Loading...
CC Minutes 1994 05 09CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MAY 9, 1994 Mayor Chmiel called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag. COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Chmiel, Councilman Wing, Councilwoman Dockendorf, Councilman Mason and Councilman Senn STAFF PRESENT: Don Ashworth, Roger Knutson, Todd Gerhardt, Charles Folch, and Todd Hoffman APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Wing seconded to approve the agenda with the following additions: Mayor Chmiel wanted to add a presentation by Susan Hurm and Natalie Rossini under Visitor Presentations and Don Ashworth wanted to discuss the Debt Study under Administration Presentations. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: PROCLAIM MAY 15-21, 1994 AS NATIONAL PUBLIC WORKS WEEK. Mayor Chmiel: I'll go through this just rather quickly. This is a proclamation establishing May 15th thru May 21st, 1994 as National Public Works Week. Whereas, the public works services provided in our community ate an integral part of our citizens' everyday lives; and Whereas, the support of understanding and informed citizenry is vital to the efficient operation of the public works systems and programs such as water, sewer, streets, and highways, public buildings, solid waste collection and snow removal; and Whereas, the health, safety and comfort of this community greatly depends on these facilities and services; and Whereas, the quality and effectiveness of these facilities as well as their planning, design and construction, is vitally dependent upon the efforts and skill of public works officials; and Whereas, the efficiency of the qualified and dedicated personnel who staff public works departments is materially influenced by the people's attitude and understanding of the importance of work they perform; Now Therefore I, Donald J. Chmiel, Mayor of the City of Chanhassen do hereby proclaim this week, May 15th thru May 21st, 1994 as NATIONAL PUBLIC WORKS WEEK in the City of Chanhassen. I call upon all citizens and civic organizations to acquaint themselves with the issues involved in providing our public works and to recognize the contributions to which public works officials make every day to our health, safety, comfort and quality of life. Given under my hand and Seal of the City of Chanhassen this 9th day of May, 1994. Is there a motion? Councilman Wing: Absolutely. Thank you. So moved. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Second. Mayor Chmiel: Moved and seconded. I think that was a well read verse. And I think really, what I read I really feel strong about because I think people within public safety are really, or excuse me. Within public works are doing things as they normally do every day of their lives and do a good job at what they do. And I'm sort of proud as to how they really function within the city. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Definitely unsong heroes. Mayor Chmiel: Yes. Resolution 094-49: Councilman Wing moved, Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded to proclaim the week of May 15.21, 1994 as National Public Works Week in the city of Chanhassen. Ail voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. CONSENT AGENDA: Councilwoman Dockendorf moved, Councilman Wing seconded to approve the following Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations: a. Approve Plans and Specifications for 1994 Street Repair Program; Authorize Advertising for Bids, Project No. 94-8. e. Resolution S94.50: Receive Feasibility Report on Lyman Boulevard Street Reconstruction and Lake Riley Area Trunk Utility Improvements in Sections 13 and 24; Call Public Hearing, Project 93-32. g. Resolution 894.51: Approve Property Transfer from the City of Chanhassen to Nordictmck, Inc. h. Approve Water Obstacle Permit, Minnewashta Ski Club. i. Amendment to City Code Regarding a Requirement to Submit Computer Aided Graphics or Models for Site Plan Reviews and Subdivisions, Final Reading. j. Amendment to City Code Regarding Landscaping and Tree Preservation, Final Reading; and Summary Ordinance for Publication Purposes. k. Approval of Accounts. 1. City Council Minutes dated April 25, 1994 Planning Commission Minutes dated April 20, 1994 Joint Public Safety Commission and City Council Minutes dated April 14, 1994 m. City Code Amendment Regarding Discharges into the Sanitary Sewer System, Final Reading. n. Approve Summary Ordinance for Publication Purposes, Wetland Protection Ordinance. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. (Item 3(p) will be discussed at the end of the agenda.) C. THE MEADOWS AT LONG ACRES, LUNDGREN BROTHERS. Charles Folch: Mr. Mayor, members of Council. This applicant requested that this item be pulled off the Consent Agenda for review and corrections that have come out today. Unfortunately it wasn't on time.,.changed highlighted. Basically these changes and the recommendations of approval...for this item. Just briefly going through in the subdivision approval. Condition number 1. Second sentence of that paragraph should read, variances should be granted on Lot 6, Block 1; Lots 1, 8, 13, Block 2; Lot 5, Block 3; Lots 5-7, Block 4; and Lots 1-3, Block 5, which is a drainage entry to the wetland. Condition number 4 shall read, a pool located on Lot 4, Block 2 shall be removed in conjunction with the site grading. On the next page, condition number 8. 8(a) shall read, full park and wail fees... Condition number 16. First sentence shall read, drainage and conservation easements shall be dedicated...except for Outlot G, H, K and L. Basically the last change occurs O11. Mayor Chmiel: How about 22 Charles? 2 City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994 Charles Folch: 22 shall be kept. There was a question, actually there was a question by the developer as to whether that was necessary or not... Mayor Chmiel: Okay, but (c) you have on here rather than Block 1 you have Block 3 to nm parallel. That is 22 (a). Charles Folch: That's correct That acplally, that amendment to the variance for Lot 3 is actually covered under that £trst condition... Mayor Chmiel: Okay. With those numbers, okay. Charles Folch: And then the final item is item 22(b). That condition can be deleted which basically provides 25%...and those are the changes for... Mayor Chmiel: That's fine. I had one other question regarding that. From the proposed location of the home that's going on the properties, what is the setback from the home to the slxeet? What is the distance involved? Charles Folch: From the existing home? Mayor Chmiel: From the pads to be put on those, each of those lots. Charles Folch: Typically. Mayor Chmiel: I went through that and I did not see from where the pad would be to what the depth is of that, from the driveway. Charles Folch'. Terry, are those 30 feet setbacks? A typical housepad to the rear yard. Terry Forbord: Terry Forbord with Lundgren Brothers. There are a number of, part of the approval of the PUD, there are a number of lots that staff recommended and were approved by the City Council in order to save trees to keep the house pads a certain distance from the wetland. That they reduce the front yard setbacks. There were a few of those...I don't know exactly how many... Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Alright. Any questions? Can I have a motion for item 3(c), items 1 and 2. Councilman Mason: So moved. Councilman Senn: Second. Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Senn seconded to approve the Final Plat, Development Contract and Plans and Specifications for the Meadows at Long Acres by Lundgren Bros Construction as amended by the City Engineer. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Mayor Chmiel: Let's txy to carry item (f) and (o) onto the balance of our Council Presentation and we'll cover them at that time. With that I'll move the agenda along. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: 3 City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994 Mayor Chmiel: I did have Sue on the agenda at this time. Also Natalie for your proposal or your presentation that you're going to make this evening and so if you'd like to come up now and do that, I would greatly appreciate it. Natalie Rossini: Well I come to you for the last time as a Chair for the Youth Commission. I graduate this June and I'm very excited. Counting the days down. I wanted to remind the Council about, that there will be an opening after this month and applications can be dropped off at the Chaska High School, There's a pink form in the back...so our commission can continue with...Also in the packet is a gold or a yellowish packet. That will give you the responsibilities of the Youth Commission members. A few months ago at one of our meetings we split up into groups and brainstormed what we thought...youth commission member, what they were. As you can see...advocating for youth. Serving as a key communicator in our community. A link between communities and the school district and also along with that a link between the youth and adults and so on. On the next page it talks about...and local board and Council. And this is Todd Hoffman's job. All these responsibilities on the committee. Reading the Youth Commission Minutes. All the other material. And keeping yourself informed. Contacting your student or adult representatives if you have any questions... arrangements for the youth commission representatives...in February, May and August and November. Those axe the months that we set up...in our By-laws each member's supposed to make quarterly udpates during the year. And also...county activities and considering all...The third page is...responsibilities off.numbers of the youth commission and that includes all the City Council, County Commissioners, School Board members and so on. We just, instead of listing all of them, we just call them all agency numbers. And reading Minutes and agendas and we put this as number one because we look to you as being a vital link to our youth commission and each of you having a responsibility towards the youth commission as we do towards you. So if you take the time to read through those, we would really appreciate it. Sue Hurm: In your packet you have a new Youth Commission Directory and one of our goals when we came before you last time was to have an opportunity for youth in Chanhassen. I think they've done a nice job. Gotten more in there. We'd still like to see more of that done but there will be opportunities for youth in Chanhassen...we had these directories presented, staff had presented it to St. Hubert's at Chaska Middle School and at the High School so they thought...if they are looking for summer opportunities to volunteer, it's available in the school. The next thing we tried to do as far as accomplishing more awareness of what the youth commission is, is we have designed a T-shirt and would like commission members to certainly buy a T-shirt when they're all made so you can also help us publicize the youth commission. The picture of what it would look like is in your packet. It has each one of the city logos. The District #112 and our logo on the bottom. It will be done black lettering for the youth commission and the logo around the outside will be a teal on white. Natalie Rossini: You haven't changed the logo, have you? Sue Hurm: Yeah, we had to check that because we were going to do this. Natalie Rossini: The City of Carver changed their logo. That's why we would have had the T-shirts done to present to you to show you. Sue Hurm: And really twist your ann. Mayor Chmiel: Watch out. This gets televised in Carver. Sue Hurm: So you need to let us know if you're going to change your logo, So that's.,.and also provide a 4 City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994 certain number in order to get them so we'll be pushing for those. A banner. We talked about Values Week and they were involved in Values Week and we felt it would be real appropriate to have a banner displayed in the City Halls which would have again the logos across the top which is in your packet. Community Values and we need 8 values that we are trying to encourage in the city. The youth commission is coming up with the funds to cover them. So we'd like you to have it displayed in a permanent place in the City Hall...But we felt that, we felt very strongly that it is important for the youth commission to... Natalie Rossini: Okay. I might as well continue with telling you about our activities that we've been doing since Christmas. Around Chrislmas time we promoted the holidays, or we organized the holiday gift project, and I don't know if you read about that in the paper but the Youth Commission, along with Student Council put this on where we had a tree displayed inside the school and we had people donate money. When they walked through the school, people, a student would...dress up as Santa Claus and stuff and then we also had people donating gifts and we had about 5 big boxes full of gifts and items that we donated to the...and then we also collected $550.00 to go out and buy more items. So that was really neat. The turn out that we had for our first year of the Holiday Gift Project. We also participated in the Super Cities Walk for MS and that was last month and we had about 25 to 30 students that came out... We also did the Walktobeffest last October and we had a smaller number so it's beginning to grow. And then we also took some students down to some churches down in St. Paul with our...project and I think I explained that before. We just had it last fall where we go down there and help serve the hungry in some churches down in St. Paul. And you can talk with the people and eat with them so it's a great learning experience. We also helped out with the Easter Egg Hunt here in Chanhassen and that was a lot of fun. I know all the students who, even the people that had dressed up as the Bunny Rabbit, they really enjoyed the time there. And then we also had Earth Week in April and this is the first time that the Youth Commission or anybody has promoted Earth Week. Just, you know students who had organized it and we had demonstrations about how much trash we use and we also had a promoting car pooling day. We had posters and an essay contest so that was...The other things that we've done on the volunteering side is finding volunteers for Parents Anonymous meetings and also finding volunteers to help out and chaperone the Middle School Dances put on by I think the Park and Rec Department. So Susan wants to t__alk about our future activities. Sue Hurm: One of the things that the youth commission will be working on next is there's a shelter down in the Minneapolis area where the youth commission will go down and provide ice cream and story time for some of the children that are down there. That's one of the next things that we'll be working on. Jeannie Strauss and I will be working on setting up...at the High School in which we would like local government people and the Senators and Congressmen and anyone else we can think of, to come and listen to the students about what their concerns are in the community. We felt that we needed to find out what their needs were and so we're going to try and get it for...we'll let you know because we'd like some people from Chanhassen to show up. It will be during the day. Next, the last thing that I'm aware of is there's a...And I guess the other thing that I needed to do is I needed to thank Natalie because she's done an outstanding job and she was recognized during Values Week as an Outstanding Youth. Or as one of the Outstanding Youth and received a bond, which was kind of nice because she's done a lot of work and hopefully it will look good on her resume too for school and everything else but she has put a lot of her heart and soul in it and we're going to miss her... Natalie Rossini: Thank you. The youth commission has brought me so far. It happened to be a fluke when one of my friends asked me to be on it so I've been very fortunate and have met a lot of influential people and learned about communication skills. But besides Outstanding Youth Award, I also leave with a sense of accomplishment because I helped the youth commission or was part of serving a purpose of the link between the youth and adults in the community and to actually accomplish some goal that was set up...gives you a good feeling. I don't know how to explain it but anyway, I do hope that this fall, when we have the Spaghetti Dinner, 5 City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994 or the youth commission has it's Spaghetti Dinner, that everyone will attend. I don't know I have all these articles that just that are proof of how much publicity that we've gotten this year and how it's going to grow. Hopefully grow in the coming year and so I want to thank you for listening to all our little updates. And I don't know, I guess that's about it. And I just hope that you guys will also be encouraged to spend more time looking at the youth commission and becoming more involved. Mayor Chmiel: Great. Natalie, on behalf of City Council, it's always a pleasure to see your smiling face here. And knowingly what you've done, it really is youth of the up and coming, well the up and coming through the process that you're going through and it really is something to see when an individual who will take their time such as you have done, many, many times over and I've seen you at many of the functions that I've attended because of the city. And you're always bubbly, effervescent and don't ever lose it. Keep that going. Natalie Rossini: Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: And we applaud you for that. Thank you. Okay. It's always neat to see young people within the community who really care and I think that's the name of the game. We'll move on to item number 4. HEALTH HOUSE '94, AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION. Mayor Chmiel: Is Diane here? Jerry Orr: No. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. I'll let you come forward and introduce yourself. Jerry Orr: I'm Jerry Orr with the American Lung Association of Hennepin County. With me is Jeff Schoenwetter from JMS Homes and we simply wanted to drop by this evening to thank you for the warm welcome that the American Lung Association received for it's Health House project. It was a project that we initiated for the first time last year. It has grown to the point where there are five health houses being built by American Lung Associations around the country. In North Caroline, Michigan, in New York, and Wisconsin and the National Demonstration Site is the one here in Chanhassen. The project is about a whole series of healthy choices and the first choice is in terms of what community are you going to build it in and we chose your's. We also chose Jeff's Royal Estates project and Jeff is our builder who helped us develop our project last year. The health house is simply about again those choices that it takes to make a house as healthy as possible and also one that's healthy for the planet in terms of the kinds of materials that are used and put in it. As the National Demonstration Site, you folks will be getting some attention in local and national m~ia. Our local media sponsor is KARE 11 and our national sponsors will be touting the national site, which is the Chanhassen site, as they put together advertisements and promotions that will.appear in the state...national housing, Health House Project. So we wanted to come by and say thank you. We brought a shovel here for the Chanhassen Archives for the site here. Jeff, would you like to make a comment? Jeff Schoenwetter. I'll be brieL I know you have other business. Mayor Chmiel, ladies and gentlemen of the Council. JMS Homes is just proud to be here in Chanhassen and building. We're grateful for the opportunity to help out the American Lung Association. We had a great project last year. It's growing to national recognition now and we hope it continues to grow and we thank you for being here for us. Mayor Chmiel: It's neat to know that this kind of a home is going to be built within our community as well. 6 City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994 and Conditional Use Permit for the Press and Kindercare until the Planning Commission forwards their recommendations. All voted in favor, except Councilman Senn who did not vote, and the motion carried. APPOINTMENT TO THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, MAYOR CHMIEL. Mayor Chmiel: I have had some discussion with Mr. Bohn, with Jim Bohn just this past week. I've had one discussion with one of the Councilmembers. But as yet I have not had any other discussions only because it curtails the ability for me to talk to any more than one person at one given time on a given Council agenda project. And so I thought what I wanted to do is to sort of get the feel from Council. One of the things that I look at strongly too is what I have seen is to have 3 members of the citizens on the HRA with 2 of the Council members overlooking. The proposal I've never really thought about it being a complete responsibility of the Council to have the I-IRA as well. I think we need the outside input for some of these things and some of these other people are well qualified within areas that we may or may not be. But some of the thoughts that I had and one of the things ! mentioned to Mr. Bohn also, is that I would get back to him and inform him prior to any decisions being made. In my mind I do not have a decision and my suggestion would be to table it but I would like some discussion on it. Councilman Wing: I move tabling so you can get your act together. It's your decision and I think you can show whatever leadership you want to. Whatever... Mayor Chmiel: Well I guess I wanted some additional input. There's been some discussions that the Council would like to probably take over or control the lIRA. I don't have that feeling. I think at one time or another, if we have two people on there, that's the way I would like to see it go. I don't think we want to raikoad things through, as most people could look at it is as. And I just think there should be some, I'd like to get some additional feelings. And you're fight, I will act on it until I get some back feed from some of the people sitting here. Councilwoman Dockendorf: I do have some comments. My frustration has been the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing and I think, which really presents to me two options. Either the Council is the HRA or we set up some procedure for informing each other. I think moving 3 people to the HRA, 3 Council members to the lIRA is a waste of time. I know I wouldn't want to sit on the HRA unless the HRA was the Council, or vica versa. So for me I don't know whether we need to, I'm not speaking coherently am I? Councilman Wing: Better than I can do. Councilwoman Dockendoff: It's two options. Either the Council becomes the HRA or we open the lines of communication a little better and provide for every Council meeting to have one of the members, Councilmembers on the HRA update the rest of the Council. Mayor Chmiel: I think that's where it should really come from is some additional communication. It should be brought back and I think not only that but other areas that ff some of the Council members sit on any respective other commissions. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Absolutely. Absolutely. I agree with you. My other comment would be, and I have the same frustration with the Board of Adjustments. Is that we're seeing the same people term after term 15 City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994 Mayor Chmiel: That's only because they're proficient at it. Councilwoman Dockendorf: So absolutely. But I think there comes a point in time where we just need new blood. Mayor Chmiel: Well I don't disagree with you with that Colleen. Well maybe I do to a certain point. When you have people who understand what the ordinances are and what the requirements are. To put someone new in who doesn't quite know exactly what's going on unless they may be aware from being in a former position as such. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Well you can always be brought up to speed. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah right. But there's quite a bit of knowledge that it takes for those people to have in order to do what they're really doing. But that has a tot of pros and cons to the issue as well. And I do believe when we made a reappointment, we did that reappointment accordingly by Council so. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Oh absolutely, yeah. I wouldn't disagree with that. Mayor Chmiel: So we have to talk out of both sides as well. Michael. Councilman Mason: Being on HRA, well. I'll maintain my position all along is I think I'm here because I'm trying to do what I think is best for the city. The comment was made by Councilwoman Dockendorf about length of terms and she related Board of Adjustment to HRA. Right? Councilwoman Dockendorf: Yes. Councilman Mason: And I guess I see some major differences between those two. I mean obviously Board of Adjustments is a Board that decides whether variances should or shouldn't be approved and I-IRA has a much different function in the city. It's to continue the city's growth, particular the downtown area. And I, while as I'll go political here and say I'm not in favor of term limits on a national level. That has nothing to do with this but I do think that there is something to be said for getting a different outlook from time to time. For getting new and fresh viewpoints from time to time. Now I'm not knocking, well. I think that's something that needs to be looked at~ However I'm not the one that does the appointing or the reappointing either. I will say, I do agree with the Mayor when he says that your comment about having 3 Council members on HRA. I do think it's important to get a "civilian" outlook on things if you will and I do agree with that. I would not like to see a majority of I-IRA be Council. But maybe it's time to look at some fresh things but again, that's not my decision. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Thank you. Mark. Councilman Senn: Well I guess I'll enter the well known minority viewpoint. To me there's major delineations between the Board of Zoning and HRA. In the f~t place, Board of Appeals, f~t of all it's appointed every year. So I mean the option's there to change people or whatever every year. If the Council chooses not to do that, I guess that's up to the Council. The other thing is, they conlrol variances and if an applicant isn't happy with what they do, they have a right to appeal it to the Council who are their elected representatives. And they can rely back on their elected representatives to make a fmal decision. And then they can also judge them based on that. I think that's how the process is supposed to work. They also don't control any money. The HRA I believe controls more money in the city than the City Council does. And I've always felt strongly and I still do 16 City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994 But there's just one little item and I think Jerry mentioned it to me when we were out there for the ground breaking. Is the mere fact that just between the studs of the walls that are going up, each of those are all vaccumed out. No sawdust remains within. Only for the mere fact that any moisture that could get in there could cause some other given problems and probably for those who have asthma or whatever, and that just builds up a mold consequently and that mold no longer would exist within this specific home. And I think it's a good idea just to probably have all builders start looking at that because many problems exist within our community. Within our own personal lives and I too have a granddaughter who's a real severe asthmatic and from that standpoint I know how clean things really have to be and I appreciate the fact that we have this within our community, so thank you. Councilman Wing: Can you make sure that Harold doesn't get a hold of that shovel. Mayor Chmiel: It will go on the wall. Thanks again. PRELIMINARY PLAT TO REPLAT LOT 1, BLOCK 1 AND OUTLOT B, PARK ONE 2ND ADDITION INTO LOTS 1, 2 AND 3, PARK ONE THIRD ADDITION; A SITE PLAN FOR 54,720 SQ. FT. WAREHOUSE EXPANSION FOR THE PRESS AND A 10,315 SO. FI'. KINDERCARE FACILITY; AND A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A LICENSED DAYCARE CENTER IN AN IOP, INDUSTRIAL OFFICE PARK DISTRICT; LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST QUADRANT OF DELL ROAD AND STATE HIGHWAY 5, MARCUS CORPORATION. Mayor Chmiel: I think that through much of what we have gone through, with this, there has been a request that this item again be tabled. And if there's any discussion by Council, I would like that to start at this time. Councilman Senn: I'd like to step down but I'd also like an opportunity to talk with you about it. Mayor ChmieI: Thank you. I was hopeful that you'd say that and remove yourserf at this lime. Mark Senn: Maybe to start with I'd like to just raise a few points of clarification. Last Council meeting one of the Council people referred to me I think personally over half a dozen times as it relates to this project so I figure I may as well at least get up and talk to you about it. The application on this project was made by Marcus Corporation, which is one of over half a dozen companies, I'll say small but modest companies that I own and Marcus Corporation submiued that application on behalf of a 12 year client. Marcus Corporation, nor myself, has never intended to have, nor will have any interest in this project, ownership or otherwise. It's simply following through as it would with this plan on any other project anywhere really in the State of Minnesota. Up front, real early on my only real involvement was to sit down with staff. I talked to Paul Krauss and really asked him to just sit down and be overly critical of this project. The reason I asked that was because I knew regardless of whether I was going to be directly involved or not, it was going to be perceived as something that had something to do with me so I told Paul specifically that I wanted him and staff to be overly critical of the project. We sat down and had a pre 'hlninary review on a concept basis and staff was very positive. In fact Mr. Krauss was probably the most positive. Beyond that I have intentio.nally really stayed out of this process all through it and as I've done before, and also tonight, I've removed myself from any votes as was my intention. I think I now no longer have any other choice I guess other than to sit in the background and do nothing because I think it's really going to perform a disservice to the community if we do. Both of our clients at this point have assumed that tonight would be basically a repeat of last Council meeting, which was basically telling them that, given the identical action to tabling and it was basically an off deal so to speak. I can't really blame them for their perception but again I think it would really be bad for our community if we 7 City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994 did. What I'd like to do is just give you a little bit of history so you understand where this came from. Kindercare, through Mr. Richard Nordlin, who is a client of our's, came to us and told us that basically they had an intention to do some fairly substantial expansion hem in the metropolitan area. In fact they talked about potentially 10 additional sites. They also gave us a priority list of those sites. Quite frankly Chanhassen was way down the list on that priority list of sites. I knew whatever, I'm going to say pressure I could convince them to move it up to the top of the site because both through personal experience and from what I've heard from a lot of other people, we have an acute shortage of daycare in Chanhassen. My efforts were successful and we then undertook the process of identifying a site and Kindercare, like most other, national companies like itself, has site criteria and we evaluated those criteria and went through them to basically...sites, Kindercare traditionally wants to be on sites that basically transition between residential and commercial or industrial areas. It's basically a traffic pattern and they want to be part of this basically puts them in the position basically to service the residential areas but also service the residential areas on the way in terms of work. We looked at a lot of different sites in Chanhassen. There's one real problem also already occurring in Chanhassen as it relates to daycare and that's land costs. As you all know from numerous other things, land costs in Chanhassen have gone up quite rapidly. Daycare unfortunately is one of those things that cannot afford high land costs, In fact traditionally you'll find land costs of less than $3.00 a square foot going into a daycare in terms of the land. And that's one of the reasons why the site basically at Dell Road was identified because it was an industrially zoned site. Industrially zoned property of course is considerably cheaper than commercially zoned property. By the way, the Press at that time did not have it's property for sale. I know there's a sign out there and a lot of people think it is for sale but that property that's for sale happens to be a little parcel that's stuck way back in back. Behind the Press that Frank Beddor still owns. It has nothing to do with that comer parcel. That comer parcel is basically extending all the way back to 79th is effectively not been for sale and has been held for expansion by the Press. Also at that time the Press really had no intentions of expansion, or at least no intentions that were very far along. They had contemplated that they had started to look at it but their expansion needs basically were being met by storage needs being accommodated on the site in a number of semi