're really willing to tie in in a big way to some of this stuff and that's part of I think getting what your needs are out laid and then it's easier to go back to them and say. Todd Gerhardt: Well I see the Legion contributing. I see the community associations, Lions, Rotary and all those people getting active in this and then of course the Chamber. This is going to be their big promo for the year so. This is a small list and they want to be a part of the subcommittee and plan for certain parts of it. They don't want to take on the whole thing. The Chamber will take on a portion and the Lions. Mayor Chrniel: Okay. Can we get a motion to consider appointments to that Centennial Committee. Councilman Mason: So moved. Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second? Councilwoman Dockendorf: Seconded. Councilman Mason moved, Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded to consider the appointments as presented for the Centennial Committee. All voted in favor and the motion carried. 40 City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: A. LAKE MANAGEMENT PLANS. WATER RESOURCES COORDINATOR. Councilman Mason: We're just accepting this document tonight, right? Kate Aanenson: I have a short presentation. Mayor Chmiel: Very short? Thank you. Kate Aanenson: On the Lake Management Plan, I'm passing out to you a newsletter. What was included in your packet is a lake management plan. We're doing one for Lotus, Riley, and Minnewashta. Tiffs is intended to be a dynamic document. There will be a limited number of these printed up. We'll have those available in the library and at the meeting, but what the intent of this document is to be a starting point with the intentions that Diane has. We're sending out mailings for workshops and IYe got those dates-if you're interested. We're hoping that each Council person can pick a lake in their neighborhood. For instance Mark, I would assume that you would be available or be interested in Lotus Lake one which would be March 20th. But what Diane's intention is a mailing was given to all riparian owners plus those members that are part of the beachlot and what the purpose is to bring ownership as part of the storm water management and we're looking at not only wetlands and lakes but as You know we're interested in doing a study of Bluff Creek so this is one component of our water resource plan. So what Diane's trying to do is get ownership of these lakes. Try to improve their quality and the best way to do that is to talk to the people that live on the lake and get their recommendation and this is how we can prioritize projects to improve the quality of the lakes. Whether it be finding out from there where there's problem areas or just getting some direction as far as prioritization. So what these meetings would be held then would be to get input from the different lake associations. So this would is a starting point...and again there's only 25 of these printed up. If anyone specifically is interested, it's not our intention to give each person on the lake a copy of this sort of document but you'll get copies of all the lake documents and then to keep updating these as information becomes available and the do monitoring and that sort of thing~ Councilwoman Dockendorf: And this is in the library or something? Kate Aanenson: Yeah. It will be available in the library. Yes, so if people are doing school projects, that information as we update it. As we do projects, those projects that we do will be put in here. We also, part of our intention is to go back and do additional monitoring to see the projects that we're doing. What that's doing to lake quality so that data will also be added to these documents. So as I indicated, it is a starting point. It is intended to be a dynamic document and it will be added to as we go along. Just in case you were interested in some of the other meetings. Lake Riley will be meeting March 21st, and then Minnewashta March 22ndo Mark had talked to me earlier about questions about cost of what we're spending on this so far. As you recall, we allocated. We combined two budgets. One we had for erosion and one we had for lake management and we felt it was better just to combine those two. As you recall in the budget we put $40,000.00 in for what we called water or lake management resources. Of that $40,000.00, $10,000.00 will be spent on actually doing the mailings and holding the neighborhood meetings in this document. The other $30,000.00 will be implementation but it's also our intent to use the storm water fund to do a lot of the other implementation or prioritization for these projects. So again I'm filling in for Diane and it's just kind of a FYI and we hope that some of you can attend some of the meetings on any of the lakes that would be of interest to you. 41 City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 B. SET WORK SESSION DATES. CITY MANAGER, Don Ashworth: That's it as far as your's? Kate Aanenson: Yeah. Don Ashworth: The next item on there was 8(b) which was the work session dates. And I don't know if you saw the note from Steve but I think all he wrote down was "wow" or. Councilman Mason: Holy cow. No, that was for 8(a). Councilwoman Dockendorf: No, no. He said, set any date your heart desires. Don Ashworth: Okay I should note, under senior housing we do show 3/6/95. That's impossible. We will not have the enclosures and instead on senior housing I'm recommending 3/16, 3/20 or 3/23. The 16th and the 23rd which favor the HRA schedules for Thursday evenings. The 20th would favor your schedule for a Monday evening. Councilman Mason: Don, when did you want to do that again please? Oh, the 16th, 20th or. Don Ashworth: Again, if you would cross off the 3/6/95 under the senior housing. We will be in a position to do the city hall expansion for next Monday would be an off Monday. But we do need decisions in regards to the senior housing and that truly is, kind of a joint funded project. The city is being asked to do certain things as a part of that and the HRA is being asked so it really should be a joint meeting where you're both saying, I'll go through. I am willing to accept my responsibilities and the other group says I'm willing to accept my responsibilities. Councilman Mason: Well, can we tie all that in on the 16th of March then? Don Ashworth: Yep. Councilman Mason: Is that what you're? Don Ashworth: I can do, I could have everything ready by the 16th, 20th or 23rd. Councilwoman Dockendorf: I'd prefer the 20th. Councilman Mason: Well, IYe already got to be here the 16th. I'd prefer the 16th but we can flip a coin or something. Don Ashworth: That one will have a lot of seniors here so if you want to. Councilman Mason: Oh, okay. Well, Mark just said he can't do the 16th so let's go for the 20th. Mayor Chrniel: No, we have it down for Council work session on seniors for the 20th, right? Don Ashworth: That's what I'm proposing. 