The URL can be used to link to this page

CC Minutes 1994 05 23CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MAY 23, 1994 Mayor Chmiel called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag. MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Chmiel, Councilman Wing, Councilwoman Dockendorf, Councilman Mason and Councilman Senn STAFF PRESENT: Don Ashworth, Roger Knutson, Todd Gerhardt, Charles Folch, Scott Hart, Todd Hoffman, Kate Aanenson, and Bob Generous APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Wing seconded to approve the agenda with the following additions under Council Presentations: Councilman Senn wanted to discuss Community Center Reciprocal Agreement and Councilwoman Dockendorf wanted to discuss soil corrections on the south frontage road by the new elementary school site. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Wing moved, Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded to approve the following Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations: a. Resolution g94-53: Approve Plans and Specifications for Well No. 7; Authorize Advertising for Bids, Project No. 94-3. d. Approve Summary Ordinance for Publication Purposes, Discharges into the Sanitary Sewer System Ordinance. e. Approval of Accounts. City Council Minutes dated May 9, 1994 Board of Review Minutes dated May 9, 1994 Planning Commission Minutes dated May 4, 1994 Park and Recreation Commission Minutes dated April 26, 1994 All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. B. OAK PONDS 2ND ADDITION, DEAN JOHNSON CONSTRUCTION. Mayor Chmiel: Oak Ponds 2nd Addition. I've had some discussion with Kate and I would, for those who may have been here to, who were some of the objectors as to some of the things that were happening, I guess I wanted some clarification from her in regards to this so Kate, would you do that. Kate Aanenson: Yes, thank you. We did receive a letter. It was given to the staff but it was written to the Mayor from two of the residents that have kind of been involved in this process...Anderson and Dave Callister and they...as far as issues that they felt needed to be...and I've spoken to the developer and we feel like all the conditions are in the contract. We are making sure that they are being followed and...they want to make sure that we're tracking these and we have been doing that, I think the conditions are in place... Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. With that I would move item l(b). Is there a second? Councilman Mason: Second. Mayor Chmicl: Moved and seconded, Any discussion? Richard. Councilman Wing: Well I wanted to pull it also to be on record as such. The only comment before we pass this. I'd like to just back up to a philosophical issue for staff. That with our new ordinance now on renderings, computer imaging, elevations, I have to ask Mark what that is because I still don't understand but it sounds like a great idea. I think this one it probably would have resolved the problem. But when we did the Highway 5 corridor tours, one of the primary focal points of the city was that hill and those trees and what happen~ out there, to me makes Rapid Oil look really tame. And so much for landform and so much for windows and suddenly I pull in and I see the total destruction of that hill and the placement of the buildings that are pretty symmetrical and some of the names that we used for them haven't been real, they haven't been complimentary and I haven't gone that far. But I think this is a real indication that if the Council, and it's pretty much starting at staff but then up to the Council level we have to see what's going on with a lot more information and a lot more pictorials if you will and we've got to start using our ordinance because siaing on the Council, had I known we were going to totally see the obliteration of that hill and the placement of square buildings in rows, symmetric rows like that, I think I would have reacted and asked for a little better development. I'm not real happy with what's occurred and I guess it's a learning process and I take accountability for that. I did not, I was naive enough to think that this was okay and this isn't what I voted for. I mean I did vote for it but I didn't vote for it. I'm going to stop right there before I stub my toe anymore. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Just to add onto that. I too wanted to pull this item and I guess I can't say it any more eloquently than Richard besides stubbing my toe and saying, that they look like barracks. I'm very disappointed and I think the ordinance will help with future developments. Mayor Chmiel: Any other discussion? Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the Final Plat, Development Contract and Plans and Specifications for Oak Ponds 2nd Addition, Project No. 94-11, Dean Johnson Construction. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: ANN OSBORN, CHANHASSEN REPRESENTATIVE FOR MINNETONKA COMMUNITY EDUCATION AND SERVICES BOARD. Ann Osborn: Hi, I'm delighted to be here to represent Minnetonka Community Education and Services Advisory Council and especially...representing you on our Board. I want to give you a little bit of information about the Advisory Council. Some of you know pretty well and some of you don't know too much about it. Minnetonka Community Education and Services, it's...to provide assistance, education, recreational activities and enrichment for all members of our community. There are 10 communities involved, of which Chanhassen is one. On our Board each community has a representative and there are 5 representatives from the School District and 5 at large, up to 5 at large members, of which one of your Council members, an at large member Mark Senn is on our Board. We are very lucky today. This Thursday is our annual meeting and so the annual report, which was available for Thursday is now available to you today. So you actually got it before our Board did. And it will show you something about our program. One of the interesting terminology that has developed in community education is the term El2+ which means that we're providing education to the community throughout their lifetimes basically. And I kind of like that term. The purpose of it is, of the Advisory Council, which I represent, is to establish personnel policies, direct the community education programs and...as far as the fiscal operation of it and establish the budget for MCES. We meet the second Thursday of every month at 7:30 at the Minnetonka School Administration Building. Because Chanhassen is kind of interesting in that about half of our community belongs to the Minnetonka school system and about half belong to Chaska, it makes you folks have kind of an interesting time in looking at what our programs are. Among some of the objectives of what we do is 2 City Council Meeting - May 23, 1994 to make greater use and sharing...talents and resources. Greater use of educational and community facilities, improve community and school relationships and increase...coordinafion and cooperation. And one of the prime interests is increased citizen involvement, ff you would like to kind of quickly leaf through the annual report, which you all have in front of you. I thought I'd just highlight a couple of programs that we have, which is kind of a special. One of the programs that has gotten a lot of notice is our senior to senior skill.q bank which is available in our adult education program. It's opportunities for people of all ages to assist older adults in their home, and has been a very popular project. I'm sure you've all seen in the newspaper our Rake-a-Thon which has this year, we had 800 workers who raked 59 homes. We also provide...programs which enable parents to get more involved with their children in school and so forth. In addition to that, the Early Childhood Family Education program involves the parents and the children in the education process together. Our Explorers Club, which is run through our youth program, has an aspect of it which I think is delightful. It's called the Whatchyamacallits program. And the whatchyamacallits is for those kids who really don't want to be considered kids anymore. They want to be, they're 5th and 6th graders, older children, who their parents would like to have care and yet it actually gives them an opportunity to do some of the planning themselves. And this year the Governor's Award for Youth Service was awarded to the Whatchyamacallits program on April 19th for their work with the Sojourn Adult Senior Daycare program. Among those things that are provided for the youth in our community, besides the basic thing which is basketball and various athletic programs, we have a youth service program. A youth program intern. The Minnetonka High School Leadership Challenge which helps develop leaders in our community. We are also working in a high density neighborhood project in collaboration with the Ridgedale YMCA to do some enrichment programming for the... One aspect of our programs that you probably are most interested in is our aquatics program and that's why I brought along our program catalog. The two places with the flags in there are of interest to you folks I believe. The first one is on page 50, and it's a lifeguard Ixaining camp and it provides a complete package to have lifeguard training, CPR training, all the things that they need to be good lifeguards. Along with that on page 52, you can see the.., program of lessons that are available. On the right on page 53 you'll see that the Lake Ann Beach is available with lifeguards from 10:30 in the morning until 8:00 p.m. at night. I hope this gives you kind of an overview. If you have any questions, I'm here to help you with it. I am a resident of the district, of the city and also ! work in the city so I'm...I would also like to introduce Betty Jenkins. She's one of the staff and she provides the leadership for all of our youth programs, including the lifeguard which we hope are serving your community well. We think so. Do you have any questions you'd like to ask of us? Mayor Chmiel: Are there any questions of the Council? I think it's a, it's always good to see the kinds of programs that are available, kids from the young to the old and that's really what's really neat, because those are basic...and thank you for coming in this evening to inform us as to how you've been going and what you've been doing and how things are progressing with the program and we thank you very much. And thanks for being our representative. Ann Osborn: You're welcome. Mayor Chmiel: Are there any other visitor presentations? If not, we'll move on. Yes. I'm sorry, go ahead. Audience: Are you going to discuss the tax increment financing? Councilman Senn: That's on the agenda. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. That's on the agenda but it's. 3 City Council Meeting - May 23, 1994 Roger Knutson: It's item 3. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, that's what we're going to go on right now. PUBLIC HEARING: PREPARATION OF A DEVELOPMENT PROJECT FOR DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT #3 AND A TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT #3-1. Public Present: Name Address Jim Paulette DataServ Incorporated Todd Gerhardt: Mr. Mayor, Honorable Council. What I'd like to do is give a short order overview of the creation of the new Development Dislrict #3 and Tax Increment District #3-1...show the district boundaries. You'll notice that most of the district is located on the Banta Corporation property and the DataServ property. And then the remaining district falls north along State Highway 101. Included in the plan, City Council must find the creation of this district provides employment opportunities with the city, improves the city's overall tax base, both from the city and state level. It also gives you opportunities to implement relative portions of the Highway 5 corridor plan. Completion. The City's completion of Dell Road south of Highway 5 consistent with the planning and reconstruction of State Highway 101. Both the trail system and reconstruction of the road. That concludes my portion... Mayor Chmiel: As I mentioned previously, this is a public hearing and those wishing to address the issue this evening, please come up and state your name and your address and concerns that you may have or questions that you have that you'd like some answers to. So with that the public hearing is open. Please come forward. Jim Paulette: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. My name is Jim Paulette. I'm...manager representing DataServ Incorporated. We're included. We own 60 acres of property which is included in the proposed disuSct. You may recall seeing us last Wednesday here at your informal meeting and we're also interested in a land use study which involves our property also. I just wanted to come here tonight to indicate that Todd Gerhardt did call me on April 4th to inform me that the City was interested in establishing the tax increment financing district which included our property. On April 1 lth we sent a letter to Todd indicating that we had some reservations about the project and that upon completion of a land use study that we are involved in now, that we would be interested in holding further discussions with the city about the establishment of the district On April 19th Todd called again and we talked some more about the concept And however we did not receive a copy of the proposal or the document until today. So we haven't had a chance to review the document yet. And we would like to request that the Council table this proposal until D_a[aServ has had the opportunity to review the document and ideally until we've had a chance to respond formally to the Highway 5 corridor study. If you have any questions. Mayor Chmiel: Are there any questions? Councilman Mason: Not at this time. 4 City Council Meeting - May 23, 1994 Councilwoman Dockendorf: Well I have one Mr. Panlette. Last time seeing you was several months ago, I think. Jim Paulette: Yes. Councilwoman Dockendorf: And you were concerned about things moving too quickly and DataServ didn't have any plans yet. Have you come any further in your decision making about what exactly you want to do with that land? Jim Paulette: Yes we have. We've just presented a proposal that was put together by Ryan Consm~cfion and RLK Associates to our Executive Staff. And we are in the process of putting together a formal response to the city, which I suspect we'll have completed by the time you vote on the corridor study itself. Councilwoman Dockendorf: In terms of an expansion, is that what you're looking at? Jim Paulette: What we're looking at, as far as the study is concerned. Councilwoman Dockendorf: As far as what you want to do with your property. Jim Paulette: That's what we're in the process of doing now, correct. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Alright, thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Are them any other questions? Councilman Senn: You said something about you wanted to tie this to the Highway 5 corridor study. Jim Paulette: Right. In other words, what I'm trying to say is that, as I indicated before, we're coming very close to putting together a formal response to the Highway 5 corridor development study. I think them is some connection between the tax increment financing plan and also the study that we're completing. We would feel better if we had an opportunity to tie them together and make a decision after we've had a chance to review the document and prepare a formal response for the land use, or for the Highway 5 corridor study. Which I believe we're very close. I'm not saying it's October or anything. We're talking within a couple of weeks. Councilman Senn: Well I'm having trouble following it because it seems to me if you're trying to relate to the Highway 5 plan, I mean what that is is that gets to your land use issues. Jim Paulette: Right. Councilman Senn: Now I'm talcing a big leap and going from land use issues to tax increment issues. Jim Paulette: It's a matter of being able to discuss the two simultaneously and make a decision based on our discussions about both issues. Councilman Senn: I'm not sure how one affects the other but that's where I'm going with it. Jim Paulette: I'm not either and basically what I'm saying, I'm not either but we haven't had a chance to review City Council Meeting - May 23, 1994 this document and we don't know if there is an actual connection between the two but we'd like to have the opportunity to take a look. Mayor Chmiel: I guess I don't see either the tie in between the Highway 5 corridor study and the tax in~rement district. I think if you're saying that you and your company has not yet had an opportunity to review that, basically it would probably be to the benefit of your company by adopting that tax increment district for the particular area. Todd, would you like to? Todd Gerhardt: There's no question adopting this plan tonight will benefit the DataServ property. It has all the benefits to his property. Not .approving it or delaying it, that's up to the Council. It has nothing to do with the Highway 5 corridor plan. Only if there's certain public improvements that you want to see accomplished in that area, you may use the increment that's available to the Council to fund certain public improvements. Dell Road, as I stated earlier, is one of those public improvements that you would look at upgrading and then TH 101. But other than that it has no ties into the Highway 5 corridor plan and is a benefit back to the property...land write downs, public improvements...That's all this plan calls for and that's all you can use those dollars for. Councilman Senn: And the Dell Road upgrade and the TH 101 upgrade are going to occur regardless of any land use decisions on that property, correct? Todd Gerhardt: That's correct. Those are safety issues. Mayor Chmiel: Now in relationship back to just to Dell Road for the south side of that. That road, if I'm not mistaken, is that not owned by, half by Eden Prairie and half by the City of Chanhassen? Todd Gerhardt: That is correct. Mayor Chmiel: And how do we tie that in with Eden Prairie? Todd Gerhardt: Well Eden Prairie has finished their half of the consamction of that road and we have not completed our halL.serve Chanhassen residents but we do have a lot of ability in maintaining our roadways. Right now it makes a very wicked jog to the left, if you're out there, and you cannot publically..,assess those costs back to the DataServ people because there's no real benefit to that property for that. So the only mechanism we have is with the general fund dollars or to use tax increment...use tax increment. Jim Paulette: If I could just step back for a minute and maybe explain what I was getting at before. I guess our question is, upon completing our land use study we may decide that we do not want to develop that land for several years and if we do decide that, then it may not be in our best interest to establish this district now. And it may not make a difference but until our legal people have had a chance to review the document and understand it completely, we don't feel like we're ready to put our stamp of approval on it. Todd Gerhardt: It's an 11 year district, 9 years of which we can capture increment Councilwoman Dockendoff: Is there an urgency to it Todd? Todd Gerhardt: No. The only thing, if you do decide to table it tonight, that you table it with a date to extend the date of the public hearing. So you have a date to extend that public hearing to. And that's the only thing that I would ask. If you do not extend it with a date, then we have to re.advertise. City Council Meeting - May 23, 1994 Councilman Senn: Putting the dislrict in place, and the eventual delay of development has no effect one way or the other on each other though, correct? Mayor Chmiel: Shouldn't. Councilman Senn: No. I mean not even feasibly, or potentially. Councilman Wing: And if it's our desire to have this increment district, we might as well do it tonight and then that may affect their decisions to do what they're going to do accordingly. Or it might help them make decisions. But I think the recommendation is to go ahead with this. There's no relationship to any land use and I'm real comfortable with that. This is simply a collection district that we're going to create. Jim Paulette: There is a connection in that if you decided to approve it now, there is a possibility that the land use study may make the marketability of our land a somewhat distant opportunity for us. It's possible that we may not be able to develop the land in the manner in which it's laid out in the study in a year or two or three years. Councilman Wing: But TIF can only enhance that. Jim Paulette: It will help, correct. It will help. Councilman Wing: And if it was a total disaster, you may not get the financing. Or the assistance. I mean I can't see anything but positive here. Councilman Senn: And if you delay forever, the T1F's going to be gone anyway. Because that's got a sunset date on it then right? Mayor Chmiel: That's part of the given problem with it. Me, all I see is strictly positives for your company. Whether you're choosing to expand or not expand. And if you do expand, there are some TIF dollars that could be assisted to your company by creating some additional jobs within the community. So I just don't see any real pros and cons that, or anything that would really offset it that would be a disadvantage for your company. Jim Paulette: I think maybe then, looking at it from your perspective then, maybe the only thing that stands in the way, I think .really that maybe as a courtesy to D8LaServ, is just giving us the opportunity to review the document prior to the City Council voting on it. If that was a matter of a couple of weeks, that would still give us a chance to look at it. Mayor Chmiel: Well, I guess I wouldn't be objecting to that myself. But I would like to then put this back on Council agenda for June 13th and carry over the public hearing until that date. And then conclude with the review from your company. Councilman Senn: The only question I guess I'd like to ask is from staff's standpoint. Is there potentially any projects that could start in the interim in this area that would affect our ability to capture the increment? Todd Gerhardt: The only possibility would be the proposed daycare and expansion to the Press. Councilman Senn: But that's not 2 weeks. I'm just saying, is there something we don't, I mean not everything 7 City Council Meeting - May 23, 1994 has to come before us I guess is what I'm saying. Is anyone planning an expansion or doing anything that would be potential increment? Todd Gerhardt: Not that I'm aware of. Councilman Senn: Okay. Mayor Chmiel: So with what I proposed, I would then make that a motion. Councilman Wing: Second that. Mayor Chmiel: There's a second. Any other discussion? Councilman Mason: A quick comment. I believe that I will be out of town on the 13th of June. I would like to go on record as saying that I would, if I were here, I would be voting for the TIF district. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Do we need a 4/5? Councilman Mason: No. Just so my voice is heard. Thank you. Jim Paulette: Thank you very much. Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilman Wing seconded to table the public hearing on the approval of Development District No. 3 and Tax Increment Financing District No. 3-1 until June 13, 1994 City Council meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. AWARD OF BIDS: CHANHASSEN ESTATES 1ST AND 3RD ADDITION STREET RECONSTRUCTION, PROJECT NO. 93-10. Charles Folch: Thank you Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. This past May 17th, bids were received and opened for the Chanhassen Estates 1st and 3rd street, drainage and reconstruction improvement project No. 93- 10. A total of 4 bids were received with the low bid being received by Brown & Cris at a total amount of $698,980.50, which is approximately 5% below the engineer's estimate. Brown & Cris has performed other projects within the city in the past and has a track record with the city. Therefore the city would recommend that the City Council award the contract for Chanhassen Estates 1st and 3rd Additions to Brown & Cris in the amount of $698,980.50. Mayor Chmiel: Any questions? Councilman Wing: How are the lines of communication with this neighborhood? Is there any, when the assessment hearings come up, is it going to be a done deal on this or are they going to say where'd this come from and how did...and we didn't know it was going this far. Are they being, are there city information letters going out letting them know that this is ongoing. It is on the move and here's the cost. Charles Folch: Absolutely. Since the public hearing was held, I think 2 letters were sent, maybe 3 letters were City Council Meeting - May 23, 1994 sent out during the planning and design process. And there were meetings following that. And then following the last of final approval meeting, another letter went out explaining that part of the project is approved... Councilman Wing: So they know we're coming, there's no question? Charles Folch: Absolutely. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, and it's still within the total estimate you had come up with and it's lower than what the estimate is so the assessments shouldn't change, hopefully. Councilwoman Dockendorf: It shouldn't be a surprise. Councilman Mason: I'll move approval of award of bids for Chan Estates 1st and 3rd Additions, Project No. 93-10. Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second? Councilman Senn: Second. Resolution g94-54: Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Senn seconded to award the contract for the Chanhassen Estates 1st and 3rd Addition Street, Utility and Drainage Reconstruction Project No. 93-10 to Brown & Cris in the amount of $698,980.50. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. CHANHASSEN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL/COMMUNITY CENTER. Don Ashworth: Under the agreement that we entered into between School District #112 and the city, the city is required to simultaneously award the bids for the joint project with the School District. I shouldn't say simultaneous but at approximately the same time. Bids were received approximately a week ago and the School Board met I believe last Tuesday or Wednesday and did act to approve the low bid of Bor-Son in the amount of $8,350,000.00. And this is a joint use facility. With the city's portion being approximately $2.2 million, not including costs of grading. In breaking out the bid, the $8,350,000.00, in comparison to just our budget, provides a shortfall of approximately $39,000.00. However, this does not take into account that a reserve has been set up of approximately $375,000.00 or approximately $90,000.00 for the city. That would mean if, to balance the budget we took a portion of our reserve to cover the $40,000.00 deficit, we would still be in a positive position of about $50,000.00. Staff is recommending that the City Council approve the low bid of Bor- Son in the amount of $8,350,000.00, including adding alternate g4 (flooring) for $80,000.00, deleting Alternative #7, which was the emergency power, minus $19,000.00 and adding Alternative #10, which is the park shelter building, in the amount of $251,000.00. If the Council wishes to add to that approval, something to the effect that the award is being made on the basis that the City's portion of the overall conslxucfion cost shall not exceed $2,360,000.00, that would be fine with staff. I stand ready to answer any questions Council may have. Mayor Chmiel: Are there any questions? Colleen. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Don, what does the, what are we approving tonight in terms of facilities? I know it does not include the grading costs. Is this everything? Is this the hockey rink? Are these the tennis courts? Is this everything that we need to furnish that park? 9 City Council Meeting - May 23, 1994 Don Ashworth: Well, alternative number, yes. Well the answer is yes. I should throw in the caveat that nowhere in our discussion have we talked furnishings for that facility and so things such as tables, chairs, and a couch or anything else that you would put in there that typically you would call furnishings, we have not allocated. But otherwise it includes everything that you saw on the previous maps. It includes the lighting. All the hard surface areas. The park shelter building, which would include the picnicking area. The wanning house. The concession area~ The rest rooms~ They include all of the community rooms. Gymnasium that you had previous seen. One of the add alternates was a slab of concrete underneath the hockey area, which would have allowed us to use that as a skating facility in the summer months. That bid came in on that for approximately $100,000.00. Todd Hoffman: $77. Don Ashworth: And we felt that that was one item, in light of the overall budget, that we could or should delete. On the other side of the coin, there was nearly $100,000.00 on the table in.regards to the park shelter development. We really tried to do everything we could to make sure that that park shelter building got back in there because I really believe that if you rebid it, at a very minimum it would be $50,000.00 more than it is this evening and logically up to $1130,000.00. So I really think it's in the city's best interest to try to find a way to make that happen. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Could I ask a question of Todd? $77,000.00 for a slab of concrete? What's unique about that? I mean how many yards of concrete are we talking? But it'd be a neat thing to have. Todd Hoffman: Yeah. The estimate we had on it was about $80,000.00 and it's a more elaborate slab than a regular garage floor due to the fact that you're going to flood it in the wintertime and thus you've got some issues with water melting and frost heave and those types of things and you want to skate on it in the summer so it had expansion joints and they were doweled with metal dowels and that type of thing, So the engineering that went into it. Now many communities are either turning tennis courts into in-line skating areas or turning... Councilman Senn: You're kidding. Councilman Mason: That's hard to believe isn't it? Councilman Senn: That's also an easy way to kill a tennis court. Todd Hoffman: ...due to large groups of teenagers using the courts up here at the elementary for in-line skating and so they said, well what can you do for us? They actually came in and talked to the Park and Recreation Commission that evening as a visitor presentation and lots, many communities are putting asphalt down right inside their hockey rinks but asphalt isn't the best choice to surface it because it doesn't have the longevity and it's black which isn't conducive in the wintertime.,.It's an up and coming issue of in-line skating...look for alternatives. Councilwoman Dockendorf: That's too bad. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any other questions? Councilman Senn: Don from a, okay so what we're approving tonight is what? $2.2 million for the building? 10 City Council Meeting - May 23, 1994 Mayor Chmiel: $2.360. Councilman Mason: Not to exceed. Mayor Chmiel: Not to exceed. Councilman Senn: Well yeah, and I'm just trying to come up to that number. I mean you're saying $2.2 million in building improvements and then the add Oh'S to that? Or what? Don Ashworth: Well the original budget was $2.2 million for the building and $350,000.00 on the grading for a total of $2,550,000.00. The grading actually came in less but I still compare it to our overall budget and coming back down to this overage of $39,000.00. Councilman Senn: Okay, but we aren't approving the grading? Don Ashworth: The grading was approved by the City Council approximately 2 months ago. Councilman Senn: Okay. So we're back to $2.2 million number then? Exclusive of the grading. Don Ashworth: Yeah, except I should note that I'm using the total budget of the $2,550,000.00 which therefore, since we save approximately $90,000.00 on the grading, gives me $2,360,000.00 for the school. I'm taking the total budget of $2,550,000.00. Subwacting out what our commitment is on the grading and coming back to a budget for the school of $2,360,000.00, which is what this will be done. Councilman Senn: Okay. So our grading contract is $100, what's that $190,000.00 or whatever? Don Ashworth: Correct. Councilman Senn: Okay. Of the $2,360,000.00 then, what about the adds and deletions down below? DOn Ashworth: Those have been factored in. Part of the ad's, most of the ad's are on the 74% school, 26% city so of the facility we have 26%. So costs suchas the flooring for $90,000.00, is a 26/74% item. The dropping of the emergency generator was also a benefit to both sides. The only one that was an add, that went exclusive going into our column was the park shelter building, because that sits exclusively on our property and it's exclusively our's. Councilman Senn: So that's 100% then. Okay, and all of those are included in the $2,360,000.00? Don Ashworth: Correct. Councilman Senn: Okay. As is the 4% contingency and the reserve fund. Don Ashworth: The reserve fund and 4% are one and the same in they are included in the, so in other words. Of the $2,360,000.00, $90,000.00 of that is actually reserves. Actually the payment's being made to the school district as it stands right now, $2,270,000.00. Well actually we're $40,000.00 out of balance. Add 40 to that. $2,310,000.00. 