trailers that were basically just being put on site and counted as additk~nal storage that was necessary. When I originally talked to Paul about it, that was one of the reasons why I thought there was an ideal marriage here. The ideal marriage was to possibly give the Press the basis to proceed earlier with their expansion and not function on that type of a basis, which they're allowed to do. And secondly, to create a daycare that would basically help meet some of those daycare needs in Chanhassen. From there we've gone through you know a very long process. We've been at this basically since about February. The process itself has become in effect quite arduous and at this point you know we really need to I guess get it back in line or go on with other things and I guess that's what I'm here to request that you do tonight. Essentially the proposals here are not able or you're unable to separate this proposals. It took a lot of convincing to convince the Press to sell off this piece of property and their Board authorized it only on the basis that the parcel be sold to Kindercare and basically that income be used in effect to turn around and fund the expansion. Or to. help fund the expansion. So basically one can't go ahead without the other. Kindercare on the other hand is on a tixne line which basically is something that affects...so you know we've reached basically the point of no return because ff we can't get this thing authorized basically we're past that point and after we pass that point, there will be no daycare like this in Chanhassen until, I guess that would put it into say approximately late 1995. A little over a year from now. Well over a year. A year and a half. The facility was designed and the plans were made up very carefully. My instructions to my people as well as our consultants were that it meet every city requirement as well as a number of city requirements that technically didn't even exist. But a lot of them were in draft form. And basically as I understood it, and as I also understood it from staff in their review, the plans did precisely that, Beyond that I'm not quite sure where the process has gone awry except basically I thought the Council made a fairly strong statement last time sending it back to the Planning Commission that it should act on it one way or the other, and that's what was requested. But once again it was tabled, which basically just holds it in limbo. Unfortunately 8 City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994 that limbo period now puts it past the point of no return in terms of any action at all. And I really hate to see that happen. And the reason again I really hate to see that happen is, I'd really like to see something like the Press be able to expand in Chanhassen. They've been here a long time and I think we all know they're very responsible corporate citizens. I also want to see them be able to create new jobs which is good for us and pay more taxes, which is good for us. I also want to see Kindercare come in because we badly need daycare. My understanding, from some information I got from the county last week is, I think there's something like, I think I heard a number like 190 people who's daycare needs are not being met fight now in Chanimssen. It's simply not available to them and most of that's infants. And Kindercare, by the way, is one of the few prodders that offers that service so. I guess given where this all sits fight now, where it's at and I guess Roger will have to speak to the legalities of it one way or another but I would simply implore the Council to act on it and push it forward because if it feels they can't do so tonight, my fear is basically just that. It's basically a dead deal and I don't think that is productive to the City of Chanhassen or beneficial to it. If I could see something in here that I felt was really detrimental, I think I would feel differently but I really don't see anything in here that I feel is detrimental and I think that is supported very sl~ongly in staff's recommendations. Because there was, all the way through this project, never one single negative recommendation from staff on this project. And again, it met or exceeded all the criteria. It gets real frustrating when you go through a process and you meet or exceed the criteria but every time you go to a meeting, there's new criteria. But that's really kind of water over the dam at this point. So I'd just like to ask the Council to take the bull by the horns so to speak and take an action on it one way or another. Again, there's no benefit to me one way or the other. I think it will help the clients but it will also help Chanhassen and I would really like to see it go forward and I'd like to see it go forward...thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Thanks Mark. One of the problems that we have, or at least I have fight now. The Minutes of that meeting are still not available at this time for us and it has been recommended back by Planning Commission to make that recommenO_ation to table this. Maybe we have a couple of members from Planning Commission here this evening. Maybe you'd like to address some of those things at this particular time. The Minutes to me are sort of essential to know exactly what was done and what was said. Nancy Mancino: You didn't get them with your report? Mayor Chmiel: No we don't. Matt Ledvinax Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. Matt Ledvina with the Harming Commission. One of the most important things that we had difficulty, as far as the application was concerned, was the change in the access for the site plan and we did not have any opinion from the city staff as to whether that access would be acceptable to the turning movements in and out of the facility so there were also some other items associated with the application that were not changed based on previous comments and requests. Based on that, we felt at that time we couldn't act on the materials in front of us so. Nancy Mancino: And I'd like to add to that and that is that we did feel from the very beginning that the Press and the expansion that they asked for we wanted to let go ahead because we wanted in the interest of developers to make sure that they could go ahead with,amd we gave them a very firm recommendation and...The Kindercare we still had some questions about circulation and...to the developer and to the city saying that the access into Kindercare off of Dell Road needed to be changed, needed to be moved further north and that Dave Hempel of city staff had not had enough time to review that and make a recommendation to the Planning Commission. So it is now outside with a consultant being looked at as far as the circulm_ion problems that we saw. They had to do with the entire Kindercare site. We didn't feel it was fight to go ahead without that 9 City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994 information. We also received the night of the Planning Commission information on electrical power lines and what kind of, what they give off and whether it's healthier or unhealthy and we felt that we also wanted to read that information and have that background...so that's why we decided to again table that once again. We are also, according to the lawyer, within the legal time line for a conditional use permit. We have 60 days, and I'm sure the developer knows that, in which to act so we felt we were within the legal time to look at all the information in which to give you a motion on the conditional permit. Make a recommendation to accompany that. Any questions of us? Mayor Chmiel: Council have any questions? Roger, give us a reiteration of legal ramifications that, and how we proceed with it. Roger Knutson: What the ordinance provides is that the Planning Commission has 60 days to act on a conditional use permit... If it does not act upon the application for a conditional use permit within 60 days after it's been referred to it, the City Council can act without the recommendation of the Planning Commission. More or less take it away from them. 60 days. Mayor Chmiel: After the 60 days, okay. Roger Knutson: Exactly. Which I believe, I'm not sure, is June 1. Nancy Mancino: June 3rd. Roger Knutson: This says June 1st. Nancy Mancino: Oh okay. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. To fall on June 1, 1994. Okay, thank you. Mark Senn: Don, I'd like to show the Council one thing if I could please. Mayor Chmiel: Sure. Mark Senn: Basically what the Planning Commission, there were several issues that were raised germaine to this project. I'm going to say technical elements of it. In the first meeting we met with Planning Commission I think they raised about 10 different points. Most every which point which we went back and basically complied with, included kind of a parkway, walkway you know over between the Press and the Kindercare prodding a direct connection. A whole bunch of numerous other things like that including additional landscaping way over and above the standard which we had already been way over and above. And a number of other things. One of the concerns that the Planning Commission had all along is basically, and when you do get the Minutes you will see this very clearly. One of the reasons Planning Commission was still negative on this was hard surface coverage. Basically that relates to the Press pamel and this was basically identified I believe through a legal opinion that Roger issued is that this site basically is in effect bettering the hard surface coverage condition that exists there now. And by doing so it's becoming further into compliance, which is what it is supposed to do. The way the ordinance reads, I believe, is it can't get any worst. And we're going from basically about 79% hard surface coverage down to about 75%-76%, with this expansion. And you say well how does that happen? Well it happens because we're basically putting the building where the parking lot is now, or on the existing parking lot. So it's hard surface to hard surface basically. And we're supplying additional green space on the 10 City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994 site that wasn't there before. Another issue that basically became the latest Planning Commission issue. Or I shouldn't say, not the latest one. The one that was, we were still at odds on and maybe the Planning Commission wanted to do something through here to basically stop traffic from basically going from here through here to come out to Dell Road. This is a fight-in/right-out only on Dell Road. Okay. We put in some landscaped islands, all that sort of thing. You know narrow enlxances. We've done that from the beginning to discourage that. We also talked to Press' management and Press' management agreed to basically issue to all employees telling them not to use that as an exit. It's only to be used by those people going over to the daycare. You know we thought that was fairly strong coming from your employer. But we also were going make a commitment, we told staff this up front, that if it is a problem, we'll be happy to put in speed bumps or whatever to help curtail them more. Well 48 hours before the last Planning Commission meeting, all of a sudden staff called my people and basically told us that, what they told us was wrong and that MnDot wouldn't approve this right-in/right-out where it is at and that in the construction of this intersection...going back so far from that intersection, which this fell within that area. This basically, an oversight up front but was something they had a right to do. Well, what we did on basically very short notice, which was less than 48 hours, was go to an alternate that quite frankly we showed staff way, way up front back in March. Which was to move the driveway here to the north so it's to the side of the building. We basically just moved the building over a hair, not violating any setbacks and putting this...Well at the time that the staff came back with less than 48 hours notice to let us know that, we thought well geez. I guess that should really make everybody happy because all of a sudden that's a pretty big deterrent for traffic going straight through from the Press to Dell Road. At the same time...moving the driveway 50 feet to the north in any way, shape or form, would have any major traffic ramifications that didn't exist there before when it was 50 feet to the south. I mean I guess that defies imagination that it would. So you know quite frankly, you know I don't think those are real hard issues to deal with. I guess ! would say, I wish we would have known that more than 48 hours ahead of time after already being in this process and back to the Planning Commission twice. But again you know, I can't help that... But we did react with a viable alternative and...and maybe it's a question for Charles or for Dave or for Dave or whoever but again, I can't imagine that a 50 foot difference in that location, if anything it will help the stacking distance going out to the intersection, making a right-in/right-out. The only other part that relates to that traffic movement, and continually got challenged from the Planning Commission, basically was the ability of the driver to go down to the end basically there at 77th and make a U turn and come back to Dell Road and come in that rather than making movement in through here on the main driveway. Well you know, quite fl'ankly that's outside of our control but it can be very easily solved by the City putting up a No U Turn sign at that intersection, as we pointed out from the very beginning. It's not a condition we're trying to create one way or the other and stuff so I really don't think the issues here are all that terribly complex and I don't think they're really all that complicated. There is one other issue that I think is complex and maybe complicated and that Planning Commission brought up and that was basically one of should this use be at the "gateway" to the city. The other one they brought up was power lines, and quite frankly I don't know of any reason that I can technically, nor I believe anybody in the city technically can evaluate that. In the first place I don't think it's anything our ordinance would allow us to evaluate but I can assure you that both the clients have evaluated it because it's very important to them. In fact Kindercare has an environmental team that before a site even makes it to the second phase, comes in and totally does a "environmental study" on the site. Including what's around it. They actually go out there with meters and take a readings as to how many mega whatever they are and again, I'm not competent in these things. All I can know is that the professionals that are; are happy with it and the two landowners, they're all happy with it and the two that have liability for it are happy with it and again, I don't think that's anything that we're really in a position to evaluate. Or that the city's in a position to evaluate. As far as the gateway to the city. One of the reasons this was suggested in the first place, you know I thought it really presented a nice gateway to the city. Far better than expansion of an industrial building would and maybe another thing that needs to be understood here is, really any future expansion on the Press' part is not going to 11 City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994 be additional office space. I mean it's going to be additional production space. It's going to be high ceiling warehouse space. And basically with this type of an approach, that type of development effectively is going to be moved back. We've often times talked about perspectives and stuff...came in with this and this is basically a perspective and it's not playing with any, basically with any sizes one way or the other. If you can visualize yourself as that person standing out there on the trail, that's you. That's how big you are and that's what you see. Also if you were sitting out here on Highway 5 in your car, this is precisely what you would see. To me if that's not a nice gateway to the city, I guess I don't know what is. We've also made it real clear to staff that we were perfectly willing, for whatever reason the city wanted anywhere between this parking lot and wherever, to do whatever it wanted to with entry monumentations at a future date. But we haven't even addressed that. The city hasn't addressed that yet. But when it does, it may want to do something special in that area. Kindercare has stated right along that they have no problems with that and they're willing to put an easement in place to deal with that. You know again, all these answers were there. All these issues were there. I think all the resolutions were there. Again, I hate to see it die because there's nothing there that really is critical in temls of ongoing study. And if Charles can jump in on that whether he wants to or not but I mean the key things in terms of anything on resulting traffic and...it became kind of silly...because again, 50 foot here, 50 foot there for a driveway and again, they thought they were being real nice by going back and altering very quickly to do something that in effect was accomplished at least in earlier plans, that direct...So that's some of the specifics of it and that's a lot of what will come through and show you in the Minutes in terms of the issues. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thanks. Does Council have any questions? Councilwoman Dockendorf: I don't have any questions but, Council has not had the opportunity to speak at all about this issue and a lot has been said and done and I just, I'd move to table it but I would like to have some comments. It's unfortunate that Planning Commission tabled it. However, I do understand their reasoning. I'd really like to see this project continue. That doesn't mean I'm going to vote for it without some modifications to it but I think everything is surmountable so I would hate to see the applicant wait for a year. On the other hand, I don't want to be put to their time table and right now our hands our t/ed. Legally we have to let it go back to the Planning Commission and hopefully those issues can be resolved and whether they recommend it or deny it, and we can get on with it. And I'd just like to add that I've never seen this as a personal issue. It's always been a site plan and just got mucked up. Mayor Chmiel: I think you're right in what you're saying. It's not a personal issue. Although in my own judgments I have my own opinions as well where Council people should be but that's beside the point and people are elected to office. That's people's perogative to do so. But I do have a bit of a concern and I can address that later but I think the item is right before us now. Whether to table this action or ff there's any real strong feelings to move forward with it. I think I'm fully in agreement to the comments that Colleen has made and I don't have, and I do want the Press to know, that I think they're a fine company. They do a great job. They provide much employment within the city and has nothing to do with the Press either, It's just that two things got fled into one item of which presents a problem. And the problem being is that the clarifications and some of the concerns that people have on the Planning Commission are really not addressed and all the facts basically are not before us. Until I think I see those facts as well, that's at least where I'm coming from. Richard. Councilman Wing: I guess I'd concur with Colleen. I just have a couple comments. I'd like to see it go back to Planning Commission too to clarify it before it comes back to us. I'm not looking for resolution but at least recommendations. Mayor Chmiel: Michael. 12 City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994 Councilman Mason: I think it's all been said. Like it or not, I think we need, that's how we need to go. I would like Kindercare to hear that if in fact there area, and I believe that there are, 190 people or 190 homes looking for daycare, knowing the position that I'm in as a teacher, I understand their concern about being ready by the time the school year opens. However, I see the ads that come through the schools and what not for constant requests for daycare during the school year. I would hope that, I understand they're concerned about opening in the fall, if this projects gets approved. On the other hand, I also know how quickly daycare is f'filing up any time of the year. And I would certainly hope they would take that into consideration. If in fact it goes through. I don't think we have, like it or not, I don't think we have much choice but to second the motion that Councilwoman Dockendoff has made. Mayor Chmiel: Was that a motion at that time Colleen? Councilwoman Dockendorf: Yes it was. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. And you seconded that? Councilman Mason: That's correct. Mayor Chmiel: Any other discussion? Councilman Wing: I had some comments when it's appropriate. Just some issues. Mayor Chmiel: The time and it's appropriate. Councilman Wing: Would you like to lead off?. You made the motion. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Go ahead. Councilman Wing: This isn't an issue and I wanted to just throw it out because of a leadership issue and I think that the Highway 5 conidor study has been a passionate issue to me. I'm not going to deny that, and an emotional issue but I certainly talk from the heart and I'm certainly talking for the true concern for the city. So when we get a proposal on the west end and we really, as a unified group said, go away and leave us alone until this is complete and staff said it's going to be done any day so it isn't a problem. And then the east end comes in and this Highway 5 corridor study is not binding on them whatsoever. It's not a document that exists so they're not bound by this thing and whether they comply or not, it's almost not up for discussion but my concern was at that time, to get onto these other facts quickly here. Was that were we being fair and were we as a Council being consistent and were we showing leadership by saying no to the group out west and go away and leave us along but then coming in and be willing to take the time and the effort to talk to this development on the east end. So that did concern me. It seemed to be inconsistent and slightly unfair. And I'll leave that sit where it is. I think it's a moot point right now. The fact is ff we don't get that done, the whole corridor's going to come in because it's still...and this is the year things come in. There's at least 5 things with Planning right now or with staff that are going to be on Highway 5 but I'm convinced we're going to get going on that. I guess we're talking about that later. Both for Mark, I think it's fair to talk to you directly Mark, representing the development and then for planning. I want to make sure these items get back. Issues that I would like, that I'm concerned about that I would either like to see come back resolved or just recommendations if nothing else. Or denials. Whatever. But I don't want these thrown in our lap because then we're going to have to hassle with them so number one. Number one, ~ere's just been a lot of talk and argument and the people on Planning seem 13 City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994 to understand parking lots. Especially Diane coming from where she does, with parking. The access. The flow. The circulation and the concern that all the entry comes through the parking lot and that's their entry and exit. Kind of was the parking lot through the Press as I saw it early on. So I'd like this parking thing resolved before it gets back to us and I think the city consultant, or whoever's been hired to do this study, that should be back and you should have that information by then and make some clarifications. Number two. Mark commented on impervious surface and I think it's tree. They are dropping it. Our ordinance says 70%. It doesn't apply to the expansion. I don't think it applies to the Kindercare. But I think it is worthy of discussion. I think to be paving a lot of area over with asphalt, if it's not necessary, and the number I remember was, there was excess parking spots. I don't even have the numbers but 10 or 12 or 15 parking spots more than was required and that was a Planning Commission issue so if that impervious surface is there, maybe we can trade off those parking lots that aren't required, parking spaces and get down to the impervious surface. But again, I'm not going to question that because I don't think they're in compliance with it. We have a parking lot ordinance that requires interior landscaping and there's a revision coming out to clarify that with sketches that requires interior parking lot landscaping. I want to make sure that that ordinance is being met regarding interior landscaping of large asphalt areas. I don't know if the size dictates this or not. The health ba?~rds we've discussed. I don't have any knowledge on that but I certainly want to make sure that that's been discussed and clarified. That there either is or isn't information and we're not putting these infants and young children underneath these wires and a haTord that may or may not exist today or in the future. I think if there's a place to err, it would be on the conservative side here but I know less than anybody else on that. The Press expansion. Landscaping. I'd like to make sure that that expansion has a landscape design coming to the Council that's been recommended, approved, improved or denied. But whatever is required on those big blank walls, let's have that up front and defined before it gets to Council so we don't have to debate whether we should put in two more trees or some simple. Let's have that done before it gets here. And then I guess the one that I'm perhaps most concerned about, and again this is having looked at the Kindercare and I haven't seen the Marcus proposal. I don't know what it's going to look like other than the brick in the brief picture we saw. But all the rooflines I looked at and the 4 Kindercars I looked at, were very linear. Very flat. Didn't have what I saw as good quality roofing material and I can't define that. I think Mark brought up that there's a special shingle that looks like, whatever that is. I'd like to see that but there was a lot of pipes. Vents. Miscellaneous roofmg stuff on these very linear, flat roof surfaces that I didn't think looked good at all. So the only issue I have with the project maybe itself, is the roof line. I'd like Planning to look carefully, look at the roofline. The linear roof line and do we need to break it up. Do we have to meet some quality or some architectural standards to the roof line on these buildings because they're, again. I hope I'm not using the wrong words because I don't want to offend Marcus Development but it's kind of a cookie cutter building in that it's kind of standard Kindercare building, as I see it. And a basic square building without a lot of architectural standards and designs and shadowing and angles and that's fine. That's certainly, it's maybe irrelevent because it meets the standards but the roof line. If I can just put in one personal comment it would be could we look at the roof line and make sure we break up that linear effect, if it's not appropriate. And if you haven't looked at the Kindercares that exist, I think you should because the roofs are not necessarily amactive. On the other hand, the proposal coming in may address that issue and may be different and of higher quality than the ones that exist and I don't have that information but I'd like to before it gets back to us. Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Your welcome...with those additional clarifications. Any other discussiori? Hearing none, we have a motion on the floor with a second. To table. Bring this back to the Planning Commission. All the comments that Councilman Wing has provided as well and to have it at least come back to Council with recommendations, approval or denial before they get in the project. Councilwoman Dockendorf moved, Councilman Mason seconded to ~able action on the Preliminary Plat 14 City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994 feel strongly that the HRA should be the City Council and to me, the reason that it should be that is it provides a more open process for the HRA and the decisions they make and makes the HRA's decisions more open to scrutiny by the public. And again, the electorate can hold the City Council then responsible for those actions and decide accordingly. You know right now there's huge sums of money in the city being controlled by the HRA and there's not a citizen in town that can hold them responsible for anything, Because they don't have the option to elect them or not elect them. And I just think those are compelling reasons why the Council should be the HRA. And that's the reason why I'm going to say 90 some percent of the municipalities have already made that move. Very few municipalities still have an independent HRA in the State of Minnesota. And just I think with what's happening in Chanhassen, it behooves us to take that responsibility and accountability and I'd like to see the HRA and the City Council in effect be one and the same. But again, I know that's the minority viewtx)int so enough said. Plus I'm beaten so I'd better shut myseff off. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any other discussion? Richard. Councilman Wing: Well I, I really respect all three opinions. Councilwoman Dockendorf: How political of you. Councilman Senn: That's beuer than saying we should talk about term limits after midnight, right? Councilman Wing: First of all, I would like to serve on the I-IRA, but that's neither here nor there. Whether it's now or in the future but why would I like to serve on the HRA as a Council member? Well, they control more money than I do. They control our future. They control development, etc, etc. So I mean every time somebody complains to me I say, go to an BRA meeting. Well who are they? Well they're the people building your city. Controlling it and I can't disagree with Mark. I think I-IRA is a very strong, powerful force in their element. And why don't you say it right now, because it will clarify where I'm going. Councilman Mason: Okay, I will say it. I think HRA is involved with downtown redevelopment and there's a real big difference between what goes on in the city and what goes on in downtown. Councilman Wing: Yeah, downtown. Councilman Mason: I think that does need to be made clear. Councilman Wing: Yeah, let me be real specific. Mayor Chmiel: It's all within each of the TIF districts. Councilman Wing: Downtown. But that's to me what Chanhassen is right now and becoming. Civilians. Absolutely mandatory to have the community and civilians in there and I guess my frustration there is, I have been disappointed in and disappointed with some of the comments, lack of leadership. Perhaps personal weaknesses that I personally have seen at HRA that have been frustrating for me. I don't, know if I can say that critically other than I have not particularly felt a lot of leadership from some of the civilian members. So that's come back I think to haunt us a little bit. But the diversity I think is important to be there. I guess I would favor the majority being the Council, mainly because the Council itself is diverse. It's not a gang coming from City Hall to haunt HRA. The civilian members still have their vote. The discussion still goes on and a strong member whether, being a strong personality and emotional and passionate on issues I believe in, if I was on 17 City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994 HRA, would take you guys on lock, stock and barrel. I don't care if you come from the Council or not and I'd rant and rave and see that the point got made, and if you're right, you're fight. I wouldn't allow the Council to dominate me. Could we dominate the existing group? Maybe. I don't know but, so I guess, I don't know ff I want to take it over but I guess I son of, because of the amount of money and the amount of vision and the amount of future involved, I kind of favor seeing one of us sit there as the third member to have the majority vote. I don't know ff that dilutes it down too much. If we had a lot stronger, more aggressive leadership from the civilian side I might say, that isn't necessary. I think they'd be in here talking and communicating and I wouldn't, they wouldn't be allowing us to run their show so. I would be comfortable with a third member from Council sitting on there. I would not be disappointed, I'd be very comfortable supporting the position that you had too. To leave it as is. But I would warn the civilian group, do their job and be aggressive and make sure they're going toe to toe here with the Council. Mayor Chmiel: I think the civilian segment of the community does look to what interest is for the city as well. And there's no question in my mind some of the things that come back from staff or some of the proposals and so on are the things that this I-IRA really addresses. And rightfully so because that's the way the city functions. Staff makes the recommendations of the I-IRA or City Council can either approve or disapprove whatever comes before them. You want to say something? Councilman Wing: Well just. Councilman Senn: Don that's true but it doesn't ever go to the second step I guess is what I come back to. If the HRA does something, it never goes to the Council and the Council doesn't have an option, as the elected representatives of the city, to conf'mn or deny what the HRA has done and to me that's where the process goes awry. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, and sometimes just what you're saying is if we were to have addressed some of those things, but some of the things you even brought out to Council, on some of your no decisions that you voted on, I'm sure would have gone the same way. And the discussion still would be there but that's all that would be there. Councilman Senn: That's a very limited amount of what the I-IRA does. Mayor Chmiel: That's exactly right. Councilman Senn: Very limited amount. Mayor Chmiel: But the point of the I-IRA being where they are, I still feel strongly that we have citizen input rather than taking over lock, stock and barrel and ram rodding through what you think you should mm rod through. And I don't believe in that either. It's. Councilman Senn: 'Why is it mm rodding? I mean I don't understand that. I mean if every citizen come to every hearing and provide their input. I mean to me that's not the Council... Mayor Chmiel: Okay, maybe it's a poor choice of a word to say mm rodding. Maybe that's not the proper word. But would the decisions be any different? I don't know. Councilman Senn: Well, who knows? 18 City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994 Mayor Chmiel: Richard. Councilman Wing: Because of the growth of our city and the amount of money involved and the complexity of these issues, I have to side with Mark in that I think the Council really needs to be intimately, strongly and have a lot of control over this. I wouldn't go as far as Mark in ~ldng over it's entirety but I guess I do favor having the majority vote and I would just leave it at that. And no hard feelings ff it doesn't go that way. Mayor Chmiel: Oh no, no. No. I think we've worked too long together to have hard feelings one way or the other. Councilman Wing: Count on that. Mayor Chmiel: And those don't happen here, as far as I'm concerned. Councilman Senn: If you're looking for comments Don, I mean it's not hard to sense you know where it's going here. I mean I think the chances of the Council takirlg it over at pretty slim to none but, from the comments I'm hearing. But you know if you're asking for comments beyond that then yeah. The more Council representation I'm going to say that can get on there, the happier I'm going to be, even though I think that where we should be is all and so I just, and I guess like Richard, I would be happy to express my interest in doing that but again I know I'm the minority vote so the chances probably are slim of that too but I think the I-IRA needs to ask a lot harder questions than they ask about things. And I think those things need to be aired a lot more in an open process than they are being so. Councilman Wing: I want to target, excuse me Mike. If I can just target Mark's last sentence. I think that's the key to where I'm coming from. They need to ask a lot of hard questions and Mark, could you phrase that again so it gets repeated. Your feelings about what they need to do because I feel probably that same way. Councilman Senn: Well I just think again, they need to ask a lot harder questions than they're asking about things and really get to the bottom of them and you know, hey. Most of their decisions involve pure and simply expense. It's dollars going out and those, as we're so much reminded of here in the last year or two, those resources are dwindling faster than we can keep up with them and how those resources are used are becoming more and more critical here, especially as it winds down to the early 2000's when at least TIF as we know it now goes away. And that's not to say that there's probably not going to be an instant replacement of it but you know, to wind down I think is going to be real critical for the city to set those priorities and get them where they want them. And like I say, the best way I see to do that is to have the Council do it and take the leadership role in doing that. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. When you make discussions regarding TIF, I think where the TIF dollars have gone to what you see downtown and what you see in the industrial park, I think are quite well spent. Just the way the community is developing. In addition to that, the new grade school as well. I think there's an awful lot of pluses that have come from it. There may have been a few questionables that you think about when it comes to purchasing buildings or things of that nature. But I think the total dollars that have been spent accordingly is best for the community. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Here's one of the reasons I wrote down. One of my reasons...that I would favor making the two commissions, or the Council and the commission one and the same. It's just getting back to the communication issue. But more of, if we think our audiences here are sparse, I've never seen anyone sit in an 19 City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994 HRA meeting. I don't think the community knows who they are, what they do, what issues they deal with and I don't know how we garner citizen input when people don't know that these items are being discussed and who discusses them. When people think of the projects that are going on in the city, they think of the City Council you know approving those projects and. Councilman Senn: And when they're getting built, that's when you hear from them. City Council person. Councilman Wing: When they don't work, and the streets don't work and everything else, and I'm up against the wall saying, I didn't do it. And they said, well you're the Council. Who in the heck did it. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Right, and why? Councilman Wing: The HRA did it. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Well what the heck's that. Councilman Wing: That's exactly. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Yeah so you know, I don't know if it's whether we do it in a report or a newsletter or whether Mr. Trippler would be nice enough to write an article about who and what the I-IRA does but somehow we have to let the citizens know. Mayor Chmiel: Well I think too that the Minutes coming from the HRA within the packets probably should also be there. As to what's discussed rather than just seeing what's being proposed. We get the Minutes, and I think if there's direction that Council feels that there should be some discussion on, and feels what's in the packet is not apropos, that's when it's time for Council to come back before the HRA and at least state their opinions. And I know that Richard has done it from time to time and I think that's where I think that different aspect comes from. Councilwoman Dockendoff: But I'm not ~alking about just the Council. I'm talking about the community at large. They need to know what's going on. Mayor Chmiel: True. But that's also published as an informational item in the newspaper and just like you see tonight. Unfortunately there are not enough people who are really interested but take that amount and put their feelings towards us because they think that we are the authority in coming up with those discussions. Or with whatever we might address. So that's another pan of it. Don Ashworth: Mr. Mayor? Mayor Chmiel: Yes Don. Councilman Senn: Well if we're going, something Don if I could. To follow up on Colleen's point, just so we don't lose it. I just would really like, even d we're not going to go ahead and do anything on the Council and, or I should say most the Council isn't going to, the more open we can make that process the better, and if that means start putting HRA meetings on TV and getting better coverage on it and stuff like that, then I think we should we do that. I mean it just never ceases to amaze me the number of people that come up to me and tell me that they watch this. Which leads me to question a number of things but, especially with all the midnight to 20 City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994 2:00 a.m. meetings we have but you know, but if they do, at least it gives people a way to start understanding what it is and who it is and what they're doing and I don't know whether that will help much or not but I guess I'd like to see more and more steps towards that since again I don't think the other's going to happen. Mayor Chmiel: Well okay. Don, you wanted to say something here. Don Ashworth: Just a couple of quick comments. And I re~_.liTe this is being tabled. You've put a lot of emphasize on the money that the HRA has and it's more than City Council. When we review this document in 2 weeks you're going to see here where really the HRA has fully committed it's funds. I mean this takes into account what's in the ground today and so there's a strong likelihood that before the I-IRA folds their door. that you may be £mding a plus to the $3 million position over where we're at I think from a year ago of about $4 million. Something like that. Secondly the HR.A, and in 2 weeks you're going to be holding the hearing on the HRA's redevelopment plan and included in there is each and every item that they can spend money for. And their incentive program. So ff you don't like the current incentive program, because the HRA generally treats all businesses the same, and I know there was some discussion. Well should we provide incentive for ABC versus another one. Well again, the policy is in there. I'd like to spend time potentially with each one of you to take and walk down through each one of those. The pedestrian bridge is in there. The I4_anus facility is in there. The incentive program as it deals with new businesses coming in is in there, ff this City Council doesn't approve those, the HRA can't do them. So I mean that's a real vital document and again we're going through uno,her revision here in another 2 weeks. And so here is your opportunity for. Mayor Chmiel: Look at it and scrutinize it. Don Ashworth: ...of input. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. So with that I'd like to have a motion to table this to our next meeting which would be the 23rd. Councilman Wing moved, Councilman Mason seconded to table the appointment to the Housing and Redevelopment Authority until the next City Council meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Mayor Chmiel: Item number 7. Well before we go to that. Maybe we'll address item (0 and (o). Mark. Of the Consent Agenda. 3(F). APPROVE YEAR END CLOSINGS AND TRANSFERS. Councilman Senn: On item (f), I guess I pulled this for the main reason that I suppose if we could do this by line item. I support everything in here except four items but on the basis that I'm not sure that that ability exists I asked for it to be removed. The reason I asked for it to be removed quite honestly is I just get really, really bothered seeing effectively $560,000.00 being transfered into a fund called City Hall expansion when this Council has not had any discussion about expanding City Hall. So I have no intention of voting for those one way or the other going into that fund. The other one is down under the second listing. $74,201.60. You know...prime example of HRA. That's $74,201.60 in consulting fees to I-IGA on the ill fated attempt to put a community center behind the Frontier Building. And I just again, I can't go for thaL I don't know how we ever allowed almost $75,000.00 to be spent on a project that this Councilman never set as a priority or even endorsed in the end. And have similar feelings down the line. The $22,930.00 in consulting fees to go tell us we should spend $200,000.00 for entry monuments in the city so, I'd be happy, like I say, to vote for approval on all these 21 City Council Meeting - May 9, I994 items except those four and those are the masons why on those four. Councilman Wing: Can you back up Mank? I got the $74,000.00. What was the next one? Councilman Senn: $74,201.60. And then the last one was the $22,930.00 in consulting fees to tell us that we should turn around and build a $200,000.00 entry monuments. Those are the ones I have problems with transferring. Mayor Chmiel: I think we'll get into that discussion as we progress to item number 7. So maybe what we should do is just hold off yet on (f) until once we hear some discussion on item 7 yet that Don is going to bring out here. How about (o)? We'll just hold that one until, and then we'll bring it back. 3(0). AUTHORIZE FILING FOR RATE REGULATION, CABLE TV, FCC. Councilman Senn: My only question there was did we get a response back on our ability to effectively do this later rather than spend the money now? Or more or less you know, piggy backing with the other communities. Don Ashworth: Don and I have met back with Triax. Really it came down to the fact that the cost really had akeady been incurred by literally all parties. I mean we...regulation or filing for that, we're simply copying the documents that have already been created as it relates to the Minnetonka group. And as far as Triax is concerned, since they have had to prepare each of the forms that are required, they're simply copying those as it relates back to us. I guess both parties, all parties, meaning our specialized attorney in this area~..Brian Grogan. Recommended that we go through this Triax attorney and try to extend this out. It's looking that way. And I guess Don and I just came back saying, this probably provides the greatest assurance that we'll be able to regulate rates if it's necessary. Councilman Senn: Okay. Is the right word leverage I hope? Mayor Chmiel: That's part of it. Councilman Senn: Well I mean I'm just u'ying to get answers to some of the questions I brought up last time that came up and I'm sorry, I didn't get any of the answers. And I didn't know you had met and I didn't have any of this information. I guess if you're saying that we are in effect piggybacking but we have to spend the money to file the application, I think that answers one question I had. The other question is, I guess I really would still like a fu'rn answer. Do we have additional leverage or don't we? I mean otherwise it seems to be real silly that we're spending the money ff we're not picking up additional leverage. Don Ashworth: We're picking up leverage from the standpoint of federal law and what it will allow us to regulate and what it will not. It insures that our citizens get that 17% rollback. You know fact it, they're going to just do some tier adjustments and. Councilman Senn: They do everything they can do. Don Ashworth: You know so I mean as far as tree rate regulation, I don't know that it's them but. Councilman Senn: There was a deal April 1st where they weren't supposed to be able to charge for additional outlets and they've said oh they're not paying attention to that because you know it hasn't really happened. 22 City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994 That's what I mean. We have to get control of these guys. It's getting ridiculous. Mayor Chmieh My hot button. That's right. And I think by doing. Councilman Senn: Doing what they want to do when they want to do it and they say we know nothing about what they're doing. Mayor Chmieh Well that's because the feds come back and they give them a song and dance but yet I don't believe their full song and dance. Councilman Senn: Yeah, and they keep giving them extensions too. I mean which was part of the last question I think I raised last time with all these extensions they keep giving. Should we just wait until the questions are gone. Mayor Chmieh My question at that meeting was the same thing where I thought that was to be off the bills and I believe that they should start showing that. It was either last month or this coming month. One of those two. I'd have to look back at my Minutes. Todd Gerhardt: There's still going to be a 52 cent charge. Mayor Chmiel: 52 is right, as opposed to $4.95. If you read what they came out with their most recent billing too, it says they're going to have a rate reduction in one thing of whatever amount of cents it was and they were going to raise that on the other end of it. So actually there's no reduction and there's, it just sort of wipes it clean. But the portion of the outlets is something that I've been harping for so long. People finally started listening. And yet we still haven't seen it but the feds have even approached it now from that standpoint. Councilman Senn: With that info I'll move approval then. Councilman Mason: Second. Councilman Wing: Can I just ask one question? Mayor Chmieh No. Councilman Wing: 30 seconds. You keep pulling these Mark, and I don't have cable television so I've sort of not paid attention. Councilman Senn: Well Dick if you moved into the... Councilman Wing: Well I live out where the people that have these conveniences. Your concerns are, you pull these because you have some concerns. I want to clarify in my mind why you're watching this. Rates? What are the specifics why you're pulling these and you're concerned about them? Councilman Senn: Okay. Triax Cablevision charges one of the highest rates that exists in cable television. When you compare them against all the other cable companies in the metropolitan area, they're one of the highest. And ff you look at what they charge you for, I mean it's not real hard to see, excuse me for these like Don says, or maybe you don't say. But might agree was a little trumped up. I mean as soon as they're told to 23 City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994 reduce one thing, they basically just turn around and move it somewhere else and raise it on top of that. And quite frankly when you compare the service we get, and this is really where it comes back and gets me irritated is when you compare the service we get, and we have one of the highest charges, it makes no sense at all because we have neighborhoods in the city who would love to get cable who those guys won't even bring cable to. Okay. Yet I go into other systems and hey, people want cable. They get it there fight away and they're cheaper. And not Triax. I mean Triax sits there and sends you through 10 song and dances and a year and a half of we'll be out to maybe get a cable to you and that's not servicing our citizens. And to me every household in the city, if when in fact we've given them the franchise and they're supposed to provide the cable in the city, that means dang it, if people want it, they should get them the cable. That's not our fault that they have to run a cable a little bit further to do it. But then maybe we should talk about criteria and get it set up and going but it shouldn't be totally in their hands. And now we've gone around and even made it easier for them. Now we're going to tum around and make it the developer's cost and responsibility to put the cable in for them. Now the interest part's going to be to see whether that makes it any easier to get them to hook it up. Mayor Chmiel: Well it should hopefully but you're right. We've discussed and argued those points rather extensively at the meetings that we've had. But anyway. Councilman Wing: When the rates come down and you feel the service is reasonable, will you let me know and I'll hook back up. I'll hold off until then. Councilman Senn: Oh you have it, you're just not hooked up? Councilman Wing: I'm just not hooked up. Councilwoman Dockendorf: I'I1 move the other element. Could you advocate to get it into my neighborhood because I don't want it but my neighbors. Councilman Senn: I have. I have. Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to authorize the filing for rate regulations for Cable TV with the FCC. All voted in favor and the motion carried. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: ENTRY MONUMENTS, CITY MANAGER. Mayor Chmiel: We'll move onto the Administrative Presentations. We'll move on the entry monuments and then I'll go back to that item (f) in regards to this. Don. Don Ashworth: I asked Hoisington Group to present this evening to talk about it. Michael Schroeder, t__alk about at least some of the initial thoughts that they have been coming up with as far as the entry monuments. They're aware of the comments that are currently in the Highway 5 corridor plan...diligently working with the downtown group as far as the Vision 2002 and have finally have seen some of the work efforts that were done in previous discussions where they had brought in the University of Minnesota. And by the way, a good portion of those costs that we looked at, the $22,000.00 figure, related back to the work effort by the University which grew from let's say $8,000.00-$9,000.00 up to about $15,000.00 where they finished I think about the 6th of those video...films. And then we've got an additionaL.and that's what raised the cost up to the current deficit of about 24 City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994 $22,000.00 which that transfer basically insures we'll close the year without having that deficit. With that Michael you're on. Michael Schroeder: Thanks Don. The City's asked me to come here tonight to talk about some ideas about setting direction for entry features into the city. And I just handed out a brief outline that says the amount of work we've done to date. So far it's been very little. We've only started thinking about it briefly. We really want to get some direction from both the Council and the HRA before we proceed head long into this but I thought it was worth while stepping back. I understand there has been work done in the past on entry features and monumentation for Chanhassen and I thought I'd identify some of those that have been done. I don't have with me the stuff that Barton-Ashman has done with the limestone wall but I have some other things that have been done, including a recent look at Highway 5 that HGA has done. They looked at some features along the corridor that tie in line with what Hoisington-Koegler is doing with our Vision 2002 work. And also to point out that the pedestrian bridge that Strgar-Roscoe-Fausch has been working on will actually be started within the next couple months. It's also an element of an enu'y feature into the community, although it serves more than one purpose. Related to our work in Vision 2002, we've identified a couple of sites in town that can help us to identify some of the points of entry that we felt are important, especially relative to the center. And that would be at the AVR, Taco Shop, Highway 101 site where it meets Highway 5. Also on Highway 5 and Market Boulevard and Powers Boulevard. And as we started to identify some of the potential other sites for entries, the entry at Great Plains is still important. The entry at Dell Road is important and there are probably others including entries moving from west to east through the community. We really feel the best opportunities for marking entries into the community are along Highway 5 corridor. These are the best opportunities. Certainly you enter Chanhassen from many other places but most people move along that corridor and that's where, at least as far as we...so far, the direction should be set. We have gone through and identified some very basic principles that we'll be following as we generate concepts for enay features and the first one is the first ' principles...principle of identification. We're trying to make the boundaries of the center or of the edges of the community with some kind of a entry feature. We also, in principle number two feel that there should be some relation to one another. It should be a series of gateways as you move through the community. Each one of these things should look somewhat like the other. In some way so it isn't actually, not different elements but recalling the same element as you move along Highway 5. The third principle and this is the one that will probably take the most amount of direction is that the entry feaun,~ should reflect somehow the character of the community. It's people. It's landscape. It's place. It's history. A whole range of things that we can start to explore once we have a little bit of direction. The other thing that we need quite a bit of help from, both this group and from the HRA is trying to define what exactly the entry features should be. What should it be that's going to signify entering into Chanhassen? And as a list of kind of contrary statements or opposing statements that might be thought of as...and basically it ranges from gaining strength from some kind of a feature through... with it's surroundings or trying to be similar to it's surroundings. Both are reasonable directions to move but we need some direction from the Council and the HRA before we start to explore. And actually I think the next question is also important, and that's to define to what degree it should be a monument. Whether it should stand out strongly and be a powerful statement about entering Chanhassen. On the other hand, should it just be a clue. Should it be something that recalls features of the landscape. Features of the community that are important in this landscape. That's one of the things that Morrish's group pointed out in the work that they've done here. Should it be something that's, people recognize as being a part of the community but it doesn't stand up and shout Chanhassen? Or should it be somewhere in the center? So these are the kinds of ideas that we need help setting some direction on. Once we have some direction on whether it should be obviously different than it's surroundings or close, we can get some idea whether it should be a monument. More like the Barton-Asclunan limestone wall. Or whether it should be something similar to the work that Morrish's group did in the Design Center with the roads they were defining for the AVR site, which is also an element of entry into the 25 City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994 community. Councilman Senn: I have a question for you. Maybe the rules have changed recently but I thought there were pretty hard and fast rules, both on the State level and the County level as to what you could do within their right-of-ways and they don't include monuments. I thought there was a standard form of state signage that this is the only thing they will allow in their fight-of-way. And from a county perspective that's, or at least in Hennepin County that's true. I thought Carver was the same. I can't tell you that for sure but I know the State it's tree. So I mean does that then mean that you are forced to acquire land for every one of these and input them off of State right-of-way and basically get into more land acquisition. More etc. Michael Schroeder: The thinking that we've been doing so far has been that the monuments would not happen, whether it's monuments or whatever the feature is, would not be within the county or state right-of-way. That it would be on property that's owned by the city. Or acquired by the city. In fact as we've gone through and looked at some of the things that have gone on with the Vision 2002, related to these entries here, we have started to think about if we carded through the idea that this drawing depicts where around Market Boulevard there would be a statement that reflects the wetland character that Morrish identified early on at Market Boulevard. Or moving down towards Target. Something that reflects the oaks that are near Target and up on the hill behind where the Byerly's development will be. Or on the east end of town, the grove site where Morrish talked about maples. All of those, in order to make a significant statement would probably require additional land beyond what's there and available now. We could probably do something on the land that's available but it would be far more successful if we could make a larger statement. In that case it would be, land addition in terms of landscape and it may not pose any limitations to the development of those sites, depending on how they actually proceed. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. I think if, as we look at monument, marker, whatever clue it might be, we looked at many, many things through the HRA and I think some of the deciding factors were the amount of dollars that are spent on whatever's going to go in. There for a while we had one large amount of dollars for a monument or two and to me, yeah it made a statement. Look at all the money we're spending, which was $250,000.00 per and I thought no way. I can't see spending those amount of dollars. Can you, in making a suggestion, put a dollar figure on whatever we plan on putting, whether it be a monument or a marker. One or the other. Michael Schroeder: Certainly that would be a big part of what we would have to do. Mayor Chmiel: And that is where I think, at least I'm coming from. I don't know about the rest of the Council but I'm sure they're concerned with the dollars as well. I've driven, as I've often said, through a lot of cities and just checking out markers as you come into their communities. They are, some of them are you know, it doesn't really say much but there are some that are out there that I know have not cost anywhere close to $250,000.00 and probably as much as only $40,000.00 or $50,000.00. But it still makes that statement for that community and it doesn't look bad. And I wish I carried a camera with because there's been a few that I thought were fairly decent looking and yet the over expenditure of dollars wasn't there. But yet it still made a statement. Small community or big you know, it really doesn't mae, er. Richard. Councilman Wing: You're asking us some questions tonight that we've asked before and we've spent hours and weeks and months with the same questions and I'm saying geez, are we after all this, are we starting over again after looking at all those models and all the bricks and all the designs and towers. And the towers made out of cement and the towers with wood and the one with the bell in it. How could we be back to the starting point after all of that except these guys from the HRA said half a million dollars for a wall. You must be crazy. 26 City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994 Well, there's some validity to that statement. Councilman Senn: I think most of us said that. Councilman Wing: So we're back to monuments, location, size, materials. Oh my word. This is kind of discouraging. I happen to think, first of all I'm very happy with the east and west end saying Chanhassen, Population 15,285. But now when we get downtown, now I think we're looking at centralizing our downtown and now we're looking at our central business district and now we're talking where the population of people are going and something that I would like to identify. And now I'm looking for a touch of class and it becomes a key element to a strong downtown and a focal point downtown and a key element to our development downtown and now I'm ready to spend some money and do it right. So I don't want to put in something that isn't sizeable and doesn't make a statement. Or if we're just going to put in markers, I'd like to be very conservative and then not spend much money at all. I mean to say...cheaply, that's f'me with me but if we're going to really hit the downtown and identify it, I guess I would tend to put these markers downtown and one of them. Well I tell you what. I'm not sure about the locations because I had my heart set on Market Boulevard and TH 5 as the central point with all the Ixees and the marker were the ones we looked at but the ones too, where the Taco Shop was. That makes sense. And out at the Target end. I guess that makes sense. So for myself I would put three locations down. The Taco Shop, west end of Target, and Market Boulevard if I was to put any monuments in. Pass it onto my colleague. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Well, let me completely discourage you. I think at Dell and TH 5 is a silly place to put an enhance monument because it's such a small section. I mean people always think that the homes to the south are Chanhassen. We have to explain they're Eden Prairie. Anyway, that's not an appropriate site. Definitely up at the old AVR site. And again I'm happy with a natural element. I don't like markers to neighborhoods so I'm not big on enUance markers in general. But I do like the idea of a natural element. I think when you hit downtown and you know you're downtown, therefore you don't need a marker. That's kind of my opinion and we're going to have a pedestrian bridge there, which hopefully will have some kind of identification of Chanhassen on it. Perhaps one, I wouldn't be completely opposed to something at Market and TH 5. And then on the west side, people know when they hit the Arboretum that they're here. I'm not sure that we need one down there. So we already tentatively have plans for the AVR site. We've got the bridge. The only issue in my mind is do we put something at Market and I'm not certain about that. And I guess getting to your specific questions. I'm looking for something that's abstract. Something that's natural. Not anything, not a monument. Not something concrete. Mayor Chmiel: Michael. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Can I give you my suggestions? Councilman Senn: I thought you vis.aliTed it for us. Councilman Mason: Or Welcome to Chart. Spend money here. I don't know. Councilman Senn: Well don't forget you have to list the Mayor and Council... Councilman Mason: Yeah, I don't know. I'll admit as a member of HRA, when we got that quarter of a million dollar bill I kind of went well, and even without anyone from Council telling me what they thought about it, I kind of figured I knew how Council would feel about it. You know being a member of Council, I'll know. 27 City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994 Yeah, I don't know. I see, downtown I can see it'd be kind of nice to have something that says this is Chan. I can go along with that. But yeah, at either end, I agree with Colleen. I mean anyone coming in from that end of town knows where Chan starts and the Arboretum there. ! don't know, those little green or brown road signs with the population, like Richard said, have worked for a long time. At either end. But it is always kind of interesting to see what else is out there too. Councilman Wing: But didn't we primarily look just at the Market? Were we looking at one or two? Was it just Market Boulevard? Councilman Mason: Well at one time, as I recall, we were looking at two and then. Mayor Chmiel: Great Plains and Market Boulevard. Councilman Senn: Are you done? Councilman Mason: I'm done, sure. Councilman Senn: I guess from my standpoint I'd really like to see the Council reach some closure on it and provide some real specific direction before we go and spend another $22,000.00 designing $250,000.00+ monuments but ouff. I don't know. You know, the bridge is going to be there. I think it'd be really nice ff we could very tastefully in some way, shape or form, which probably is a snowball chance in you know what with the State of doing anything, but I think the effort should really be made to try to do something tasteful with that bridge. That people will understand because I think that is, whether we like it or not, now that that bridge is going to be there, that is going to be an entry monument. You know beyond that, I really don't see. I mean I think all the entries to Chanhassen east, west, north, south, whatever and there are plenty of them, I mean we're going to be plagued with the standard signage and I don't see any real change coming in those rules because at least most of the major ones I know of are either State or County roads. And I'm not willing to get into, start getting into a city wide land acquisition program for monumentation. I think Market's important I'd really like to see something at Market. I'd like to see something at Market's that natural. Maybe with some small brick treatment. I have never found distasteful the, I'm going to say, small but visible and not real over powering you know brick monuments that you see in many cities where you turn around and you see the Rotary Club and the Lions Club little round emblem in brass. Or well again, there's some schlaky ones too because I mean I've seen some schlaky ones with these little you know wood cut out, plywood you know emblems and stuff on it but there's some nice ones too. Because that has lots to say about your community I think too in terms of those service clubs and stuff being there. Of course it's also another nice way to pay for them too because most of those cases, when that's done, the service clubs put together the funding to do it through some type of fund raising effort but I guess when I get into saying, looking at brick monumentation as part of the landscaping thing, I look at dollars. More down, maybe around the $10,000.00 range than the $50,000.00 or $40,000.00 range. And I think that statement can be made, like I say, in a landscaping way where I think our money would be a lot more well spent than bricks and mortar and stuff. I just think, it's just my own opinion but I think it's real non sensical to do much of anything by the old Taco Shop because I mean if you're coming down TH 101 and if you're coming into Chanhassen, you turn before you hit it and if you hit TH 5, you're either going east or you're going west and if you're going west, you're going to hit Market anyway and that's going to identify the downtown area. If you're coming from the west, I don't see how you can miss the downtown area. I mean it's a little hard to miss the massiveness of the buildings and the signage and everything else that's already out there. It's even going to be worse yet when more gets done. I don't think we have to really point out the obvious at that intersection. I like the more central approach where we kind of bring them in Market as a focal point to the 28 City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994 downtown area. And just do that tastefully and not get carried away on monumentation. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Richard. Councilman Wing: Can I ask the City Manager a question? Mayor Chmiel: Sure. Councilman Wing: On the record and will you answer this as thoroughly and completely as you can. The press is here. Roger's here and the entire Council's here. Don, a lot of us on the Council here, the majority sat through studies, surveys, committee meetings, designs, and basically decisions were made up and to that. I think we got rid of that wrought iron crucifix, the word comes up but that wrought iron. Councilman Mason: I don't think it was a crucifix. Councilman Wing: No, no. That wrought iron. Councilwoman Dockendoff: Star of David? Councilman Wing: No, just anyways. The arch we had. Councilman Senn: What are these? I mean these are all new. This is real interesting. Councilman Wing: We went down through, as I said, all these different designs and we had models built and all these different designers and we had contests and the University held a contest. And then we came down to Jeff Farmakes coming in and designing what, everybody said we like it. Let's go. Councilman Senn: When did you do this? I'm just curious. Councilman Wing: Over the last 4 years that I've been on Council. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, he designed something really neat, Councilman Wing: So if you want to know, here's what I'm getting at. The $22,000.00. Actually it's more than that because we were spending, there was tens of thousands of dollars over this. Councilman Senn: Well this is only $22,093.00 Dick. Don't get me wrong. Mayor Chmiel: When Farmakes did what he did, there was no charge to the city. This is all out of his own time, which was a lot. Councilman Wing: I understand. But over the years now we have tens of thousands of dollars committed to this project and what happened Don? Where did it fall down? Was it just }IRA panicked at the last minute? Rightfully so. I'll just make that assumption and didn't want to take the design as presented and go with it so it kind of stopped right there. And one of my complaints that night was, but we've spent tens of thousands of dollars getting to this point to make a decision and do nothing. And again, I won't say that was the wrong decision. But now we're back to almost point zero. Is that correct? 29 City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994 Don Ashworth: I don't agree. I think that the HRA had picked out, made a decision. Yeah, we should really be looking at entry monuments. And yes we did involve the University and yes there was a contest within HGA. I think the biggest problem with that was that we put it into a narrower context of just these entry areas and what should we really do with those. I guess I'm really happy that we took a step back. And then a $500,000.00 price tag came in along with it. The Mayor's absolutely correct. We said, hey wait a minute. That's not what we're looking at. But also in that process we took a step back and we said, there's a broader issues here in terms of Highway 5 corridor and the overall downtown and really the whole Bill Morrish type of thing and as a result of that, I guess I really like what I'm seeing now and I think that ff we would have moved ahead with the St. Louis arch type of thing, that it would have been a big mistake because I think we've got an opportunity, for the most part, each of those green areas that are shown there, we own those lands. And for the most part, they incorporate a water feature right now. The third one, well the center one Market does. The 17 will shortly have one as pan of the drainage thing. The whole 78th realignment. It would be very easy to incorporate something on that east end. I think we've got a real possibility to do exactly what Mark stated. Define each of those rooms with potentially a higher deciduous type of tree on the outside. Potentially markings inside of those with bunches of crabs or other plant materials so that all of them read similarly and they all kind of defined this larger room thing that Bill Morrish was trying to get at and I think we can make a lot of identification for Chanhassen simply by looking at those 3 areas and trying to make them into something that people would recognize. This is uniquely Chanhassen. So I don't know if I answered your question. But yeah, I think we took a step back and I think we did it for the better part and I guess I'm happy that I think we're maybe even taking a new approach. Yes, it did cost us $22,000.00 to take and realize that that was a mistake. Councilman Senn: I want to come to Don's defense too. Councilman Wing: Is that the price of business? Councilman Senn: Well, you know to me Dick, and I think it's a real valid question that you asked and you know, the same question then is just, I can't tell you what happened before I was on the Council. I mean all I can tell you is what happened since I'm on the Council and to me, what's happened since I've been on the Council is, is that there's been this lingering issue out there of monumentation and who's been dealing with it? Not City Council. City Council's never dealt with it. We got one thing passed up to us with these big price tags on it which we promptly gahoshed and sent some comments back on or whatever. But again, if we're talking about ena3' monumentation to the city of Chanhassen, to me hey, the Council ought to provide some direction up front before a consultant's even hired and get his act together and say here's what we think it should be. That's what we're here for and then we should give the consultant the direction so it's a small task rather than a large task and the HRA shouldn't even be involved in it as far as I can see, other than maybe reviewing the elements that may tie into downtown. And I think this thing has gone totally awry because everybody's been involved other than City Council and the City Council, at least as far as I've been on it, has never taken a firm posit/on on what it should be and where it should be and I think that's what we should get down to doing and do it and then go from there in terms of defining it. And that has nothing to do with staff. I think that's something that we should quit passing the ball on or assuming that somebody else is doing because the bucks stops here guys. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Then let's do it. My suggestion would be that we do something at the AVR site. We do something at Market and we do something at CR 17. Some kind of natural element. See if we can get some kind of, I don't know. Maple leaf with Chanhassen on the pedestrian bridge and I really don't want to see any concrete or brick or whatever. I'd rather just leave it mural on those three separate sites. Can we give that charge to Hoisington and have them design something? 30 City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994 Mayor Chmiel: Sum. Councilman Senn: So you're saying which sites again now? Mayor Chmiel: Each of the three that are shown in the green area. Councilwoman Dockendorf: AVR, Market and CR 17. Councilman Senn: Yeah. I have problems with AVR and CR 17. I mean again, I think you really should make it central. I mean if you want to make those part of the park systems for another reason, I'll agree with you 100%. Or part of the trail system or something like that. But I don't think that's really how, I think where we want to mark, in terms of monumental/on is the center. Councilwoman Dockendoff: But we own the site at AVR and at Powers. We own some pieces of those ¢OlTiers. Councilman Wing: We're going to landscape them anyway. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Right. We're going to landscape them anyway. Councilman Senn: Well, and maybe, and maybe like the AVR one, at least my understanding is the main ptulx~e of that is the trail system and a stopping point and the connection to the bridge. Well, to me it kind of starts muddling it when we have to txy to, we're somehow frying to grasp what defining of this entry monumentation. I mean .to me it's open space. To me it's part of a trail and a park system. I don't know. Councilwoman Dockendorf: But ff we're going to do a natural element at Market, why not tie each of these sites to that? Because it's going to be landscaped anyway. Councilman Senn: Well because I think at Market you're talking about identifying Chanhassen in a tasteful but obvious way. I don't see us really doing that at AVR or at CR 17. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Well it marks the boundaries of downtown. Councilman Senn: Well but, I mean Chanhassen, Chanhassen, Chanhassen? All within a half a mile area. To me that seems kind of repetitive. Councilwoman Dockendoff: We'll concentrate on the Market but we'll fie in the other two sites because we're going to be doing something there anyway. Councilman Wing: Yeah, I would support Colleen so there's two of us anyway. And I would, in addition, I'd just, I happen to like monuments because I think there's permanence there. So I would even, and if there's just me then there's no point in discussing it but I would tie a monument in someplace. I just, like what you guys at HRA looked at at Market Boulevard. I thought that was a sharp deal with the monument and the trees and all the landscaping. And I realize there was land acquisition and land and a lot of the land form had to be changed. And a lot of money but ff that was toned down, I still like the idea of the permanence of that stone. I would agree it's not appropriate elsewhere and these other comers are too diverse for that but I like Colleen's idea of kind of rooming these up in a similar fashion with similar landscaping. I think I heard you say that. 31 City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994 Mayor Chmiel: What you're saying is both ends showing as it is, with the trees and whatever we plan on within that specific area and having those two rooms on the east and west. But yet for the center, have something in it specifically there to cause direction to saying hey, this is the entrance to the downtown. The main entrance. Councilman Senn: My question is, how much should we spend on each one of them? I mean now we're talking 3 again. Is it $250,000.00 a piece again? Councilwoman Dockendorf: I don't think we're talking 3 though. Councilman Mason: If I may. Mayor Chmiel: Michael, shoot. Councilman Mason: I think fa:st of all the monument. If you put a monument in, I think it's going to raise the price a whole big bundle and I'm not saying we shouldn't necessarily look at that. What, I'm not hearing Chanhassen, Chanhassen, Chanhassen. I'm hearing perhaps two really nicely landscaped sides and somehow the middle one, those two sides being drawn in by the middle one. Councilman Wing: More monumental... Councilman Mason: Yeah. Be it monumental by a monument or just some sort of landscaping that really grabs you. I don't see 3 monuments that say Chanhassen, Chanhassen, Chanhassen. Or even one monument that does and I think we're looking at somehow that this room concept, landscaped natural perhaps. I mean that's kind of what I'm hearing right now on all of this. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, and I think you're right. What you're saying is, if we can put a high cluster of trees which Richard would really thoroughly like, to something more moderate and show that, what the cost associated with that and then tie in and focus on this other. But I still don't want to see a monument at Market Boulevard for that $250,000.00. I think if we have something, it doesn't have to be vast and humongous as that one showed before. Councilman Wing: Do we still have the tape, the video tape of that, that we had seen? Remember the University gave us that video imaging of Market and the trees coming in. I'd like to see that but also remember that breakdown with the monument was I think 65, I mean correct me. $60,000.00 but then the cost came to the gees, the land, filling in the land. The cost of $200,000.00 or more came from just the land and landscaping. The monument was only $60,000.00. That was an enormous structure. Councilman Senn: Yeah, soil correction if I remember was a big number in there too. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah but it was more than that, Councilman Senn: Yeah, there was soil correction. It was a big number and all kinds of'things for the monument. And stuff and it just, well and I think you have to be careful. I mean again, I'm not going to disagree with anything that Michael said and I think we're all agreeing that there should be landscape elements there but again, I think cost is a consideration. We can put the trees there. Well the next thing you know, we're going to be talking about planters or we're going to be talking about benches or we're going to be _talking about 32 City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994 this. Well I'll tell you, it starts getting there real quick. Mayor Chmiel: But that's where they can come in and tell us what those costs are going to be. Then we make the decision of what we really want to see there. Councilman Senn: Should we give them a wugh budget? I mean to me when you give a consultant direction, you give them a rough budget. You don't just say... Mayor Chmiel: You don't give them an open key. Councilman Senn: Yeah, that's right Mayor Chmiel: I'm saying, ask for what it would be with X number of trees. 