42 City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 Councilwoman Dockendorf: I'd prefer the 20th. Councilman Mason: So that's senior housing only? Don Ashworth: And Don brought out a good point, and that is seniors would prefer to meet early. So like at 6:00 or 615. Councilman Mason: 6:00 is okay by me. Don Ashworth: How about for this next Monday? 6:00 as well? We will feed you on the 6th. The one on the 20th, again with all the seniors present. We"Il probably do another memo thing that says, if you're here early we'll have pizza available or something in the courtyard but then come down here. Or maybe you want to do a 6:30 where you do something up there at 6:00 and come down here at 6:30. Councilman Mason: Well I'd just as soon go as early as possible. Quite honestly, that week is just chaos for me. Mayor Chmiel: 6:157 Or 6:00? Councilwoman Dockendorf: Let's just do 6:00. Councilman Mason: 6:00 is fine with me. Alright. So, I'm sorry, rll admit to being a little out to lunch right now. Both of those are on senior housing, right? Councilwoman Dockendorf: No. Don Ashworth: Just one. Councilman Mason: Well, so which, I'm sorry. Councilwoman Dockendorf: City Hall expansion. Councilman Senn: Okay, so we're saying the 6th is also 6:00 then? Don Ashworth: Yes. Councilman Senn: Before we leave the March work sessions. I pulled l(f) and the reason I pulled l(f) is you're asking to set April 17th as the Board of Review. Prior to that Board of Review I thought we kind of had a commitment that we were going to get a lot of information about how the Assessor uses the formulas. What the formulas are. What areas he was proposing to raise and why. More or less what the rationale behind it was, and we were going to have time to discuss and look at that before we ended up in a situation where he was setting it and going to the Board of Review. So I mean, it seems to me weYe got. Don Ashworth: IYe scheduled, that's item number 3. I was just getting there. Board of Review, 4/3. Actually I should have shown the 4/17 then as well. So in other words, I'm proposing that as a work session for 4/3 and then the actual... 43 City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 Councilman Senn: Oh, okay. Not the actual Board of Review then because I was confused. Don Ashworth: Maybe you should. Maybe right under 4/3 if you write in 4/17 and then show that as official board date or however you want to do it. So the first one then would, after Board of Review should have probably said work session 4/3 and then hearing would be 4/17. Councilman Mason: Don, when is the hearing? I don't recall a time? Do you know? Don Ashworth: 7:00 p.m. Councilman Senn: Okay, and then the 3rd. What time are we going to go on the 3rd? Councilman Mason: Can we go 6:30 or later on that? Don Ashworth: 6:30. And we will feed you on that one and we will feed you on the 2nd. The only one we won't is on the 20th. And I could make food available after the senior thing but I guess that's up to you. Then I was just picking out dates. I think I would be ready to do an update on affordable housing if you wanted. See here, now you're getting into kind of ranking. I don't know if affordable housing is a higher rank than code of ethics higher than County 17. Organized collection. Mayor Chmiel: Well I'd like to get that code of ethics out of the way as well. Councilwoman Dockendorf: What kind of discussion do we have on code of ethics? I'm not sure. Isn't that just a document to review? Mayor Chrniel: Just a document for review and some of the things that we wanted to see in it. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Do we need a work session on it? Don Ashworth: Well my recollection was that Roger started going through that at a regular meeting and said, I think what you really should know is some of the things that I haven't put in here are maybe just as important as to what I have put in and somebody had said, gee. I'd sure like to hear what it is that you didn't put in here and that's when you decided to do the work session. I don't know if you remember, or if I'm correctly stating that. Councilman Senn: Well, we're not going to be able to do anything else the night of the 17th I assume, right? I mean Board of Review's going to eat up the whole evening. Mayor Chmiel: Well yeah, conceivably it could depending. Don Ashworth: Oh, the 17th. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. I think that's just dedicated to that. Don Ashworth: Actually the 17th, the way we set that up is very similar to last year where he, myself and Orlin are going to kind of be in front and we'll take all of their comments. Really the City Council's kind of sitting in the audience and kind of listening. That's what we did last year. And then at the end of that we told 44 City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 the people, alright. The Assessor will take and go back through each one of these questions that have been raised and this item will appear on the next regular City Council, which would be whatever that date was. And so when you actually met as a group, we had very few questions. I think we were down to 7 or 8 people. The meeting 4/3rd. April 3rd with the Assessor, as a work session, I think that that will be relatively short. I mean I think he can get through assessment practices, what areas of the city have been hit, what has been the general increase and I would think that after he made his presentation in a half hour, you wouldn't have over a half hour of questions, but I may be wrong. You probably could do something like Code of Ethics that same night. Or at least start it. Councilman Mason: Well let's try and