11 City Council Meeting - May 23, 1994 Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any other discussions? Hearing none, can I have a motion? Councilman Mason: Add alternate #3, flooring-S80,000.00. That's. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Isn't that a subtract? Dor.-Ashworth: No, that's an add. Councilman Mason: This is a different floor? Don Ashworth: This moves it up from a typical elementary school. Councilman Mason: Oh this is, okay. Mayor Chmiel: The flooring that we discussed. Councilman Mason: Right, right. Councilman Senn: We have the savings in the grading but how does that, how is that impacted down by the need to add for, on the service road or on the soil corrections? Don Ashworth: We'll f'md out, you may accelerated the question now but my reading of the memorandum from the engineer was that because of the modification there actually may be a savings. We didn't want to cut back into the treed area but by doing that we're probably eliminating the wall and the overall cost associated with the elimination of the wall should approximately be the same as the cost for the soil corrections. That's how I read it. Is that correct or not? Charles Folch: Actually there might even be some surplus as an additional...for additional landscaping and such. Don Ashworth: So it could be a positive. It probably will not be a negative. Councilman Senn: Are we relatively certain on that, because I mean what he said in here wasn't that def'mifive. Charles Folch: Based on my...the extent of the soil correction with the poor soils they found out there from the actual digging that had taken place last week, they pretty well defined the depth and length and dimensions and such of the area that needs to come out. Councilwoman Dockendorf: As long as we've staxted this discussion I had put under Council Presentations. Charles, could you explain to me if you've got poor soils, why you need to, I mean are they actually moving the road? Charles Folch: Actually the road is remaining as it was proposed and approved. What basically happens is when you dig down 17 feet, the with of the roadway, we actually have to expand your side slopes out, especially with poor soils because they'll slump. There's no way you can, basically you have to have safe slope so that you don't have any cave in to the excavation. Councilwoman Dockendorf: And then they're putting engineered fill in it or? 12 City Council Meeting - May 23, 1994 Charles Folch: That's correct. That will be designed for the road embankment. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Well I'd like the Council to entertain that, I mean it will be necessary to remove substantial trees. When you talk about 5 trees, you're talking 5 trees that you know, I can't even put my arms the width of so I would propose that we would see the landscaping plan and that those dollars not be used as a surplus to be used somewhere else but go directly back into landscaping that southern portion. So I'd really like to see that come before Council. Councilman Senn: That's kind of why I was asking .if there was a surplus. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Because they're raking out substantial coverage. They really are and if it's necessarily, I'd like to see the landscaping plan come before Council. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Is there a motion? With that included. Would you like to make that? Councilwoman Dockendorf: I would move that we would award the bid to Bor-Son, adding that the city's portion of the overall construction cost shall not exceed $2,360,000.00 and that the Chanhassen City Council see the revised landscaping plans for the southern part of the frontage road where additional excavation is taking place. Councilman Mason: Second. Mayor Chmiel: Any other discussion? Councilwoman Dockendorf: I have a question. I don't know who could answer it. When will they start actual construction of the buildings? Is it just grading this summer or? Todd Hoffman: The time line calls, they'll be doing footings and...late this fall is what I recall... Don Ashworth: I believe so. You also have the fact in there that there are bad soils under various portions of the building and the parking lot. All of those need to be excavated and sand brought in before they can start with footings so. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Just curious. Don Ashworth: It will be this fall. Councilwoman Dockendorf moved, Councilman Mason seconded to award the bid from Bor-Son Construction in the amount of $8,350,000.00 including add alternate #4 (flooring) $80,000.00; deleting alternate g'/(emergency power) -$19,300.00 and add alternate $10 (park shelter building) $251,000.00. The city's portion of the overall construction cost shall not exceed $2,360,000.00 and the City Council will see the revised landscaping plans for the southern part of the frontage road where additional excavation is taking place. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. 13 City Council Meeting - May 23, 1994 CONCEPT PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO REZONE 39 ACRES FROM A2, AGRICULTURAL ESTATES TO PUD FOR 56 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS LOCATED SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 5, EAST OF TIMBERWOOD ESTATES, HERITAGE DEVELOPMENT, RLK ASSOCIATES. Bob Generous: The applicant was last before the City Council on April 1 lth of this year. At that time they were requesting the conceptual approval for a PUD for a planned unit development for a 56 lot subdivision. This is the basic plan that they have. Staff had concerns about this plan, and so did City Council. Specifically how they were going to neat the wetlands in the Bluff Creek corridor. The use of cul-de-sacs rather than private driveways and the small lots that abutted Timberwood. At that meeting Council tabled the concept plan for further work by the applicant and they came in with these revisions. The old...show their treatment of the wetland areas. The installation, the purple area represents some ponding areas that they provided on the site to help with storm water runoff. The little red dashed line that I put on the overhead shows the realignment of the road to provide some curvalinear am~osphere to the subdivision and to put in that last cul-de-sac. The solid red lines are the use of private drives. We believe that they're moving in the right direction with these revisions. However staff took this concept a little bit farther and looked at having the applicant possibly revise this plan to include additional...into the development. To permit the siting of some larger lots around the western boundary of the site. If they're going to group any smaller lots, to have them be on the inside curve of the development and along that eastern pan of the project. Proposing an open space that provides connection down to the trail system and as an overlook for the wetland area or the wetland complex that will be in the middle of the project. The applicant also showed a little park setting at the convergence of the east and west banks of the Bluff Creek. Staff still believes that the planned unit development is the most appropriate way for the city to handle this development and conceptually we agree that a single family subdivision is appropriate land use for this site. We believe also that the conditions that we outlined in the staff report and that we included in this memo will provide the applicant with sufficient direction to the city to the next level of review and we're requesting that the City Council give conceptual approval to them. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thanks Bob. Is there anyone from RLK Associates that would like to say something at this time? Are you basically in agreement with what staff has pulled together? John Dobbs: Good evening. My name is John Dobbs. I represent Heritage Development. John Dietrich from RLK is...The second one is that after meeting with the staff and talking about a number of issues off the presentation that we came to before, we as a group, RLK and myself. Three planners from RLK and I went out and took the old plans and walked the site. Actually spent most of a morning out there looking at it and it was interesting to look at the staff's sketched concept plan and to think about new ways to approach this site. The topography and natural resources on this particular piece are rather difficult to work with. And I guess going through the staff recommendations, there's a number of issues that I'll let Mr. Dietrich speak to specifically, but I guess in general I'd like to say that although this is perhaps one particular way to align the road in staff's concept sketch, the one we put up was basically based on two things. One of them is trying to salvage as many trees as we possibly could and meet the existing connection of Stone Creek. And the second one was, we actually tried to not push the topography around on the hills,.,part of the plat the best that we could. Staff's concept sketch does begin to push out what is a somewhat steep slope and then push everything then further towards the creek and to Bluff Creek corridor to try and establish. The other solution then was also to push the road to the westerly side upon that very steep hill which then presented a very large problems for the sewer main...So in general I guess what I'd like Mr. Dietrich to just kind of go through and again address the issues in general, I think that we spent a number of hours talking about and sketching in my office and in RLK's.,. We've lost a number of lots to try to get it down to the point where...And I'll be here to answer any questions. 14 City Council Meeting - May 23, 1994 Mayor Chmiel: Good, thank you. John Dietrich: Good evening. John Dietrich, RLK Associates. I would just like to go through the recommen4_a_~_ion that staff has...and the overall concept, I would say we are in agreement with them. However there are just a few issues that we would like to raise in terms of some of the staff recommendations that are in the report beginning on page 5. The f~rst one was the design charette that will be coming up. We have again requested that the developer, Heritage Development be involved in the design charette so that...combination of public and private input into that process. Secondly, the item number 4 with regards to the pre-treatment of the storm water pond that we will be taking and treating all storm water ponds and we will keep all ponding to a minimum. It is in our best interest to have the minimum number of ponds and we will submit all storm water calculations through the engineer for their review. Secondly, the ability to take storm water from the north side of the site and also from the Chanhassen Corporate Center site, across the creek bed would result in storm sewer pipes anywhere from 35 to 40 feet deep...ponding area. I think the storm water ponding on the Chanhassen Corporate Center site should remain on the site and not cut across the creek. Item number 7, we have no problems with. Item number 8. The trunk sanitary sewer line be utilized that it be a lateral stubbed towards the Timberwood Estates. We feel that Lots 3 and 4 would not be the proper location to stub that. That is right in the low lying area of the creek and within the area of...tree masses and feel that would be contrary to the concept of trying to preserve that natural wooded land to the south of the property. The north, item number 9 would be no problem. Item number 10. A curvalinear street that's shown on the concept plan by Mr. Generous did not look closely at the grades that are on the site. And in walking the site, if you look at grades, the oaks that are to the center of the site, we feel we have tried to provide at keeping that...as possible based on that concept grading plan. And still provide public access to the park. Access to the park where it was suggested in the staff concept plan would require an extensive grade to climb up and feel it would be very difficult to make a trail of ADA compatibility in that area. We will comply with number 12, number 13, number 14, number 15. Item number 16, we have utilized a private drive in order to try to maximize the site and retain the natural features and the woods and wetlands. We feel the use of the private drives on the west side of the roadway do not allow the site to be kept in it's most natural setting and we have tried to minimize the amount of roadway structures, roadway grading that we go through to get to the areas to the south. Number 17, trail or sidewalk on the west side of the roadway. Number 18, we will do a tree survey. Number 19, we would like to investigate the setbacks in order to have a little variance to the setbacks and to...20, 21, 22, 23, will be no problem. 24, 25, 26. 26, the southem terminus of the trail shall not parallel the railroad tracks. Again, after walking the site and going along the southern wetland that has been identified, that is by far one of the most pristine and naunal areas of that entire site. We would highly recommend that the trail stay along the railroad tracks and on the southerly side of that wetland without trying to cross and come back up...next to the public roadway system... Number 27, a 50 foot wide trail strip be preserved along the western boundary between Stone Creek Drive and the railroad tracks. Our concern is that the 50 foot area will be exclusively on Heritage development and not... Hans Hagen side. We'd like to just be treated fairly between the two developers instead of having all of the access on one side of the property line. There are NSP lines in that area so that area would be..2qumber 28 1 spoke to about ADA codes on the trail. And 29, the trail crossing the creek in it's entirety, saying on the west side of the creek in it's entirety...branches. Again, after walking the site, the trail would not be graded and made to ADA standards along that northwest, northeast comer of the site. Based on site review, we would highly recommend that the trail cross the creek on some much flatter land and preserve that slope that the DNR has said should be protected. 30 will be fine. 31. There are a number of spaces and quality environments along this trail corridor between the open creek, parkland, picnic areas and utilization of buffer areas along ponding areas for that Wail corridor. That we have...very strong wail plan that offers a variety of environments and we'd be happy to point those out in a little bit more detail. Number 32, 100 foot building setback. That's been maintained on all lots except for one at this time and we would gladly work with that. Number 33, we will try to keep the ponds 15 City Council Meeting - May 23, 1994 down to a minimum and...Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Thanks. Bob referenced some of the questions in regards to each of those specific items that have been mentioned, Regarding low lying areas, Some of the grades on 8 and 10, Some of the others. I don't know if you were taking notes at the time. But I can understand some of your questions. Can you address some of those? And the reasoning for it. Kate Aanenson: I was going to say a lot of these, some of the later ones are conditions of the Park and Rex: Commission or the Director would like to look at. Again, this is part of the concept. These are things that we see that need to be articulated as the next phase develops. We're saying,..need to be resolved. Some of these are kind of unresolved issues as far as the staff level. That as part of the charette process we're trying to decide what would be appropriate. I think some of his points may be legitimate. As this evolves and we get further details on the grading and... Mayor Chmiel: I guess I'm hopeful we're going to address a lot of those questions and indicate our concerns as to why we even came up with those. One of the others is to share between properties, as he mentioned something between Hans Hagen and their properties, The only question I have with Hans Hagen, I'm sure they have provided different things within their proposal. Kate Aanenson: I think Todd maybe better, could answer those.,. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Todd Hoffman: Mr. Mayor, members of the City Council. I did take notes throughout John's presentation. The issues which they presented are not difficult for staff to resolve through this. Issues such as the ADA accessibility and those type of things. We may not be able to meet them in their entirety. It's our intention to do that where we can. But there are other issues as well. Every time you cross the creek, it's a $15,000.00 or $20,000.00 project to make the creek crossovers as well so we weigh those alternatives. As far as the 50 foot buffer zone for the trail crossing underneath the viaduct which is underneath the raikoad a'acks, that's an important link for the entire north/south Bluff Creek trail segment and the suggestion that,..easement for the power lines and investigate that is a good one as well. So not only I'll take a look at the Hans Hagen plat but that has been approved. From this point we.,.It's also in an area down there where...that pond, we're not affecting,.,so those issues are all fairly insignificant. We can work with the applicant. Mayor Chmiel: Good. Council have any questions? Richard, Councilman Wing: Well I would certainly like to use this as an opportunity to once again address density, A question 1 would have, At the conceptual level is how many cars is this going to bring in and do we have the roads and the infrastructure to handle them. Right now we can't get cars onto Highway 5 onto Galpin Road. And now we're, density, We never want to !alk about density so I go back to my request that we look at going to 22,000 square foot lots with PUD's down to no lower limit with an average of 18, Mainly out of density. I'm looking at this conceptually now. And we've tried to kind of protect Timberwood. Not that they necessarily deserve protecting nor am I their buddy. I mean they're there and they're their little island and I think their development, But they have low density so I happen to like them because they're low density. I can't afford to live there but they offer me low density so they're not impacting my lifestyle as much. But now we've got these 13,000, 13,000, 16, 26, 17. We've got these small lots bordering these large lot homes. That doesn't, that to me conceptually is not acceptable. So the first comment I will make is to abut and put this type 16 City Council Meeting - May 23, 1994 of density on the lot lines of the existing Timberwood is not an appropriate development. I think it ought to be buffered and if we're going to have small lots, they ought to be on the east and we ought to have the larger lots abutting Timberwood. Or frankly I'd rather see this go to industrial with a quality type industrial building coming in. Rather than this high density housing. We've talked about that in the past. Who would be better off or better served. The other thing is that as you get going conceptually, I would like to have a layman's description of the grading. On Oak Ponds you could have just told me they're going to destroy the hill. Flatten it out and I could have bought that. Here I'd like to know what they're going to do to our landforms, and layman terms would be, they're going to cut the blazes out of it or they're going to trim a little off the top and move a little to the bottom. I mean I just, I'd like to know what's going to happen. Or if they're going to flatten it, I want to know that. Those are layman terms that I can work with. So the density bothers me. The density with the infrastructure bothers me. The amount of cars and traffic Iroubles me greatly. I don't like it. This is really impacting this area in a very negative way and it's not even, I mean it's agricultural zoning right now so I think we want to look at that. See the grading. The abutting to the existing, the buffering. This type of density as it buffers Timberwood. If I lived there, I would be here tonight. I guess that's all. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Thank you. Colleen. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Dick stole my thunder once again. Councilman Wing: Oh, go £wst. You should go firsL Excuse me. Councilwoman Dockendorf: That's alright. No, no. As always you articulate better than me anyway. I too have concerns about the density. Obviously on the Timberwood side but even more so on the Bluff Creek side. This is a really neat tract of land and I'm very disappointed when I look at their roads that RLK has put in. We're practically obliterating the largest stand of trees and it will be cornfield so staff's recommendation to push that further to the east makes sense. This does need a lot of work. ! am prepared to give it conceptual approval with the caveat that we need larger lots abutting Timberwood Estates. Particularly I'm looking at up towards the north where you've got 1, 2, 3, 4 and then around that cul-de-sac you've got a density of homes right next to basically two homes on the Timberwood side. You know you've got like 15. It needs a lot of work. ! would agree with the applicant that the trails near the railroad tracks should be as it is. That's pretty steep grades there and we don't want to impact that any more than we have to. The sewer stub between Lots 3 and 4 does not make sense. That's where a creek is. I guess those are my biggest issues. Basically the density. I like the lot sizes towards the southern side of proposal but that's where you're getting to Stone Creek which equals pretty much those densities. Where you've got your higher densities of 11,000, it's up towards your large lots near Timberwood. That just doesn't make sense to me. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Michael. Councilman Mason: Well, it sounds to me like the charette may take care of a lot of the issues. I'm hearing that both sides, if you will, are talking and things are getting to roll. I'm a little concerned when I hear low density versus high density. We're talking about affordable housing and we're also talking about urban sprawl. If we knock out x number of lots, what does that do to jack up the prices for people that want to live in Chanhassen? I understand Council's concern about high density. The other side of that point is, for every lot we take out here, a lot's going to go somewhere else and how about Morrish and urban sprawl and those kinds of issues. I think we, it's real easy to talk this stuff but I think there's some other issues we also need to discuss. And I'm not saying some lots can't be changed around and I'm not completely disagreeing with what's being said but not only do we have to look at high and low density but we do also have to look at things like 17 City Council Meeting - May 23, 1994 affordable housing and urban sprawl. And every time you make the lot size bigger, you're jacking up the price and it's making it that much harder for people to live in Chanhassen. And I think those are some issues that we also have to take into account too. I'll admit to a little concern about the 15,000 square foot lots abutting Timberwood. However, there are a number. I mean I flfink of Carver Beach where I live. I have a much larger lot as do the neighbors on my street but right over in Triple Crown, th.ey're much smaller lots and we've got txees and there's all kinds of stuff between the two. So, you know so be it. Sorry about that~ I do think we need to look at the other side of low density and high density and putting in affordable housing and urban sprawl. I've seen plans that are a lot higher density than this for the same amount so I think we need a little bit more of a balance there with that. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Mark. Councilman Senn: It sounds like it's going the right way as far as between applicant and staff. Getting some of the questions worked out. Going out and looking at the site, I think there are some valid points that the applicant has over the topography but again, I'm not sure what all the issues are both ways on that, one way or the other. I think it'd be nice to really see that kind of analysis in front of us so we know what we're giving up or getting one way or the other. Given which way you go on that decision. Conceptually I don't see a problem with the direction it's headed. I think there's some good points both sides. I too get a little concerned when I hear the term high density because I mean this is a half acre lot average basically which to me seems fairly low density in relationship to a lot of things we've done. You're kind of, it seems to me we're kind of catching the applicant here between the rock and the hard place. A neighborhood on one side and Bluff Creek on the other side and I'm not sure both sides are going to end up being happy or dealt with in a manner that I think we'd like to see the creek dealt with or the way that the neighborhood would like to see dealt with on the other side but at the same time I get a little fearful that depending on how far you push this, you get down to density numbers on single family that are, that's going to do exactly what I would like not to see happen there and that is force them to take a different direction other than single family there and look at something else and I just, I can't agree with the potential or possibility of sticking industrial or whatever in that particular site. I think it is single family. For one single family and that's what ought to be pursued there. Mayor Chmiel: Good. Okay, with that I guess everybody'.s really expressed some of the concerns that I have. On either issue or each one of these and there's no sense in continuing on with the discussion from my standpoint. I would then bring this back to Council. See if there is a motion for the revised plans for the conceptual plans at this time. Councilman Senn: Kate, what are you looking for? Kate Aanenson: Concept approval at this time. Councilman Senn: With the caveat that you're going to continue to work. Kate Aanenson: Right. Now this has no, as far as legal standing. These are the marching orders. This is what they need to come back with preliminary so the preliminary will go back to the Planning Commission and.., site elevations. You get...grading and the tree survey. All that stuff will come back in the next round and be very detailed. For right now we just want to know whether or not they need to go forward...and do that detail. Councilman Senn: Okay. Well I'd move conceptual approval based on staff and the applicant going ahead and working those things out. But also when it comes back next round, I'd really like to see that analysis because I 18 City Council Meeting - May 23, 1994 think there's some very definitive issues here that if we isolate and look at individually, it's going to get very complicated. I think we need to look at them side by side and know what the Wade-offs are on one versus the other. More or less how's this decision going to affect the creek? How's it going to affect the neighborhood or how is it going to affect the cluster of trees? I mean I hate to say it but in this fight of area where you are, there's going to be a lot of affects that way and I would just like, I mean we're going to have to sort those out and I think it'd be a little easier for us to do that. Kate Aanenson: That's why the staff supports the PUD...that in a cornfield we go with 11,000 square foot lots. Up in the trees we do...3/4 or 1 acre lots. So unfortunately there was a concern about not averaging out the lots in a traditional subdivision. And this is an answer again is a balancing act...you've got Timberwood and you've got the creek and somewhere there's an appropriate mix and where's the balancing here. But there is a place to have some of the small lots and places where...and I think those are only accomplished with a PUD. Doing a straight subdivision I don't think does the best job on the site...it's a balancing act and that's why I think the charette we'll £md out... Mayor Chmiel: I think you can do that direction as you've done before with your Q and A's in relationship to each of those concerns and addressing those concerns so we at least know where it's coming from. Councilman Senn: I'd just like to see the Q and A's organized a little differently on this one in the sense that, if you make them separately it's going to be real hard to follow. I'd kind of like to really almost see a cross section and say here's the affect on A, B and C. Kate Aanenson: There's a lot of layers... Councilman Mason: That's a good idea. That would be helpful to see it like that. Councilman Wing: Okay that Boyer, we were kind of sold a bill of goods on the Boyer conceptual plan that we were going to have all these wonderful things happen and it turns out when they go back to the standard subdivision, they couldn't get the density thought they could. It sort of seemed to start to work to our advantage. What if we take this charette and all our tree preservation and all our setbacks that we've developed over the last few years and apply it with a standard subdivision on this narrow strip. Would we win or lose here? Kate Aanenson: I think on the Boyer's you have to go back and look at, they were trying to do a different type of project. They were trying to do a zero lot line which is a lot different. Councilman Wing: I understand. Councilman Senn: I think if you, Dick I mean looking at this strip and if running a typical subdivision through it, I don't think anything that's been presented is even close to that. I mean I view that as a mild disaster. I mean if you're trying to do that. Kate Aanenson: I understand. I think you still have the tree preservation, you still have certain setbacks but I think it'd be much more sterile. I think this is probably a little bit more creative. Mayor Chmiel: I think staff has direction as to what we're looking for. To accomplish this particular proposal. So with that we have a motion on the floor. Was there a second? 19 City Council Meeting - May 23, 1994 Councilman Wing: Second. Mayor Chmiel: Moved and seconded. Any other discussion? Councilwoman Dockendorf: I just have a comment to what Mike was saying about affordable housing. You know that's an issue that we have put on our agenda to address, and I don't think it's being ignored in this. I think we were looking at the specific topography and the constraints of this piece of land and saying, it's not appropriate here. Councilman Senn: I don't think Mike was saying that though, was he? I mean he wasn't saying put affordable housing here. Councilwoman Dockendorf: No. He was, well. Mayor Chmiel: I guess what he's really relating to, and correct me if I'm wrong to what you were saying, was that you saw housing costs raising, whether it be affordable or not. Councilman Mason: Yes. Yes. Mayor Chmiei: Just the automatic overall. Councilman Mason: Yeah, thanks. Yeah. Councilman Senn: The larger the lot size. Councilman Wing: But the larger the lot, the smaller the lot is the greater the density so people we get in and then are we dealing with those issues. If we want to talk, density keeps coming up. Planning doesn't want to mess with it. I mean they can't get off dead center with density. They haven't for 10 years but yet density is the issue and I don't mind small lots, and I don't mind affordable housing. I don't see those as relevant issues at all. I mean let's talk affordable housing. Let's talk small lots. Density is what concerns me because I can't get on Highway 7 anymore. I can't get across Galpin Road on TH 5. These densities are really troubling me because they're making life unbearable. Councilman Senn: But Dick there's other parts of Chan that are better. Mayor Chmiel: With that we have a motion on the floor with a second. I'll call the question. Resolution g94.55: Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Wing seconded to approve the Conceptual PUD of 39.64 acres of property to create a single family development subject to the following conditions: Tho applicant incorporate design oomponents from the proposed Bluff Crook Watershod Plan that are boing initiated in the upcoming month. The City's recommendations will remain pending on the design components for the Bluff Creek Watershed Plan. A charette will be held on May 26, 1994 concerning the design issues for the creek north of Lyman Boulevard. Buffer strip widths and areas will be addressed at this time as a guidance for planning. 