Loading...
CC Minutes 1996 04 08CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING APRIL 8, 1996 Mayor Chmiel called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Chmiel, Councilman Berquist, Councilwoman Doekendorf, Councilman Mason, and Councilman Senn STAFF PRESENT: Don Ashworth, Roger Knutson, Kate Aanenson, John Rask, Scott Harr, Charles Folch, Todd Gerhardt, Jill Sinclair, and Jerry Ruegemer APPROVAL OF AGENE,,,~: Councilman Mason moved, Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded to approve the agenda as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: PRESENTATION OF MAPLE LEAF AWARDS TO JIM ANDREWS~ PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSIONER~ AND DAVE DUMMER~ PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSIONER. Mayor Chmiel: Before I present the Maple Leaf awards, is there anyone wishing to make a public announcement? If not, Jim Andrews. I'm going alphabetically. Jim, I'm really pleased to present you with the Chanhassen Maple Leaf Award. Jim has served on the Chanhassen Park and Recreation Commission since March of 1990. Acting as Chair for the past 3 years. Jim has also been a dedicated servant xvho exhibits a high level of energy and enthusiasm. His leadership style centers on a philosophy of cutting straight to the point and making his position known. Jim served as Co-Chair of the Highway 5 Task Force and this group met for 18 months to develop a...vision for future growth activity within the Highway 5 corridor. This commitment, which is above and beyond his commission business, and in addition to Jim's numerous volunteer positions with the ski patrol, Minnetonka Soccer Association, and other groups, paints a picture of Jim's zest for life. Jim also enjoys recreational outings with his family and believe it or not, still has time to make a living at his insurance business. Accomplishments that I know Jim is particularly proud of include the ballfield additions at Lake Ann Park, the construction of the Lake Ann Park Picnic Shelter, and the Chanhassen Recreation Center. And procurement of the neighborhood park in the Stone Creek, Minnewashta and Galpin Boulevard north neighborhoods. Again, on behalf of the City Council, I would like to present you with the Maple Leaf A~vard which you are well deserving of. Congratulations. Jim Andrews: Thank you very much. Mayor Chmiel: Mr. Dummer. Can you come forward. Tonight I'm really pleased to present the Chanhassen Maple Leaf Award to Dave Dummer. Over his 7 years of service on the Public Safety Commission, Dave brought some considerable expertise in emergency management to the commission because of his position as Lt. Colonel with the Air Force Reserve and with his expertise being in emergency management. Dave is employed as Vice President and Chief Financial Officer for Powermation and his financial expertise also benefitted the commission and the city also. Dave's logical and numerical approach to things helped keep the commission meetings really on track. During lively commission debates, Dave could always be counted on, no matter how emotional things got to say, now let's get back and look at this intellectually. That's just what he said. Dave was one of the commissioners that was appointed at a time when there were many public safety issues being addressed in Chanhassen, and although Dave had no previous connection, or relationship with other people in the community or the commission, he rolled up his sleeves and dug right in to help us to get to the positive point we are now. Dave, I would like to present to you the City of Chanhassen Maple Leaf Award and thank City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 you from the Council and the City. Thanks very much. This is always one time that you really enjoy doing things, but you also hate to see these people leave. And I didn't say that literally. CHANHASSEN~d DESIGNATION AS A TREE CITY USA. Jill Sinclair: Mr. Mayor, Council members. I just wanted to formally inform you that we have been nominated and accomplished as a Tree City USA. In March I attended a Tree City USA luncheon and accepted the folloxving items on behalf of the city. We received a plaque for the city that will go somewhere here in City Hall. Also a flag that xve will fly in front of City Hall for the month of May, which is Arbor Month. And we also got highxvay signs to put out on Highway 5. It is a real honor to be a Tree City. There's only 164 cities in the State of Minnesota that are so it's an accomplishment. You should feel real good. Mayor Chmiel: Good. Nice presentation. Thank you. Thanks for your time in pulling a lot of those things together as ~vell. PROCLAMATION DECLARING ARBOR DAY AND ARBOR MONTH. Mayor Chmiel: Whereas, in 1872, J. Sterling Morton proposed to the Nebraska Board of Agriculture that a special day be set aside for the planting of trees; and