do that. If it works, works. Councilman Senn: So that will be 4k3 then? Don Ashworth: And since we're now out into April, why don't we just leave the rest of this list as maybe just kind of tentative with the idea that I'd bring it back at another time. Councilman Mason: I think that's a fine idea. Don Ashworth: We'd relook at it. Councilman Senn: Only one question though. Didn't we set kind of a date certain on organized collection for them to go and get... Don Ashworth: No, you instructed staff to try to put together a date when the haulers could meet with the Council but the only way I could do it at this point would be if you revised this and said, okay. We want to do something earlier than what you had it. Councilman Senn: Okay. So we didn't really say we wanted to do it by a certain date? Don Ashworth: No. The haulers have all called and they say, well heckc If you want to make it for December Don, that's okay. We're not going to get anything done this year. Kate Aanenson: Road restrictions was the issue and weYe already missed the road restrictions. Mayor Chmiel: Right. Councilman Mason: One real quick thing. I will be out of town on the 27th of March. The next Council meeting. Just so everybody knowse Steve will be here the 13th. We'll all be here to do commission appointments on the 13th. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. Councilman Mason: The 27th is spring break. And I will be up north. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, let's move it on. Let's go to item l(c). 45 City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 Councilman Senn: Before we do, a couple questions if I could on the Administrative. Do we do that under Administrative Section or not? Mayor Chmiel: Well normally that should have been given at the. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Approval of agenda. Councilman Senn: Oh okay. Well I'll save them and put them on next time then. I don't care. CONSENT AGENDA: C. STONE CREEK 5TH ADDITION. HANS HAGEN HOMES. Councilwoman Dockendorf: As part of the final plat approval I have discussed with Kate and Charles the fact that the meeting of Stone Creek and Timberwood really looks pretty awful. We've got some road blocks basically and what I'd like to see is a condition of the final plat is some tree plantings there. And I don't know if weYe had any discussions with Hans Hagen at all in that regard. Kate Aanenson: Well Charles went out and looked at it. You know there is a drainage ditch that goes through there. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Right. Yeah, and Charles has indicated that there may be some way of putting some plantings in. Kate Aanenson: Well the other issue too is, as you're aware, living in that neighborhood, that's where people from that neighborhood are going to come down to get onto the trail to get to that park. So we need to make sure that we have access. We're not blocking. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Right, but we're talking about 40 feet that's pretty open and the trail head is only on one side of it. So I would really like some negotiations to go on with Hans Hagen to see how we can put some substantial tree plantings there to make up for what was taken down. Kate Aanenson: Okay. Can I maybe get a clarification from Roger on that? We're finalling plat on the 5th Addition. I believe that was probably the 4th or the 3rd Addition. To go back and put trees on that with approval of the 5th Addition. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Can you make that a condition? Kate Aanenson: It's all part of the same subdivision. Roger Knutson: The 4th is done. It's been approved. Kate Aanenson: This is contiguous to that though. Roger Knutson: Is the 5th driving that? Otherwise, I think you could...discussions with the developer on what you think is appropriate. 46 City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 Councilwoman Dockendorf: And maybe that's the direction we go. I mean it looks just as crummy from their side as it does from Timberwood. Kate Aanenson: Sure. I think we understand what you'd like us to do and can work with him on that~ Councilwoman Dockendorf: Okay, that's all. With that rd move approval. Councilman Mason: Second. Councilwoman Dockendorf moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the Final Plat, Development Contract and Construction Plans and specifications for Stone Creek 5th Addition, Hans Hagen Homes. All voted in favor and the motion carried. F. SET DATE FOR BOARD OF REVIEW AND EOUALIZATION. Mayor Chmiel: Item (f), and I think weYe already discussed that. Councilman Senn: Yep. You probably need to take an action though, or what? Mayor Chmiel: Right. Councilman Senn moved, Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded to set the date for the Board of Review and Equalization to April 17, 1995. All voted in favor and the motion carrie& L. APPROVAL OF BI1,LS. Councilman Senn: I just pulled this so I can vote against it so you can go ahead. Councilwoman Dockendorf: I'd move approvalc Mayor Chmiel: Okay. I'll second it. Councilwoman Dockendorf moved, Mayor Chmiel seconded to approve the bills as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Councilwoman Dockendorf: rd like to know why~ Mayor Chmiel: One quick answer. Councilman Senn: It's not a quick answer so rll let you know. There was one, where is it here? Mayor Chmiel: That was it. Councilman Senn: I would like some discussion on the vehicle lease though before we implement that in the Administrative packet. We can do that at a work session. The other thing is my commitment at the last work session was to talk to the auditor and get back to you. I assume the best place to do that would be in the next work session likewise? 47 City Council Meeting - February 27, 1995 Don Ashworth: On what item? Councilman Senn: I was going to talk to the auditor on finance...and get back to the Council on that. Don Ashworth: Okay. Councilman Senn: So should we just do that at the work session then? That makes more sense I think. Don Ashworth: Sure. Mayor Chrniel: Alright. Any other discussions? Councilman Mason moved, Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 9:55 p.m. Submitted by Don Ashworth City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim 48