20 City Council Meeting - May 23, 1994 2. The proposed pending area in tho routhorn portion should bo relocated to loseen impact on wetlands, wooded areas and natural features. (Revised) All wetlands should bo surveyed by a professional weflancIs delineator, staked, and included in tho grading plan. Total amount of impact~! acres to the ~tland and a proposed mitigation plan will also bo require:l, if necessary. (Completed) Tho applicant should attempt to retain tho natural topographic features to preserve tho rolling tm $ff~c,t and dminag~ characteristics with tho final grading plan. A suggested layout re orienting tho road and maintaining som~ additional open space is recommended. Two regional stormwater ponds for water retention and pretreatment are recommended. One in the southwest comer and one in the east central section of the property to retain and ~retreat stormwater prior to discharge to the wetlands. The southwest pond is in the process of being constructed in coniunction with Stone Creek 4th Addition (Hans Hagen) to take runoff from portions of the Hans Hagen ~ro~ert¥ and the southern third of the Heritage ~ropertv. The east central pond should be designed to take runoff from the northern two-thirds of the propert3, in addition to portions of the Chanhassen Corm)rate Center property. Fees for trunk storm sewer will bo evaluated based on the applicant's contribution to the stormwater infrastructure. Protroatmont of tho stormwator runoff before it discharges into tho wetland is required. Tho City recommends a protroatmont pond in tho southxv~st coruor of ~tland Al5 11(1) (Lots 50, 51, and 52). When tho re~t of tho property is dov~lopod an additional protreatmont pond may bo necessary just north of wetland Al5 11(1). (Revised) 6. Wetland Al5 15(1) should remain and retain tho current drainage from Timbonvood lgstates and tho future Stone Creek 4th Addition backyards. (Revised) The SWMP requires the applicant to pay stormwater quality/quantity fees and trunk storm sewer charges as appropriate. The applicant may be entitled to some credit or compensation if they provide the necessary on- site stormwater quality/quantity improvements as outlined or modified in the SWMP. This will be determined upon review of the storm drainage/pending calculations. o The trunk sanitary sewer line be utilized to serve both a lateral and a trunk to benefit the adjacent property (staff recommends that the applicant provide a sewer service in the general location of Lots 3 and 4 for future extension into Timbenvood Estates). The best location for the sanitary sewer will be further investigated during the grading and utility plan preparation process. 9. The north/south street shall be extended through the outlet to connect to a future east/west frontage road within three years after the final plat is approved for the first phase. 10. Curvilinear streets are recommended to add aesthetics and character to the neighborhood as well as deter speeding motorists. The attached diagram suggests a street cut that will retain the stand of oaks in the central area of the oro~ert¥, provide ~)ublic access to the park, and allow for larger lot sizes along the western border. I 1. Tho north/south street (futuro Stone Crook Drive)should bo modified at the T intersection to provide major traffic movement from north to south and minor traffic movement on tho dead end cul do sac to tho east. (Revised) 21 City Council Meeting - May 23, 1994 12. Detailed construction drawings and specifications wilt be required for submittal with final plat approval. All street and utility construction should be in accordance to the City's latest edition of standard specifications and detail plates. 13. Final construction drawings are subject to staff review and formal City Council approval, 14. The applicant will be required to enter into a development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial security to guarantee installation of the public improvements and conditions of approval. 15. Trail easements connecting the interior of the development with the Bluff Creek Corridor trail system will need to be developed, 16, The applicant should investigate the use of private driveways to serve up to four lots fi.om the proposed north/south local street in order to minimize impacts on wooded areas and the wetlands. There are a number of vrivate drives on the east side of the road, It is recommended that these alternate between the east and west sides of the road, 17. The north/south street should provide a sidewalk on the zazt west side of the roadway to match the typical cross section for Stone Creek Drive. This sidewalk will make the roadway pedestrian friendly as well as permit school children to walk to the school site once the future frontage road is constructed. 18. A tree survey must be prepared as part of the dovslopment vreliminarv plat review process. In addition, a woodland management plan will be required as part of ths platting procoss. 19. The applicant may wish to investigate the use of setback variances to accommodate the siting of housing in the vicinity of wetlands or to preserve existed wooded or topographical features on the site. 20. Submit utility plans for review and approval. Fire hydrant spacing shall be 300 feet maximum, 21. Street names shall be submitted to the Fire Marshal for approval. 22. Submit turning radius dimensions to the Fire Marshal for review and approval. 23. Applicant shall address the comments enumerated in the letter from Joe Richter of the DNR dated 3/2/94." 24~, A ten (10) foot clear zone must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e. street laml3s, trees, shrubs, bushes, NSP, NW Bell, cable TV, transformer boxes. 25~ Submit turning radius and cul-de-sac dimensions to the City Engineer and Fire Marshal for al:qaroval. 26_..: The southern terminus of the trail shall not parallel the railroad tracks, It should be located between Lot 53 and the wetland with sufficient buffer to protect both. 27~ A 50 ft. wide trail strip shall be identified along the westerly border of the l~lat from the Stone Creek Drive extension south to the railroad tracks. This corridor is for the future Bluff Creek trail which will l~ass under the railroad tracks at this location, 22 City Council Meeting - May 23, 1994 28._.~. The mid-way trail connection shall be relocated to the vicinity of Lots 35, 36 and 37. This easement shall maintain the 30 ft. buffer distance consistent with the remainder of the site. This is accommodated as part of the staff sketch l~lan. 29~ The trail shall remain on the west side of the creek in its entirety, crossinlz the west branch at the convergence of the east and west branches, then continuing on to the collector road. 30_..~. Trail fee credit shall be granted for the construction of the trail. Buffer areas are required for wetland l~rotection and shall not be considered for park fee credit. 31_..~. One of the goals of the Bluff Creek Corridor plan is to provide a Clualit3, outdoor experience along the corridor. A necessary compenent of such an experience are open mace areas which provide views and allow for the placement of picnic tables, etc. Such smces are not represented on this plan. 32. A minimum one hundred (Iff)) building setback should be maintained from Bluff Creek. This may be revised based on the outcome of the Bluff Creek charrette. 33. The two small ponds that are not rexluired for stormwater retention or prelxeatment should be removed from the prol~osed plan. All voted in favor and the motion carried. LUTHERAN CHURCH OF THE LIVING CHRIST FOR A SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A 7,560 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION TO THE LUTHERAN CHURCH OF THE LIVING CHRIST ON PROPERTY ZONED OI, OFFICE INDUSTRIAL AND LOCATED ON.LOT 2, BLOCK 1, CHANHASSEN LAKES BUSINESS PARK, 820 LAKE DRIVE. Kate Aanenson: (A portion of the staff report did not get picked up by the microphone.) ...one of the additional things that we asked for is that they place a berm facing the proximity to Highway 5. A berm in the parking between Highway 5 and the church itselfi If you've driven across that, you're fight on grade...south of Highway 5. We are...getting MnDot approval. They are reviewing it fight now. There's also a power line in the area. The Planning Commission wanted me to review this project...berm could not be placed so they wanted to see some alternatives because they felt that that soften the building. They are doing landscaping out in front of the church and that does help soften...In addition we feel that there's additional areas that are outside the MnDot right-of-way that additional plantings can be done and also along the driveway easement even though.., in that area. Other than that we feel like the church has met the requirements of the Highway 5 overlay and would recommend approval with the conditions in the staff report. Mayor Chmiel: Good, thank you Kate. I like the looks of that myself. It's really quite outstanding. Would the applicant like to come forward and go through your formal presentation with this. Jim Dewalter: My name is Jim Dewalter. I'm Chairman of the Building Committee. Don Wagner is here as well. He's the architectural firm that we're working with and ff you'd like me to go through the changes we're going to make or the details of the plan? Mayor Chmiel: Yes, if you would. Just lightly. 23 City Council Meeting - May 23, 1994 Jim Dewalter: I think that you pretty much heard what all we're looking to be doing here because this portion of the church, which is the new 7,500 feet that we're talking about is about 3,800 feet per floor. It's two floors. It's primarily for classroom and staff offices on the top floor as well as an improved narthex, That's what that all is there. We've had a need for handicapped accessibility, both from the outside of the building as well as within the building and in these plans we have an elevator system to handle the traffic between floors and then also the ramping into the main level that's right in this entrance and then this is a new entrance down here and the vestibule that will accommodate the fin-st floor, or the basement. The basement level. These are 3 well established crab apples already that if any of you remember, they used to be in this area. We needed to move those. They're quite large. We've had to do quite a lot of trimming to keep them alive but they're doing fine so far and I think that it's helped.., Part of the berming that the staff has recommended or that we've asked to be able to do to accommodate some of the off site brick that we need to address as we do excavation as well as how we think that will tie in with Highway 5 with the parking lot and create somewhat of a buffer and we've agreed with staff that we would do the appropriate plantings once we see the berms in place and the building up and then we would go about addressing the plantings after as necessary. We do have concerns about that and that we have lost trees in the past because of the location of the property to Highway 5 and the snowplows and salt and that type of thing. We get quite a lot of burn out there but we'll work on that to come up with the right materials, whatever they might be. These are the materials. Don, maybe do you want to comment on these at all? Don Wagner: Good evening. First of all, this isn't my normal voice. Mayor Chmiel: It is too. I heard you at the Planning Commission. Don Wagner: ...that we're showing. This is a pre-cast concrete panel which is called corduroy and it's...as a limestone buff. The buff is created by a granular...that's going to be used predominantly through all of the exterior surfaces as you see the vertical striping around here and here and around here. This other material, we were looking for something to provide a little bit more interesting accent and this is going to be used around these two walls that are...added this as a band all the way across so that it would be significantly... Jim Dewalter: Kind of the timeframe of the project is we have..,Thursday night we'll be looking for final approval from the voters and we're confident that that in fact will happen. Construction, we're hoping to start by mid-June. The panels start going up the first week of July and we've been in this building now, it will be 25 years in September so it's our 25th Anniversary in September and we're having a celebration at that time so we're hoping to have the project, if not totally completed, very close to completion so we can use the facilities for that so it's a fairly quick project. It's nothing that's going to be hanging around for 6 to 9 months. We surely can't afford to be in that situation. So it's going to go up in a hurry in fact if we get all the approvals here. Don Wagner: On the interior, as far as the space is concerned. The existing entrances are over in this area. We're relocating them slightly to the south and reducing them to just two doors and two side lights. This flows into the existing narthex. The new narthex is really an extension of the existing narthex so you'll actually see this space flow all the way through. You'll also see the ceiling,.,same configuration as the roof. Mayor Chmiel: Very good. Does the Council have any questions? Thank you. We'll start on the far end. Mark. 24 City Council Meeting - May 23, 1994 Councilman Senn: I guess no questions. Don't really see any problem with it. Like what I see. I guess the only thing I'd like to see is I'd like to see item 10, under the recommendations, stricken because I really see it as being repetitive and it's already included in item 1 and I'd be perfectly happy with staff making that evaluat_ion as the professionals if that situation arises. That wouldn't necessitate them having to come all the way back through approvals which I think is a little repetitive and arduous. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Michael. Councilman Mason: Looks good. Well it does. It looks nice. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah it does. Colleen. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Ditto. No, I have a couple more comments. No, I think it looks great. I like how the applicant came in to the Planning Commission with a very sound plan to start with. I really like this, what would you call it? Kate Aanenson: They call it an isometric view. Councilwoman Dockendorf: An isometric view. An artist rendering from what I can tell. It's very, very helpful. I agree with Mark about condition number 10. I don't see that as necessary. Mayor Chmiel: Richard. Councilman Wing: Kate, the last church we did, just almost as a casual comment we mentioned overstory shade trees and how it could enhance their property long term. And I counted 13 and they put in 16 without even asking. Was there a reason we didn't encourage that here? I mean there's a million little. Kate Aanenson: That was a brand new site plan. There was a lot of flexibility. This is an existing site plan. If you go down on the slopes. If we would have increased the parking lot in order to do that, what you'd be doing is cutting the grade...the topography would be actually cut into the existing trees and put the parking lot down. You can't go...No additional parking is required so really all we'd be accomplishing is taking down some existing trees. Staff concurred that we needed to do something to soften the front and we've identified places on the plan. In front of the parking lot too. It's not only the berm but on the eastern side in an area_There is a significant stand as you're coming to the west. On the down slope. Councilman Senn: On the hill there. Kate Aanenson: Yeah. But really, the site does drop off dramatically and in trying to accomplish that, we'd be doing a lot of grading and taking out some existing vegetation. And we did look at that... Councilman Wing: Well I wasn't even suggesting that. You're right. It's an existing site plan. I guess all I'll say is that because it sits up high it's sort of a stark area. Whatever trees they put in will really benefit them as well as us in the future. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. I guess I don't have any comments on it either. I like what I see and I did spend an evening at the Planning Commission. I'd like to request a motion. 25 City Council Meeting - May 23, 1994 Councilman Senn: I move approval. Deleting t0. Councilwoman Dockendoff: Second. Councilman Senn moved, Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded to approve Site Plan Review #94-2 for a 7,560 square foot addition to the Lutheran Church of the Living Christ subject to the plan dated April 5, 1994 and subject to the following conditions: The applicant shall obtain and comply with MnDot's permit for constructing the berms and landscaping within MnDot's right-of-way. In the event that no landscaping is approved by MnDot or NSP in the ROW or power easement, then the applicant shall submit a revised landscaping plan for final review and approval by city staff. 2. Storm sewers and curb and gutler are not necessary with this phase of expansion. However, future expansions may require the site be brought up to city ordinance with curbs, gutters and storm sewers. 3. The parking lot stall design should be modified to provide a minimum of 22 foot wide drive aisles and 8 1/2 foot by 18 foot long parking stalls. This can be accomplished by restriping. 4. The applicant shall redesign the drive island drop off area to accommodate proper bus turning movements. Additional landscaping along the proposed berm of Highway 5 as well as the southeastern portion of the property along both sides of the driveway to the church. The landscaping along the driveway shall consist of a mix of 5 conifers and 5 deciduous trees as selected from the city's landscaping list. A landscaped berm be placed in the MnDot ROW. If approval from MnDot and NSP cannot be gained, it is recommended that intensive landscaping for the islands in front of the main entrance and outside the utility easement area be designed and submitted for approval by city staff. 6. A staff review be conducted of this parking arrangement annually for the next 2-3 years to monitor parking needs and to require the additional spaces to constructed should the need arise. 7. All conditions as stated in the Building Official's memo dated April 14, 1994. 8. All conditions as stated in the Fire Marshal's memo dated April 21, 1994. 9. Any building lighting improvements shall be made in conformance with the city's lighting standards and shall be subject to £mal review and approval by city staff. 10. Deleted. All voted in favor and the motion carded unanimously. ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 11 OF THE CHANHASSEN CITY CODE CONCERNING FIREARMS AND CITY SHOOTING BOUNDARY MAP REVISION, FIRST READING. Mayor Chmiel: Scott. By the way, for those of you who were aware or not aware, Scott's daughter is back home after a long touch and go at Children's Hospital in St. Paul and it's nice to hear that~ 26 City Council Meeting - May 23, 1994 Scott Hart: Very good. Thank you Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor and members of Council, I presented to you in your packets a background analysis and recommendations of an ordinance amendment to the section of City Code dealing with shooting boundaries within the city limits along with the revised shooting boundary map.., a significant effort undertaken by the Public Safety Commission the 7 years that I've been here and they have sought to balance the recreation and safety. Because of the continuous growth of our city, both the ordinance amendment and the map reflect increased conlxols of shooting by the city as well as a marked decrease in the area. The only response that I've received from the affected landowners that I mailed information about tonight's meeting to was from Mark Halla who requested that there be included something to permit shooting ranges elsewhere in the city. However, the amendment that would permit such a use outside of the area would defeat shooting boundaries themselves and a shooting range that meets the other authorizations would be permitted if it met the requirements within the general ordinance. One addition that I would like to ask that the Council consider in addition to what I'm presenting tonight would be on page 3. Adding a fourth item to section C that would limit shooting to B-B guns, pellet guns, shotguns or bows, unless specifically approved by the Public Safety Director for the welfare or public safety of the community. We have. restricted shooting to shotguns, bows and arrows but in the event they would get to the point where control might become necessary, the commission did want to provide the city with the opportunity to expand the boundaries and reference for safety sake in those specific situations. With those comments I'll be happy to answer any questions that you have but I believe the information along with my recommendation for the ordinance change and the map is within your packets. Mayor Chmiel: Good, thank you. Is there anyone wishing to address this at this time? Be, n. Ben Gowen: My name is Ben Gowen at 6440 Hazeltine Boulevard. I've got established gardens that were established in 1939. The deer are devastating it. I've got approximately 3,000 lily plants, or...plants that they have not affected. However I have friends over in Lake Elmo that say that they're feeding...but I've got 6,000 lily bulbs down there that I've harvested...but I haven't cut any of them in the last 3 years because the deer wipe out all the buds the day before I want to cut them. I can't spray for deer away or any of them chemical products on lilies because then the florist can't handle the product because they get the product on themselves and their face and what not and so they're not amenable to spraying cut flowers to keep the deer from eating them. I've tried fencing. By laying fence on the ground. For 2 years they didn't walk across the fence as long as it was laying on the ground. Now they've learned to walk through it. Along with that I've got 550 varieties of hosta with numerous stock grows that they anniliated. They eat them up like grass. I would like to be allowed to use bow hunting on my property and try to eliminate some of the deer that are down there. There's the highway is doing a pretty good job. They got 7 on Highway 5 in one week last year. 2 of them landed in my front yard. There's a couple folks here, Mr. and M_rs. Siebert that are bow hunters and want to use my property to hunt with bow. The lower part of my property, which is 7, approximately 7 acres faces the Herman ball park and the Carver County Park. There's kind of water areas, swimming areas in that area, down in that comer and that would be the area that they would be shooting to or for to deal with this swamp area. I'd like to have a permit to use bow hunters down in that area. These folks might have a word or two to say in that behalf for getting a permit especially for my property. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Karen Siebert: My name is Karen Siebert. I live at 101 East Broadway Street in Osseo. And Mr. Gowen and I have a mutual friend who explained his problem with deer...to me and when I called the city last fall, before I called him telling him I wanted to hunt, I found out that he was not in an area that was open to bow hunting. And I suggested he get in touch with the city and see what there was that he could do to open it up for him. As 27 City Council Meeting - May 23, 1994 it was explained to me and as I viewed the property since then, I believe that in his situation, where his lot is, the way that it's wooded, and the fact that he's adjacent to, that bow hunting would be a solution. A partial solution. Not a complete solution but the pressure that it would put on by the bow hunters in the area, not only hopefully we'll take one or two, maybe more deer out of there, depending on how many hunters come in and on the number of licenses that are available this fall to the bow hunters. But the pressure itself from hunters in the area does help to force the deer back out. He is adjacent to the park and a heavy trail that comes in from the park and the fact that he has seen so many deer killed on the highway right near his home indicates to me that there is some problem in that area In the park and on his property with a high population of deer and if it is not addressed at this time, it should be considered by the County as some kind of a near future problem...The accidents on the highway and the number of deer killed and people, the possibility of human life being endangered...And I think if the Council has questions, just looking at the property and the fact that it is extremely wooded in the back, part of the property, If you're not familiar with the bow hunting, I'd be happy to answer any questions that I can... Mayor Chmiel: Is them any questions by Council? I guess not, thank you. Scott, maybe you could sort of address some of the specific issues. Scott Hart: Mr. Mayor, it was a very difficult decision for the commission to not endorse Mr. Gowen's request and they did discuss it at length. The fact that they endorsed the other request indicates that the commission was not against any changes because they added to and deleted from the existing map. The 500 foot mark that the Statute sets forth for firearms, the commission seemed reasonable for bow hunting as well. The size of the parcel and the proximity to the neighborhood to the north, the highway to the east, the park to the west, and the regional park to the south led the commission to question whether the risk...analysis made it worth while...to be productive. We had the DNR conservation officer deal with the commission and a concern that was broi~ght up that's outlined in the memo was that even if the deer are shot, that they have, at least the potential for wandering onto the highway and the speaker was certainly right, and Mr. Gowen. The deer kill by cars are becoming an increasing problem for us but the commission was concerned about adding to it by creating a situation where an injured deer would wander off the property or perhaps even onto the school property and this was an issue that was brought up by the conservation officer. It was also discussed that the location of the property is just at a prime deer place. It's just right there with two parks bordering it and as I understand some of heaviest deer population in the regional park and it was questioned by the conservation officer whether any amount of shooting during the season would resolve this problem that Mr. Gowen eloquently put it. The deer like his property. And so for those reasons, weighing all of the factors, the commission did not think that a potential benefit of shooting some deer was worth the potential risk of the proximity and not only neighborhoods but the highway. And they did wrestle with this and as you see, we put a significant amount of effort into measuring and trying to f'md some way around this one spot. Mr. Gowen and I did talk about the possibility of him working with the DNR to try to come up with some alternative solutions. The commission talked about deer traps. It's just, it's a very challenging problem from our position and his. And I appreciate the input from the presenter tonight because I've learned a tot about bow hunting, as has the commission. It's a difficult problem. Councilman Wing: What does the season nm? What's the dates on the season? Richard Siebert: September 15th to end of November. First part of December. Ben Gowen: End of December. Scott Ham End of December? 28 City Council Meeting - May 23, 1994 Councilman Wing: I took 150 squirrels out of my yard illegally in one year and I never made a dent and I can't believe the impact that didn't have. So if we had a year round season, would it alleviate the problem? That was the question at the commission wasn't it? With this population and the movement, they'd have to be out. there constantly protecting their property. Wasn't that the resolution towards the end? Scott Ham That was. That was a possibility...brainstorming different solutions. Councilman Senn: Question for you. In terms of the other areas, okay that you're allowing hunting, okay. Is the purpose for allowing hunting in those other areas thinning the population or some other reason? Scott Hart: Could you repeat that? Councilman Senn: Okay, the areas which you are proposing or the commission's proposing that we continue to allow hunting, okay. Is the reason or the purpose for that to thin the population or is it another reason just generally because it's there and it's a hunting area or what? Scott Ham Good question. The Halla Nursery property and the Gorra property specifically requested to be included with the bow hunting because of the damage to the commercial product on those properties. The other areas are strictly recreational. Does that answer your question? Councilman Senn: Yeah. If you take this area as well as then those two areas that have been included for damage purposes, can we not in effect leave those out as designated areas and in effect still cover them under what you're suggesting through the ordinance, which is controlled hunt? You know for the purpose of thinning population. The thing I'm getting at Scott is this, you know ! think we're fast coming to a day where you're not going to see any hunting in Chanhassen anymore and it's not because I'm against hunting. I've been one for 30 years. But you know the city's growing. It's getting hard to go anywhere in the city without running into population and I get real concerned about the safety that gets involved with that. But it seems to me that yeah, there's going to be problems that go along with it but to me there's logical and controlled ways to handle those problems, such as the one this gentleman has. Such as the other two requests. I mean if it's a thinning request, to me you put it in the ordinance and allow it to go in under a controlled situation and deal with it. It seems to me then everybody's happy. But at the same time we're not just creating open hunting zones which quite frankly I do have a problem with. At least in terms of populated areas like TH 7 and TH 41. That's not to underplay the problem because there's a problem there but again I take what's in that area and what borders it and what's around there and it raises real concerns in my mind in terms of open hunting. Scott Ham And you've addressed thoughts that the commission looked at as well because you're thinking is exactly what the community at large was thinking. Whether it's new residents moving from one suburb to here and not being used to the noise or perceived danger or because they want to maintain a sporting activity, the commission really has put in a lot of time because of the emotion and the practical issues here, to try to balance that. And as you look at the map, there just isn't much area left and particularly because platted property does not permit hunting. By the ordinance that exists or the one I'm recommending .... close it down every year by jus[ Councilman Senn: Well attrition of this week, right? Scott Hart: And the hunters, exactly. And the hunters have been extremely responsible. We've issued very, very few citations over the last several years since we've really brought our program together and I think the 29 City Council Meeting - May 23, 1994 majority of those have been from people from outside the community. We just have been extraordinarily pleased with how the community's policed themselves. Councilman Senn: Well couldn't we get rid of the hair splitting I guess is my question? I mean the hair splitting in this is, to me is deciding where you pick these little pockets out. I mean to me we ought to go in and say these are recreational areas because they still belong as recreational hunting areas and those may thin and go away over time, as I'm certain they will but treat all the other areas the same, which is if there's a problem, then set up control situations to deal with it. What was the commission's reaction to that? Scott Hart: Well the difficulty is, how do we determine what a problem is. The goose situation on the north end has been a problem but is it worth bringing in a number of hunters to deal with that amount of geese coming over. Councilman Senn: Don't have to hunt them at all. Just lay the cord down and put them in cages and haul them away. Scott Hart: And that's, some communities