Whereas, this holiday called Arbor Day was first observed with the planting of more than a million trees in Nebraska; and Whereas, Arbor Day is now observed throughout the nation and the world; and Whereas, trees can reduce the erosion of our precious topsoil by wind and water, cut heating and cooling costs, moderate the temperature, clean the air, produce oxygen and provide habitat for xvildlife; and Whereas, trees are a renewable resource giving us paper, wood for our homes, fuel for our fires and countless other wood products; and Whereas, trees in our city increase property values, enhance the economic vitality of business areas, and beautify our community; and Whereas, trees are a source of joy and spiritual renewal; and Whereas, Chanhassen has been recognized as a Tree City USA by the National Arbor Day Foundation and desires to continue it's tree planting ways. Now Therefore, I, Donald J. Chmiel, Mayor of the City of Chanhassen, do hereby proclaim Sunday, April 27th, 1996 as Arbor Day and May as Arbor Month in the City of Chanhassen. I urge all citizens to support efforts to care for our trees and woodlands and to support our city's community forestry program; and further I urge all citizens to plant trees to gladden the hearts and promote the well-being of present and of future generations. Is there a motion? Councilxvoman Doekendorf: So moved. Councilman Mason: Second. Resolution/t96-30: Councilwoman Dockendorf moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve a proclamation declaring Saturday, April 27, 1996 as Arbor Day and the month of May as Arbor Month in the City of Chanhassen. All voted in favor and the motion carried. CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Berquist moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the following Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations: a. Amendment to City Code Concerning Bluff Protection and Side Slope Setbacks; Second and Final Reading and Approval of Summary Ordinance for Publication Purposes. City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 b. Amendment to City Code Concerning Landscaping and Tree Removal for Transitional Buffering Between Uses; Second and Final Reading and Approval of Summary Ordinance for Publication Purposes. d. Amendment to Section 20-1255(9) Temporary Development Signs; Section 20-1301(2), Area Identification Signs; and Section 20-1 Definition; Second and Final Reading and Approval of Summary Ordinance for Publication Purposes. e. Resolution #96-31: Approve New Municipal State Aid Street Designations: 1) MSAS 113: West 78th Street from Kerber Boulevard to Great Plains Boulevard. 2) MSAS I13: West 78th Street from Great Plains Boulevard to TH 101. 3) MSAS 119: Great Plains Boulevard from TH 5 to West 78th Street. 4) MSAS 120: Townline Road from Vinehill Road to TH 101. g. TIF Payment to School District 112. h. Approval of On-Sale Beer/Wine License Renewal, Happy Garden Restaurant. i. Approval of Bills. j. City Council Minutes dated March 25, 1996, (Councilman Senn and Councilman Mason abstained) Park & Recreation Commission Minutes dated March 26, 1996 k. Approval of Temporary On-Sale Non-Intoxicating Liquor License Application, Chanhassen Lions Club, May 18-19, Lake Ann Park. 1. Preliminary Plat Extension, Lake Ann Highlands, Lotus Realty. All voted in favor and the motion carded. Mayor Chmiel: Ho~v long will (c) take, Mark? Are there some real concerns in that? Councilman Senn: I don't know. Could take a little bit. I talked to Kate and to John about it and I'm still not comfortable. There's a point that I'd like to share with the Council and see what the Council thinks. It will probably take a little discussion. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. We'll move that item to 12(e). And Steve, ho~v about your's? Councilman Berquist: Probably take 3 minutes. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, let's do it. F. APPROVE REVISED SANITARY SEWER AND WATER HOOKUP FEES FOR 1996. Councilman Berquist: Is the clock running? Charles and I had a conversation earlier today regarding the index that's used to compute the increases that are being proposed. My recommendations ~vere that we do one of two things. We either, or perhaps both things. We get a little bit more detailed on a regional basis as far as the City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 construction cost index relative to our area, insofar as that the Midwest has a tendency, especially the northern tier, has a tendency to have a somexvhat inflated construction costs for a variety of reasons. So a little bit more regional data would be advantageous. Secondly, if we're going on a 3 year basis before we re-establish these things, perhaps language within the ordinance that would speak to increases predicated against the CCI. It would just take place on an automatic basis ~vould be. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Reviewed annually? Councilman Berquist: Yeah, just annually. Annually on January 1st if the construction cost index shows as an increase, it's plugged into the ordinance and it goes from there. So those are my ideas. Did you have an opportunity to check with Engineering News? Charles Folch: Yes I did and it appears that there is regional data. Unfortunately they weren't able to get it for me today but I suspect they will get back to me either tomorrow or Wednesday so we can either, I guess maybe two opts. One, you either direct myself to make that adjustment based on those numbers. Or if you wish to table it, for me to bring the numbers back to you in 2 weeks, that's perfectly fine too. My guess is that the numbers statistically will probably change maybe plus or minus .2%, maybe .3% per year, which could amount to maybe, for the sewer, trunk sewer, maybe could amount to maybe somewhere between a $6.00 to $10.00 change per unit. For the trunk water, it could be anywhere from maybe an $8.00 to a $13.00-$14.00 rate increase so, whichever the Council prefers we can certainly do. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. What would be your suggestion on that one Steve? Councilman Berquist: Well...make an amendment to the Code. I'd just, I mean I'd like to know xvhat the dollar differences are going to be but I don't think it's in our best interest to get involved in the minutia of it. I'd just as soon pass an amendment outlining the change relative to a yearly update based on the CCI. Councilman Senn: Yeah, this is an average of 2% per year increase which is, at least as I understood from the data I have, just under both national and midwest average for the last 3 years. So it's just a hair under. Your concern I think was that the midwest might be high but the midwest actually ranked pretty much par. At least now in terms of construction materials. Okay, that's all I can really talk about. Not specifically sewer and water, that type of thing but in terms of general construction... Councilman Berquist: Well I don't think there's anything in there that I can make a motion on. I can motion to amend the ordinance and get that, if you have any follow-up paperwork on their part. Councilman Senn: And do it annually. Councilman Berquist: Yeah. Councilman Senn: I would agree with that. Councilman Berquist: Then I would make a motion to amend the City Code to, on a yearly basis, to be reflective of the construction cost index relative to establishing trunk hook-up rates for sanitary sewer and water mains, and let it go at that. Councilwoman Dockendorf: With a regional cut or. City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 Councilman Berquist: With regional data applied. Councilxvoman Dockendorf: Question? Mayor Chmiel: Question. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Charles, how administratively difficult is that to find? Is it just a phone call? Charles Folch: Real easy. It's a matter of whether you want to see that number change each year or whether you just want us to administratively do it. We can do it automatically. Councilman Mason: You can go xvith automatic. Councilman Senn: Automatic, maybe just put it in the Admin packet. Charles Folch: Yep. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, any other discussion? Roger Knutson: Mr. Mayor? Mayor Chmiel: Yes Roger. Roger Knutson: If I could point out, under your rules you require two readings for an ordinance. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Councilman Berquist: Will this constitute one? Roger Knutson: This will count as the first meeting, if you so desire yes. It's not on your agenda. You don't have a written ordinance. I would recommend that you bring back, or staff bring back a written ordinance for you at your next meeting. And that wouldn't have to hold up this. You could direct for this year, for example, if you desire to, that the numbers be adjusted in accordance with the...and that would do it. And then we could amend the ordinance at the next meeting... Councilman Berquist: And insofar as xve have, we probably have a fairly high number of applications coming it, it would behoove us to do that? Roger Knutson: I think so. I mean at this time of year I suppose you'd be getting permit applications. Councilman Berquist: Okay. I'll withdraw my first motion, until we act on this and then I'll make a second motion acting on this. Mayor Chmiel: Alright. Councilman Berquist: So I'll move approval of Charles' memo dated 3-28-96 approving revised trunk sanitary sewer and water hookup fees for 1996. City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 Councilman Senn: Second. Resolution #96-32: Councilman Berquist moved, Councilman Senn seconded to approve the Revised Sanitary Sewer and Water Hookup Fees for 1996 as presented by the City Engineer in his memo dated March 28, 1996. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Councilman Berquist: Then I will also move that we amend the City Code to be reflective of the annual CCI indexing and make yearly water and sanitary sewer hookup's a matter of routine. Mayor Chmiel: To continue with that Roger, are you looking to have two readings of an amendment for the Code, because of the ordinance portion. Okay, then we'd bring this back. Roger Knutson: Since you've already taken care of this year, there's no urgency. Mayor Chmiel: There's no rush. Okay, good. Councilman Senn: Second. Councilman Benluist moved, Councilman Senn seconded to direct staff to pmparc an amendment to the City Code to be reflective of the annual CCI indexing and to make yearly adjustments admlnistmtively to the water and sanitat>, sewer hookup fees. All voted in favor and the motion carded. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: CHAN/CHASKA SOCCER CLUB, FI]gLD AVAILABILITY, SUSAN HOFF. David Collett: Mr. Mayor, Council members. My name is David Collett. I live in Chaska. I wanted to live in Chanhassen but my wife wouldn't let me. No. I represent the Chanhassen/Chaska Soccer Club. I'm a representative. Sue Hoff is here with me tonight. I guess to make it real sweet and simple, we provided you with a packet of information this evening. Talking about the organization..lay Johnson, the President of the organization provided a cover letter to give you some background of what we do and who we are. The sxveet and simple is, there's a dire need out there for fields for the kids to play soccer. Presently there's only one field in the toxvn of Chanhassen. Regulation field...and a lot more is needed .... part of the problem is soccer is kind of the new kid on the block and when the planners are out there planning, I think I know some of you who have kids in soccer. I've talked with a couple of you in the past and we've talked soccer stories but when plans are being made by the school district, about building a new schools, put in parks, the people doing the planning quite often have not had exposure to soccer. They didn't grow up with it. I didn't. I don't know hoxv many of you did. But I think most of our kids are playing it. So when they're doing the planning in the rooms late at night, they right away plan what xve all know about and that's baseball, which is great because I also have two kids who play baseball. I'm sure we all have real needs. Soccer's always left out there in left field so to speak. ...are not getting the fields that we need to take care of our kids in this community. In this community, and the surrounding communities, if we can represent all the communities combined. Presently we have, in 1996 there will be over 600 kids in the soccer program that we have here. Last year it was 418. It's grooving by 20% a year. The question is do you stop the growth? Do you limit it? We don't know. We're not sure what to do with it. We need fields presently to play on. They're not there. We needs fields for growth, and the rest of the fields that are there. We need to have a regulation field. We have a varsity team in the school, our high school team doesn't have a regulation field to play on. In your packet, to give you some comparison. Nothing more than comparison sake... The first one talks about soccer fields in other communities. Other communities have a lot more. That doesn't make any difference here today because what we have right now, ~ve have to plan for 6 City Council Meeting ~ April 8, 1996 other things. We talk about youth development soccer in the packet. We compare it to baseball. It's kind of dangerous in doing it. We said we're not, we're not wanting to compete with baseball and softball. That's not why. It's just showing, there's a lot of kids that they chose baseball and softball as their chosen sport. And lots of kids today xvant to play soccer and they can't. We can't let them do it. They can't find a place to do it. We need your help with this. We put in a request for action tonight and what it is, we weren't sure what to ask for action because we weren't sure what your plans were. If we put in a field a year from now until the year 2000, four fields. We'd also like to see Bandimere, Bandimere has, you know this site out here that you're looking at as a park. We should have two fields out there. I don't control your checkbooks and I don't know if you have any money left but that's what xve're asking for. I guess in summary, the data's there. It's not a question of debating whether the need is there. The need is there. We can show a need. Again we need your help, we really do. We've approached Victoria and we've approached Chaska. So that's, any questions on it that you'd like to ask? Mayor Chmiel: Does Council have any questions? Councilman Berquist: Have any of your members received notification of Park Task