50? 25? Whatever. And if that is too much, well then come in with more of a moderate thing. Have one or the other. Colleen. Councilwoman Dockendorf: I agree with Mark. We should give them a rough budget Mayor Chmiel: Well that's a-ue. Councilman Wing: First of all, I would move Mike's suggestion. I would just move that to get that part settled. Councilman Senn: Three landscaped elements with a monument at Market? Councilman Wing: With a centralization with the Market Boulevard. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Perhaps a monument Councilman Wing: Well yeah. The monument I'm saying in terms of, it could be... Councilman Senn: But three landscaped areas with something additional or primary at Market Mayor Chmiel: Right, okay. Do you have that? Councilman Mason: So far so good. Mayor Chmiel: A buck and a haft on each side. You know to throw out a dollar figure. Councilman Senn: But I hate to ask the obvious question. What do we have in the budget for this? I mean I shouldn't ask such dumb questions but Councilman Mason: Takes all the fun out of it Mark. Councilman Senn: Oh I know it does. I'm just curious. What have we got budgeted? Don Ashworth: Do you recall the redevelopment plan currently shows as far as enlry monumentation. $200,000.00, $300, $400? Todd Gerhardt: The new plan for the Economic Development District in Hennepin County has got $660,000.00. 33 City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994 Mayor Chmiel: Is that all? Golly. Todd Gerhardt: That's not taking into account we've got to get 4 new buildings in town and take care... Councilman Senn: Well that's kind of the end of that money so you can forget that. Councilman Wing: If we were to put in 60 dry roots. Mayor ChmieI: Okay. Throw out a figure. You heard what his figure was. Cut it in half. Cut in half again and a half again and a half again. Councilman Senn: Well, I'm going to go back to my earlier point. I am very willing to talk about a number and some money in terms of developing some open spaces. But if you want me to buy off on a number like $200, $400 or $600,000.00 relating to entry monuments, forget it. I'm not willing to do that. I'm willing to say that, let's talk about some open areas and let's keep those, you know maybe look at some alternatives on those open areas and some dollars. As far as entry monumentation goes, which seems to me what we're really talking about is at Market, then let's put a budget together and say hey, less than 50 or less than something. I don't know. Don Ashworth: Mr. Mayor. I guess this seems reasonable that you just come up with some, you need to take these plans one step ftmher before you start talking really about budgets. And at least to get some different concepts for what you could do in those areas and maybe that next one would take and say, this plan is going to be more pricey than the next. But I think just to take and say, you know, $20,000,00. I don't know if yOU could go through here and put shooting permits required at all three and stay within that budget. Councilman Senn: No, but you do pay a consultant to design the project and then you mm around and pay him to build it and he's paid on a percentage of the cost. You know so I mean there's a little bit of a self serving function in here. I mean when we deal with it from a private standpoint, we go to the consultant and tell them to design what he wants and then reduce it in half and give us a realistic price. Councilman Mason: I guess I'm agreeing with what Don is saying and I know I saw Councilman Wing nodding his head. I do, I have a lot of faith in what Hoisington-Koegler group has done with the city and I have a sense by Mr. Schroeder, having to listen to all of this bmhaha tonight, knows what direction we want to go with the money and I would certainly hope that HKGI would act accordingly when they put some things together. I mean I guess I happen to. Mayor Chmiel: Well I think you know where we're coming from basically from what you're hearing. And that's something I think as to that discussion to come up with a conclusion. Show us something but let's not go out in left field and stay there. Realistic is what we want. And what's realistic as far as dollars, we don't know yet but just show us something. Councilman Mason: Mr. Mayor? Mayor Chmiel: Yes Michael. Councilman Mason: I just, and this doesn't have anything to do with. You know I-IRA I think rightfully so is 34 City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994 coming under some scrutiny right now and I think that's positive. No, I really do. I think some questions have been raised here that hopefully all members, and not just the two Council members that serve on HRA but all HRA members will listen to. The flip side of that is, is that HRA meetings are open to the public just like any meeting is here and with, I don't hear these comments at HRA meetings. And the other HR members are not privy to these direct comments like I'm hearing and I think they're good comments from Council. You know they're open to the public. We all know what's on those agendas and we all have the Minutes available to us. And I'm a little, I guess I'm a little curious if people on Council are so concerned about what HRA is doing, I don't, as a member of I-IRA, if I wasn't siring right here, I would not know the concern that Council has with HRA. And I guess that's, I'll just. That's, I feel pretty strong. Councilman Wing: But Mike I have shown up at numerous meetings and I have spoken but I feel that I'm being over aggressive, nagging. I feel out of place and uncomfortable and I don't feel it's appropriate as a Councilmember to stand up there as a Council member and start pointing fingers. I want you to do this and I expect this and what are your priorities and... I might as well be on the HRA then. And some of the things I brought up, I don't feel the Chairman has followed through on or kept tabs on. I read the Minutes but as I've gone through them, very few things that I've addressed have come through. And you've got your own agenda too. I mean it's not just mine so it's, even Planning Commission. And I think it's sort of their time and should we be standing up there pointing fmgers directing and telling them what to do. Councilman Mason: Well I don't think it's an issue of pointing fingers but I do think it's an issue of what everyone in the city wants to see happen for the city. Councilman Wing: It's too bad the public isn't there more. Councilman Mason: Well yeah but, I agree with that. Mayor Chmiel: Well maybe there are enough people out there listening or will be listening to get a little stimulus to come in and say exactly what they feel. Councilman Mason: I think there's something to be said for having these televised, to tell you the truth... Don Ashworth: ...because that was one of the problems the HRA ran into. HGA came back with, they had a plan for $8 million for this community center. They said no, we want you to establish a budget of this. And let's move this and let's do that. Well those were $4,000.00 every time we did that. There's 15 of those upstairs. That's how that $74,000.00 sits in that as a deficit for that downtown account. Councilman Senn: Don, I understand that but why, I mean again. Why doesn't somebody come and ask. I mean again, maybe there were 15 of them and 14 before I got here but I've seen 1 since I've been here and I'll tell you. I was here all during 1993 and this is only 1993 we're talldng about here. 20 some thousand dollars. This is 1993 fund transfer. Okay, to cover that. That's my understand from talking to the financial people so I mean to me, whoa. Don Ashworth: No, that is the 1993 transfer to close basically those accounts out but that's a running total of the cost that have been charged to each of those two projects. Councilman Senn: But you weren't running a negative fund balance in the account at the end of the year of a previous year?. 35 City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994 Don Ashworth: Sure did, If it's still an active project and you're anticipating that something's going to happen with the thing, that's in effect. Councilman Senn: Well I asked if that was I993 and I was told that that was 1993 and it was paying the Banon-Aschman period. So I mean, I don't know beyond that. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. And I think we have to go on some of the things that Don is saying. I'd like to move back to item (f). Mark on those dollars figures that you had questioned. I think many of those have been answered. 3(F). APPROVE YEAR END CLOSINGS AND TRANSFERS. Councilman Senn: The only one we've dealt with is enu'y monuments. I've heard nothing on the $75,000.00 almost for the community center behind Frontier or the expansions to City Hall so again, I mean if you want to move ahead with this, that's frae but. Mayor Chmiel: Well we could delete those two last ones. Councilman Senn: If you would want to delete those 3 items. Mayor Chmiel: Expansion of City Hall. Councilman Wing: No because, well. Whenever Mark. I don't want to cut in on Mark here. Mayor Chmiel: Well those are the two items that he suggested being removed. Councilman Wing: I'm assuming that Don Ashworth, the City Manager. Well I'm going to speak for the Fire Department. I hope that somewhere Don Ashwonh's thinking, he's putting aside money for $200,000.00 ftre trucks because we've got a proposal coming in that's going to sUm you on stuff that's got to get done. And it's not going to maybe happen. We'll let you decide how many years you want to rotate these u'ucks but they're going to get rotated. But in the meanwhile we've got to make...but the point of that is, I hope that we're saying, we probably are going to expand City Hall. I'm assuming that will happen. I'm hoping Don is putting money aside and carrying that money forward and carrying that money forward. He's not spending it but when we decide to do it, and when we decide to go, I'm assuming. This is the way I read it. That this is the money for that? DOn Ashworth: That's correct. Councilman Wing: And I think it's good policy. Councilman Senn: But Dick, my problem with that is, if we've got $560,000.00 of exlxa money right now to set in that fund, then this Council ought to be looking at priorities in terms of how that 560 should be spent. It should not automatically be wansferred over into a fund that's for the expansion of City Hall, which again this Council has not had one discussion on. And I have real problems with that. Leave it sit in the general fund and if that's the case and then let's ~_alk about priorities and let's transfer it to where we're talking about transferring it. 36 City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994 Don Ashworth: But that would be the worst mistake. Deloitte came in and basically told you, the auditor's office is in the process of txying to rate cities. They have their number one priority is cash balances. You have taken positions year after year to take those dollars. To move them into projects just exactly like Dick is referring to. We did not have to get into the bad R word as it dealt with the expansion for public works. I want to make sure that putting this city into a position that we do not have to go back out for a referendum for city hall expansion. You're absolutely right. I don't know when that's going to occur. I don't know what that will entail but if I can help ensure that we do, that we've got the dollars and that we don't have to go back to a referendum, I'll strive to do that. And again, you should not leave that in the general fund. And this does conform with your previous policies and it's shown. Most of those dollars you referred to are right out of the budget. Councilman Senn: I understand that Don but if we've got, we're also being told there aren't any monies to do this. There aren't any money to do that. I mean if we've got 560, I'd much rather look at issues like, well are there trails we should fund? Are there parks we should fund? Are there issues like that where we should be funding now rather than creating a rainy day fund for a new city hall. And you know, we haven't even been asked to look at those questions and again, I think that's the kind of direction the Council should be providing. Mayor Chmiel: Well that's everybody's choice as to where those dollars should go and you may have a different idea and Mike will have a different one and Dick and I. Councilman Senn: Well then we can.vote on it. Mayor Chmiel: That's right. And that's the point being. But I think with some of those dollar allocations, that doesn't mean that those dollars are going to just automatically go. They're in that fund. They're set the?e for that particular reason so that, as he said, when they come back to rate from the State, at least we have those dollars out of there and that cash fund is not there. And that's the whole point of it. Councilman Senn: Well, but then put it in a fund other than, there's a lot of funds you can put it into where it's safe from a rate by the State without creating in effect all of a sudden kind of a almost pre-approved assumption that a city hall expansion's going to happen. Councilman Wing: Let's move it if we come up with a specific then I guess. Mayor Chmiel: Well that's something too that Don and I have sat down and talked about. The Fire Department start getting some of thOse dollar appropriations and maybe trying to fred some other ways of getting some of those dollars into another slot. But I think that for what's there and the position that he has said, I would either, if you don't want to move it, maybe someone else could move it then. That we continue where we're at and accept this with clarifications. I think that is not there. That can be put into something that we can use somewhere else. Councilman Wing: I guess I, a lot of times, well first of ali I guess I will move this for discussion. Item 3(0. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Would there be a second? Councilman Mason: Second. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. 37 City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994 Councilman Wing: A lot of times Mark brings these things up and my ears perk up because he's knowledgable on this and he's, and I find myself listening. In this case I'm really comfortable that the City Manager's on top of it. I just have the respect and support for him and I'm comfortable with what's happened here. With due respect to Mark's comments. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, and I don't dispute those but sometimes some of these commenls have put us in a hole once in a while too where we didn't know how to get back out of where we were at. So I think we have to have all of this down and know where the real world basically is before those things move ahead. So with that there's a motion on the floor with a second. Resolution #94.52: Councilman Wing moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the Year End Closings and Transfers. All voted in favor, except Councilman Senn who opposed and the motion carried. Mayor Chmiel: Okay Don, item number 7. Or excuse me, 8. The debt study. Don Ashworth: I passed out a copy of the debt study. I plan to have that onto our agenda 2 weeks from today. It will be a shorter presentation and you've got 2 weeks to kind of look through it. Councilman Wing: I can only say, I think the only one in my opinion that's capable reading this, well you and I are kind of equals, is maybe Mark and maybe the Mayor. What about for us laymen? Can you read this or can you help me? What do we do with this? Listen to your short version. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. All you have to do is if you have some real concerns with it, give him a call. Sit down. Have it explained. If you have other concerns, check in with Jean. Jean will tell you the same thing. Councilman Wing: Is it going to be a laymen's explanation of this? Mayor Chmiel: There may be a laymen's explanation coming. Just so long as we don't lose it all, right? Don Ashworth: Point of clarification. We pulled off special meeting dates to give us the ability to talk about the entry monuments but we should either have a motion or go back and try to figure out. Where was that at? It was 3(t)). Mayor Chmiel: Don Ashworth: Mayor Chmiel: We approved that. Oh that's right. You're right Roger. You're right. We have not adjourned as yet so let us go right to 9(b). Councilman Senn: 9 what? Roger Knutson: 3(p). Mayor Chmiel: Yes. As we moved it along. (Taping of the meeting ended at this point in the discussion.) 38 City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994 Action taken on item 3(p), which was setting work session dates for the Highway 5 corridor, was unclear and will be clarified at the City Council work session on May 18, 1994. The meeting was adjourned. Submitted by Don Ashworth City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim 39