are doing that with deer. With deer traps and I've seen some of the emotions that have come about that. I feel much better about having a very definitive ordinance because we get so, it's such an emotional issue. It's very difficult. The more opportunity the city has to say well maybe, the more difficult it is. Councilman Mason: How does, I know Murphy Handerhand Park, Hennepin County Park has closed. I mean they close the park and they hunt deer. I know even Highland Park here in Bloomington does that. I mean those areas are, (a) they're controlled hunts but good griefi There are people all over the place around the perimeter of those parks and that, I mean how, I guess I'm kind of. Councilman Senn: Controlled hunt's a whole different situation. Councilman Mason: Yeah. And I'm kind of hearing what Mark is saying here and I clearly, in 10 years I question that there will be any hunting. In our fair city, just because like he said and like you said, attrition but is there a way that we can address Mr. Gowen's concern? I mean by a conu'olled hunt...there are areas in town. I mean look. I will stare at Bambi for hours so I don't want you know deer lovers to, you know the phone's going to be ringing off the hook. I have seen and tracked more deer without killing them than those people probably could ever dream of. But the fact remains, I mean deer get like raccoon if we got too many of them. Something needs to be done. You know raccoons walk across the street and get killed a little bit more regularly I think than deer do but what...but what can we do in terms of, is there anything we can do in terms of controlled hunt to take care of that problem? Scott Harr: I think that would involve dealing with the DNR to do a deer count. Population count and if it was determined that that was an appropriate step, to make arrangements to either open up hunting or bring in sharp shooters to thin the herds to whatever amount the DNR would determine would be appropriate. And that is what other communities are doing. Eden Prairie's getting..xight now. Mayor Chmiel: Maybe what I'm probably listening to is that Council seems quite acceptable I think probably to this proposal but I'd like to maybe just see staff have some additional discussions with Mr. Gowen and maybe some other solutions can come out of that that could eliminate some of the given problems that he's having with the deer. And I think that maybe some of that could be done with that kind of determination. I would like to, 3O City Council Meeting - May 23, 1994 maybe I'll get back to what my position on this right now would be to proceed with the mending portions that we've gone through because this is going to be the f~t reading and we can probably have some further discussions with this prior to it coming back for it's second reading. Yeah Colleen. Councilwoman Dockendorf: I have a question. How long will this be in effect? Getting at, we've got a large shooting area between border 1 and CR 17 south of TH 5. A big shooting area and we've got Opus going in there. We've got Trotters Ridge really close. It just seems that that's going to, I guess my question is, how long is this map going to be in place. Is this this year's map? Because next year it's going to have to change. Scott Ham The commissions reviews it annually well before the hunting season. Councilwoman Dockendorf: So this is for the '94 season only? Mayor Chmiel: For this '93 season. Councilwoman Dockendorf: It's '94. Kate, is anything going to happen with, do you see any developments in that area taking off right now? Mayor Chmiel: Everything's sold. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Yeah, everything's sold. Mayor Chmiel: So you never know. Councilwoman Dockendorf: I guess it will need to be revised if you know, anything happens. Mayor Chmiel: But the commission does look at this on a yearly basis. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Okay. That's my question, thank you. Mayor Chmiel: You had your hand up before. I wasn't ignoring you, I was just trying to get discussion here with Council. Richard Siebert: My name is Richard Siebert and I live at 101 East Broadway Street in Osseo. I'm the husband to Karen who is actually the hunter in the family. I wanted to point out a few things. I wanted to thank Mr. Hart first of all. His commission's obviously done a lot of work and I've dealt with Councils before on things similar to this. This is a better report than I've seen in most cases and I appreciate your effort. I wanted to point out that Mr. Gowen has 7 acres and you are recommending in your report 3 acre hunts for Capable Partners with shotguns. The bow range is not anywhere near where a shotgun range is. I'd also like to point out that even if no deer were taken from that area, the presence of hunters will or can alter the travel of the deer. So it may, even if we don't take any deer out of that area, help him with his problems in his gardens. I also want to point out that the safety record of a bow hunter is probably unequaled to any other type of hunter in the United States. There's never been a fatality of a bow hunter hunting legally anywhere. You mentioned trapping of the deer. That has proven to not be effective and it's not cost effective at all either. Special hunts provided by the DNR...are about $80.00 a head or something like that. Karen Sieben: That's sharp shooting... 31 City Council Meeting - May 23, 1994 Richard Siebert: And plus you get a media circus along with that happening. The animal rights protesters and... As far as small parcels of land being hunted, I would like to point out that...in Minnetonka has had hunt. It was very successful. That was some 21 acres. Total. I think it's in the middle of the city next to a park. Plymouth has hunts on parcels as small as 10 acres. Fort Snelling had a hunt on the cemetery. The Fort SneLling cemetery last fall, which is a very busy place and had absolutely no incidents or problems. North Oaks has hunts within their city regularly during the year because they have a horrendous deer population. Much worse than you have here and they for the most part had no problems. We would recommend that if you allow bow hunters on smaller areas or preferably any area, that you require in your ordinance, Minnesota Bow Hunter Education Certificate. This at least means that that person has taken a minimum amount of training to learn this craft. And the bow hunting not only provides you somewhat with a control with no cost to the city but man. Y cities also charge a small fee for an extra license to hunt within the city limits so that can be brought up. Again, as far as safety goes, we both belong to an organization called...Archers of Coon Rapids at Bunker Hills. we have targets within 50 yards of residences. You can see the residences from the targets and we've had few, if no complaints. Very accurate range. Again, just with my wife, we'd like to offer any services we could with your permission. If you have a quesfion...can answer those questions. Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Good, thanks. Councilman Wing: Scott we had a goose hunt, clearly was one of the most hilarious nights in the Council chambers I've ever witnessed. ! thought it was worth paying to be there that night. Some of the goose and anti- goose people and I'm glad, well at any rate. We all know that the goose, not only collecting the geese off the lake at a fairly, well costs a lot of money but then we also had a goose hunt. We opened up this area north of TH 5 and east of TH 41 for a goose hunt and we're talking about a lot of birds. I mean we're talking about an influx becoming unbearable for health. It was just becoming a public ha?~rd. So the DNR allows this special shoot and our process is to get rid of these birds and then they go out and tag because they're over their limit. I mean if there was one day I would have probably not been there or turned my back, it would have been that day. So I think we get into these things. You get 3 days to hunt and you're allowed 1 deer. But yet we've got 400 we're trying to get rid of. I almost don't want to deal with them except off 'the record, quietly. Whatever they want to do. But I want to get back to Mark here has a real valid point that I'd like to see you address as we move ahead here and that's if the Public Safety Director, because of a specific need on a specific parcel, under his direction, so on and so forth, couldn't go through this thinning process without having to talk about it and get into the, this area is open. This area isn't. And work with the DNR with just that homeowner. Maybe it needs to be done off season if there's a critical issue. I don't know what the rules are and I'm not a hunter but whatever Mark was getting at, I'd like to tack onto that and ask that that be followed up on because I felt that had some real validity in this whole process. Councilman Senn: I think everybody jumps to the conclusion under a controlled hunt and assumes that means bringing in sharp shooters and stuff. I mean what I'm suggesting is if you take a recreational area that belongs to recreational and you make it that. Other than that you treat everybody else the same, which is ff there's a problem, you organize the controlled hunt. A controlled hunt may be you're deciding to let 5 bow and arrow hunters into the area or something. I mean again, I don't think we need to be involved in that kind of a decision on a seasonal basis. I think that's something that's between you the DNR and stuff you do. But at the same time, I think we could have a little bit of a problem by saying well this parcel it's okay on but this parcel it's not okay on as far as the designations and stuff. I think there's probably some valid arguments saying well why do they get it, you know why don't I. At the same time, if they don't like deer, I still suggest they go buy some good dogs because they do wonders and stuff and we've kept deer out of our yard for years on that basis. But I mean again there's lots of ways, I guess what I'm trying to say, to deal with the problem so I think you should 32 City Council Meeting - May 23, 1994 have the ability to do that and go do that and this shouldn't be an annually recurring issue. I think what we should be dealing with is shrinking the recreational area which should really be the only areas we deal with. Councilman Wing: With Mark, I'd like to give you that flexibility to be able to do that. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any other discussion? If not, I'd like a motion. Councilman Mason: I'd like to make a motion to approve first reading of the ordinance mending Chapter 11 of the Chanhassen City Code firearms and city shooting boundary map revision with directing staff or Public Safety Commission to continue to work with Mr. Gowen or whatever the case. If we need to look into these closed hunts or whatever you'd call them. On an as needed basis. Mayor Chmiel: Second? Councilman Wing: Second. Mark, did that cover what you were homing in on? Councilman Senn: I think it's a direction, it goes in that direction but what I'd really like to see is eliminate the other special parcels and lump them all into this category so Scott can just go and do it. Mayor Chmiel: I think at some time that's going to just automatically take care of itself. Okay. Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Wing seconded to approve first reading of the ordinance amending Chapter 11 of the Chanhassen City Code concerning Firearms and City Shooting Boundary Map Revision with direction to staff to continue working on discussions regarding controlled hunting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS: HIGHWAY 212 UPDATE REPORT, MAYOR CHMIEL. Mayor Chmiel: I just wanted to give you an update on the Southwest Corridor Transportation Coalition that I attended last Tuesday, which was May 17th. Some of the information that they're talking about, there's several different things. First of all, the total amount of dollars that's been appropriated by the Feds and with the State. They have $7.5 million which is dealing towards the Scott County Bridge and that has been following through and moving along. There's also a million dollars that have been taken for the RALF funds so it can be done for acquiesce of given properties and so on for right-of-ways. And then of course one thing that will probably interest us as well regarding light rail transit where they still have $10 million that have been appropriated for that. With the jurisdiction and factor of that being the counties within each of the 7 county metro area who has that responsibility of creating a corridor somewhere within each respective county. They were also taking out $35 million to defer out to the 1995-96 projects and some of the target dates that have been there have been set back in comparison. Some of the other things that I'd like to point out is that we did make a motion to inform the transportation coalition that we were not too excited about the toll road feasibility that they were talking about. Well plain and simple, we can either go along with it or we're going to get it one way or the other. Only because of the balance of the communities are in agreement to go through with that process for several reasons. To go through the acquiesce of that $75,000.00 for the road feasibility. The principle purpose of the study, and I think hopefully most of you have had an opportunity to take a look at it but I just want to reiterate a little bit. It says where this will assist local units of government in evaluating the potential viability of Trunk 33 City Council Meeting - May 23, 1994 Highway 212 as a toll way and 2, which is going to also provide a preliminary base of information for potential developers of the project should the State...study suggest that the desirability of proceeding further with the approach. And 3, which is also analyzing the prospects for funding Trunk Highway 212 by traditional non tollway methods. If the tollway does not work out, you're looking at this thing maybe 10 to 20 years down the road. If it goes with a toliway, you're still looking probably at 10 years down the road. So it's a combination of two different things. That input that I was mentioning before of other communities in and along this particular stretch for the TH 212 corridor is all the way from Eden Prairie as far west as you would care to go. Each of those communities are all in favor of getting this done to their respective areas as well. Right now as I mentioned, as far as the current funding sources, they're not available. I said it was going to be 10 to 20 years down the road. And the only way really that they can see is going the tollway. There hasn't been a tollway put in the State of Minnesota. I don't expect it's going to take place but they have to go ahead and proceed with this and determine what has to be done. How it can be done and what involvement is really there. MnDot is one who will fund up that $75,000.00. The City of Chaska has also agreed to be the lead community with MnDot in regard to that funding and also to conduct a study. Their City Council is basically in full agreement with that proposal at this particular time. There is a steering committee that's going to consist from 2 representatives from each local unit of government and what they are planning on doing is going out for an RFP on toll roads. And I think what they want to do that is by June 1 of this year acquire a consultant by August 1 and to have this pretty much pulled together by January of '95. So they can, for the next legislative session, to see whether or not there'd be any funding from the State as well. So it's understood that each of these agencies that are going to participate on the steering committee, is really for the purpose of facilitating and preparation of the feasibility report. And I guess that's all I really had to say. Only because of the fact that I did support our position at that meeting and I wish the hell the rest of you were there to defend yourselves. Councilman Senn: You didn't tell us. I think it's wonderful if you did that. Mayor Chmiel: But anyway, that's where that's at right now. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Could I ask a question about, where's the LRT going? Where does that sit? Mayor Chmiel: The light rail transit? Councilwoman Dockendorf: Yes. Mayor Chmiel: Normally the counties are the ones who sit back and determine where that route is going to be. Where is it going to go? Nobody's going anywhere on it. Nobody's spending anything. There's been a lot of dollars spent by all the counties within, well I should say between Hennepin and Ramsey. Washington really hasn't done too much nor has Dakota County. Carver.., Councilwoman Dockendorf: So we did a study and it's just sitting nowhere? Mayor Chmiel: Right. Councilwoman Dockendorf: No one's even denied that it's. Mayor Chmiel: It's the dollar that is really where the problem is. And there's not enough funding coming. Is really what it boils down to. 34 City Council Meeting - May 23, 1994 Councilman Wing: The Southwest Corridor Transportation Coalition, this is a private sector driven committee. This isn't a government committee. Mayor Chmiel: No. All communities in and adjacent to. I wanted to bring out one other point too. BeCause when we were trying to do some of this with the Highway 5 corridor that we have at that time in trying to get it extended. We've had all these other communities also supporting our position in getting I-Iighway 5 to work that right now. And also there's support for the extension of Highway 5 to TH 41. And I sort of felt like I was there with a cloak and dagger. Councilman Wing: Yeah-but we didn't charge them. Councilman Senn: But you shouldn't Don because we support the extension of TH 212 1 think 100%. Mayor Chmiel: That's right, and that's the position that I said except for that part of the toll but they still have to go through the process to come up with the determination as to how and when it can really go. Whether it's even feasible. Councilman Senn: I understand but I just, you know when you start talking about $75,000.00, I mean to me that one's right up there on the top of whoever that guy's list is for waste in government. Councilman Mason: The Golden Fleece. Councilman Senn: The Golden Fleece Award. Right at 100%. I mean to study a toll road for 212. Mayor Chmiel: That's where that RAL funding has come in where they can attach onto this. And you're right, I'd like to see them put $75,000.00 into Highway '5 to finish it to TH 41. Councilman Senn: That's right. Or something. I mean anything productive. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Start building 212. Mayor Chmiel: What they're trying to do is eliminate the total years. Really it's a farm to market kind of road that really comes back in on 212. Councilman Wing: And they would like to get their...supported out past us and that's good. Well we're not charging them 25 cents to get there now and they charge me 25 cents to get there. Mayor Chmiel: Well there's different ways that that can be done too. As far as license plates are concerned. The City can ask that, we could have something put onto our tabs or onto our plates as a tab showing that there's no charge to be done in the city of Chanhassen. Or you could go through...Some of the things that we have is where they can pick up on a vehicle and bill them on a monthly basis. Councilwoman Dockendorf: You can put a chip in my neck too doing the same thing. Mayor Chmiel: That's right. But you're going to have to stick it out the window. You've got to be careful how you're driving. 35 City Council Meeting - May 23, 1994 Councilman Senn: Why don't we spend $75,000.00 to lobby to get the money to do 212. I mean to me even if we lost, that's money better spent that studying some goofy concept that could never survive or exist in this state and everybody knows it before it starts. Councilman Wing: In the State of Minnesota I would like to have the money to build our infrastructure and keep it for public use and not let the private sector start driving some of these issues. Or put it someplace that there's no chance I will ever visit, drive or go, Councilman Senn: If toll roads were feasible in Minnesota, they'd already have one on 35-W. Come on. I mean they're trying to figure out how to pay for that one. Mayor Chmiel: ..,hard time throwing that money in, they won't have those kinds of things. Councilman Wing: I have heard this Council every time this is brought up say let's now and for myself I don't want to. I don't want to be part of the study. I hope I'm not being short sighted. I hope I'm not looking a gifted horse in the mouth but I don't think this is the way to run government and I don't like, This is just another tax and either we've got the money to do it or we don't do it, And if we went as a community, want to get together and spend the $75,000.00 on lobbying, you would take it and I bet you would do a heck of a job for US. Mayor Chmiel: That's what he's thinking too. Councilman Wing: Boy, give it to Mark and turn him loose over at the State. That's for me, Councihnan Senn: You can't afford me Dick, Councilman Wing: 75 won't pass it huh? Councilman Mason: This is an update. This is nothing to vote on fight? Mayor Chmiel: No. Just strictly as an update. Councilman Wing: Thank you Don, Councilman Senn: Except we haven't agreed to enter the project correct? Mayor Chmiel: Pardon me. Councilman Senn: I mean in our previous votes we haven't agreed to enter the project. Councilwoman Dockendoff: We're not signing this is what. Mayor Chmiel: That's right, We are so far being excluded from it. Councilman Senn: I'd like to really reiterate our support for the project but this concept I think is. Mayor Chmiel: I think maybe what we'll do is have some of those people talk to you and give you a call, 36 City Council Meeting - May 23, 1994 Councilman Senn: Sure, why not. What's a few more phone calls. I'm just really curious since we got this, who are these people? I mean there's not one from the whole southwest area but I'm just curious. Mayor Chmiel: The information that was being sent to them are people who can move ahead with some of the materials to pull together for the particular proposal. See whether any of those, they may be one of the RFB's that I think will go to. Councilwoman Dockendorf: They're the consultants. Mayor Chmiel: Exactly. Okay. Your tm'ri. You're on there Mark. Council Presentations. Councilman Senn: Ah yes. Real quickly. I think it'd be really nice. I just got my Cha.~ka Community Center Non-Resident Bill again and I think it would just be wonderful that we direct staff to either initiate a fee for our new community center for anyone who lives out of Chanhassen, or better yet negotiate a reciprocal agreement between the two communities so we don't have to do that kind of, excuse me, idiotness. Which doesn't belong there in the f~t place. But I think it's absolutely ridiculous that our citizens, who helped pay for the Chaska Community Center in the first place because was built totally with...TIF funds, have to sit there and pay a non- resident fee on it. Especially now when we're building a community center which people who live outside Chanhassen and are part of the Chaska School system are going to be able to use with no differentiation of fee at all. How about if we kind of do something about that? Councilman Mason: Is Hoffman still here? Mayor Chmiel: That's how you create good working relationships between communities. Councilman Senn: It's turn about fair play. It has nothing to do with working relationships. I mean our residents have to pay $100.00 more than a resident of Chaska to go to that center and ff that's the case, then why should we be making up part of our f'mancial ~oblems that way too. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. Well, you have a choice of either going or not going as well. Councilman Senn: Well that's right but they all have that same choice. I mean our's, we're not tacking that on. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. Same thing with our park which is not quite as high in price. But same thing again. Councilman Senn: More amenities in some ways. Don Ashworth: Why don't you ask staff to address that and put it in as part of a future, at minimum administrative section, if not tacked onto an agenda where we will report. I guess as I'm sitting here I don't know the implications. I guess I'd like to talk with Todd and see what we're talking about. I heard what you're saying. I don't know to respond. Councilman Wing: Well I'd like to see that on an administrative presentation... Councilman Senn: Yeah. I'd like to see it at least investigated and see where we can go with it, 37 City Council Meeting - May 23, 1994 Councilman Wing: In fact I do identify that as clearly as their city's recreational unit and I personally I guess expect to pay more if t was to go down there as a non-resident. The issue then, if you accept that. If you just feel we ought to be taking those same approaches. Councilman Senn: - Well my understanding that the resident fee at Chaska Community Center is a resident fee based on whether you live in the city of Chaska or the Chaska School District. Councilman Wing: Or School District? Councilman Senn: Yeah. Now I may be wrong on that but that's what somebody on the Park Commission told me. ff that in fact is the case, then I mean to me especially then that. Councilman Mason: Ooh yeah, that's a little different. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, then that would be a little different. Councilman Senn: And so I mean, that's one twist I'd like to look at and have the answer to. The second one that I'd love to have the answer to would be, just even if that isn't the case, just the reciprocal, I mean again, we're going to have gymnasiums sitting down there that are going to be servicing a good chunk of Chaska's population because of the School Dislrict. We have a park that already does that with very minimal fees and everything else like that. I mean hey, that's our park. It's going to be our community center. So I mean, you know it seems to me we ought to get rid of the silly boundary so to speak if we're going to do it and do it across the board or else we both start charging each other. Mayor Chmiel: I think what I'd like to see is staff really address that and come up with some conclusions. Because that could be just hearsay too. Maybe it's not the facts or anything else. Don Ashworth: I will look into that. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, okay. Colleen. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Mine was already addressed. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: A. REVIEW DRAFT LETTER FOR LCMR PROJECT, PLANNING DIRECTOR. Kate Aanenson: ...letter that we put together in draft form but...as you are aware we have applied for the $700,000.00 LCMR Grant for...that meets periodically and we have people on there...what we're suggesting here is maybe the Council, this is kind of a form letter we put together and if that's okay, if you have any concern with the language, that we just go ahead and type it up and have that available for you at your next meeting to sign... Mayor Chmiel: I would say that yes. As soon as we can. I'd like to see that done and have the entirety of Council sign that letter to them requesting it. 38 City Council Meeting - May 23, 1994 Councilwoman Dockendorf: I think it would be attached to something that would tell us what slrategy J is and strategy. Kate Aanenson: Well what it is is a form that goes with the grant application...but we can certainly attach that... But there's certain criteria that you have to meet to apply for grants... Mayor Chmiel: I'd like to see us send them some, along with this letter, pictures of the given area so it gives them a little more of an idea as to what we're really talking about. How pristine that basically is. Councilwoman Dockendoff: Good idea_ Mayor Chmiel: Okay, no action is required on that. Don. B. WORK SESSIONS, CONFIRM SCHEDULE, CITY MANAGER. Don Ashworth: At our last work session, two staff members..xecall exactly what the City Council did as far as dealing with future work sessions. The problem was every one of those positions was absolutely different. My recollection was that we skip this past Monday. Monday was a problem and so therefore we did Wednesday and that was just for that one time but from there on out we'd do the off Mondays at 5:30. Another position was to do the Wednesday prior to Planning Commission meetings. And another position was the Thursday prior to like Councilman Wing: I don't remember any of those. Don Ashworth: What is the Council's pleasure? For the remaining work sessions, do you want that first and third, off Mondays or is there another? Mayor Chmiel: Let's scratch it for the summer. Councilman Mason: That's a concept. Councilman Wing: I'd like to get TH 5 completed and then scratch it for summer if you'd like to. Councilman Mason: Yeah I can't. If we go to, if we stay at off Mondays, if I'm going to be there, it's got to be after 7:00. I've got soccer games at 6:00 and then over at 7:00. Now if you go ahead and have them at 5:30, I'm sure I can get input and UlXlates from other people but. Councilman Senn: Why not just start at 7:00. Let's just start at 7:00 and have a late dinner. Councilwoman Dockendoff: I would prefer to start at 7:00 as well. Councilman Wing: I play fh-eman on those off nights so I'll have to get an update. Don Ashworth: What about the Wednesday or Thursday? 5:30. Councilman Mason: But don't you have soccer on Wednesday? 39 City Council Meeting - May 23, 1994 Councilman Senn: Yeah, I've got it Wednesday. Councilman Mason: So if we go later but you can go later right? Councilman Senn: Yeah, it depends. Some games are at 7:00. Don Ashworth: If you have it later then it gets into whatever commission. On Thursday like before an I-IRA meeting. You have two off. I don't want to say off. Councilman Senn: I can't on Thursdays. Don Ashworth: Should we just stay then on Mondays and go to 7:00 and have a late dinner? Councilman Mason: But you can't do that, right Richard? Councilman Wing: No, I've got to show up at the fke station sometime, Councilman Senn: But doesn't this count? Same thing. Councilman Wing: If it went to court I might win, You're a sensitive group. Councilman Senn: Just bring up fire trucks every week. Mayor Chmiel: Make sure you send Council a schedule indicating what's going to transpire because it Seems like there's some problems. Councilman Wing: Can I just ask if there are any.,.if we're going to have any special meetings, can we just limit them to Highway 5 until that's done and off our back and then we can move ahead on affordable housing or, and concentxate on one thing. Councilwoman Dockendoff: And really let's skip actually June and July. Councilman Senn: I say let's skip July and August... Don Ashworth: The seniors are quite concerned that we're not really doing anything with that senior housing and I do have it...on June 20th, But moving ahead with Highway 5, I mean that's just simply ready to come back to the Council. Councilman Wing: I think Colleen and myself, well and you were there. You know most of us, I don't remember. You weren't at meetings on a regular basis like we were. Councilman Senn: On which ones? Councilman Wing: On the Highway 5 corridor group. The only reason I say that, the document to me is ready to go, I'm comfortable with the north roM. I could stamp it tonight and be done. If there's a debate on the road, we need to resolve that. Is that a work session or a Council session? 40 City Council Meeting - May 23, 1994 Kate Aanenson: There was a couple...I'm talking about the overlay dislrict...at least the overlay district. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Put it on the next agenda. Councilman Wing: Okay. Then all we have to do on a work session is just the frontage road issues.9 Councilman Senn: We already discussed that issue. I thought, unless that's changed. I mean didn't we talk about the north frontage road and there was some...to the south alignment and everybody right across the board said south alignment. Kate Aanenson: ...go back as far as land use which we never actually...but as long as you agree that that's the direction you want to go, we can start that process... Councilman Mason: Before you adjourn. I did say I would not be here on the 13th. That is not tree. I will be here on the 13th. Just so you know. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thanks. Motion for adjournment. Councilman Wing moved, Councilman Mason seconded to adjourn the meeting. Ail voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 10:04 p.m. Submitted by Don Ashworth City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim 41