Force meetings, either the, well primarily I guess the get out to vote committee. Stuff in that regard? David Collett: I believe so... Susan Hoff: ...Mary Berchall is serving on that group. Task force. Councilman Berquist: Mary Bersha? Susan Hoff: Berchall. Councilman Berquist: If they're there, I'm going to be embarrassed. Okay. David Collett: Partly it's like any organization, you spend so much time and effort trying to take care of these kids, it's hard to find volunteers these days. No matter what you do. And we try to do the things we have to do politically to get things done. There's not always time for that. You guys...spread thin. So there is an effort to do that... Jim Andrews: I'm Jim Andrexvs. I'm a coach for Tonka United and I heard about this presentation tonight and put together some information just to contribute...to the growth of soccer. Tonka United is a neighboring club. We're a little larger but this just gives you an idea of growth in the manner of the sport. As of March 31st we had 1,870 players in our club. We serve both traveling and recreational needs, just as the Chan/Chaska Club does. As of, the last time I talked to the person in charge, we had 140 teams in the instructional level, which is about 1,400 kids and we have 31 traveling teams in the Tonka United group. Out of the 1,870 players, approximately 445 are Chanhassen residents so there's a huge demand for soccer out there and I have this all, I'll give you a copy of this but we had the same observations that Chan/Chaska does. There's a definite shortage of fields in our community compared to other surrounding communities. The growth of the sport has been phenomenal. There's no end in sight. We predicted growth rates of 20% and we're seeing continued growth rates of 30-35% so it's, I don't know where they're all coming from to be honest but each year there's more and more young kids getting into soccer. Each year there's more and more dedication. Time, commitment, training, development of coaches and players at the older levels. I think we've all seen on the international matches scene that soccer has become a sport that Americans can play and compete and I think that the sport will 7 City Council Meeting ~ April 8, 1996 continue to grow. Again, I had no prior experience with this sport. I couldn't understand why people would want to xvatch something that only had one goal in an hour and a half but I've come to love the game and I've come to love watching the kids play and have fun. I like seeing 22 kids at a time run around and having fun. So I agree, it's something that the city needs to look at and I hope that we can move ahead quickly. I mean we're at a crisis point with facilities that the city can provide. Some of these clubs have been looking at buying fields on a private basis and we're non-profit clubs. Money is much tighter than even the city, believe it or not. And land prices, we're all familiar with what's happening there and the shortage of flat land. If we xvanted to play soccer on a hill, that's not a problem but finding a piece of flat property, it's difficult so. I would hope that the city does put a quicker action plan and try to look at being a little more creative and perhaps creating some fields. If we can't develop Bandimere on a complete basis, perhaps we could get two fields on the north section. There is a flat area there. It was shown as a proposed entry. I think between the city and the clubs... I do have a copy of the information I have... Mayor Chmiel: Good, appreciate that Jim. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Mr. Mayor? Mayor Chmiel: Yes. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Perhaps Jerry, you can answer this. Isn't, aren't the ballfields at Bluff Creek, aren't they supposed to be doubling as soccer fields? Jerry Ruegemer: Yeah. Currently there's going to be five multi-purpose softball/baseball/soccer fields out there. They'll be ready for play in probably '97... Councilwoman Doekendorf: Okay. So it's a matter of programming. Arranging those. David Collett: I have one comment about doing those fields. First of all those fields, the fields we're asking for are full sized, regulation fields which are normally for the players of more accomplishment and more experience. Jim Andrews: I guess the question ! would ask is, if ballfields or soccer fields with infield diamond cut outs are acceptable, then why aren't grass fields acceptable for softball teams? I think each sport could argue that at a certain level, we should try to have a little better field for the kids. I mean yes you can play on dirt but it certainly is not the preferred thing so. Mayor Chmiel: Good. Okay, thanks. Are there any questions of Council? David Collett: One last thing and then I'I1 sit down. Part of the usage of the...I have four children who play soccer and they play baseball. In your packet it talks about usage and total number of hours that is spent. Soccer is a very fast moving, quick game where it gives kids much better use of space than a baseball field... there is more of a demand than is being provided at this point. It has to be addressed... Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Thanks very much David. Don, have we taken this before the Park and Recreation Commission that you're aware of at any given time? Don Ashworth: I'm sure that Todd continues to update them but as a separate item, I'm not sure. I guess I would encourage them to make a similar presentation to the Park Commission. 8 City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 Mayor Chmiel: That xvas going to be my direction xvith that. Okay, Steve. Councilman Berquist: I was going to invite them to the Park Task Force meeting xvith the Get Out To Vote committee on Thursday the 1 lth, but they've left. Oh Dave's still here. Was it Sue Hoff that mentioned someone's name that she believes has been attending the meetings? I've been attending, I've attended almost every single meeting and I have yet to see that person there so if I'm wrong, I'm grossly wrong but the fact of the matter is that one representative from an organization that provides recreation for 1,870 players is small representation and I would, I agree. Soccer facilities and other sports facilities are desperately needed within the city of Chanhassen. Part of the Park Task Force referendum xvill be to provide funding for the development of Bandimere, as well as land acquisition for the development of other parks. But in order for it to fly, people have to get involved. I also understand that volunteer time is very precious. But there is a need for involvement on all levels, xvhether it softball, soccer, hockey or any other sport. So please pass that on to the folks that were here to get involved in the process because if it doesn't fly come September or November, it ain't going to fly and then we're, then 5-6 years from now when instead of 1,870 you're serving 2,800-2,900 kids, you want to talk about field crowding, then we're going to have field crowding and we're not going to be able to do a thing about it. So that's the only comments that I wanted to make. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, good. Thanks. We'll move on to item number AWARD OF BIDS: GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT REFUNDING BONDS~ SERIES 1996A, Don Ashworth: Dave MacGillivrary with Springsted is here this evening to go through the bids that ~ve did receive. Dave MaeGillivrary: Good evening Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. We'd like your consideration of the resolution of one sale of $900,000.00 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1996A. A little bit on the background. The objective of this sale is to reduce interest costs on the city's outstanding general obligation improvement bonds that were issued in 1987. We propose to do that in t~vo ways. First, these are repaid by special assessments. The City has collected significant amounts of special assessments. We would take approximately $500,000.00 of those assessments and reduce the principle from approximately a million four to $900,000.00, and that...pre-paying those bonds, and at the same time reduce the interest rate. These bonds are subject to prepayment on August 1, 1996. As you're probably a~vare, ~ve've been seeing a lot of activity in the financial market...talk a little bit about scheduling the sale and some of the constraints. The federal government only lets you refund issues on a limited number... The August 1st '96 controls the timing of this issue. It's called a current refund and they have a schedule, I can go through the specifics but the bottom line is you really couldn't bring it to market until on or after April 1st '96... For the most part make it an advanced refunding which would be a lot more costly... Secondly, just in the general the market has bumped up somewhat in the Minnesota Tax Exempt area. Obviously there's been a lot of activity in the last 2 or 3 days...Minnesota since about mid-week of last week resulting in about 5/100ths of 1% so not a lot of movement in Minnesota since about Wednesday or Thursday. Also just in general, there's an index similar to the Dow Jones Index of composite. Ifs about 580 now. 5.8%. The all time 20 year low is 5.3 so it's about 1/2 of 1% over the 20 year low so that's still... I do have the results of the bids in front of me on the yellow sheet. We received 7 bids. Pd like to come back to the Standard and Poors credit rating. The best bid, FBS...Systems Investment Services in conjunction with the State Bank of Chanhassen is the best bid of 4.5676%. It moves upwards from there. John B. Kinnard...Norwest. Page 2...4.97. These bonds are outstanding at a rate of about 6.25 so you're reducing the rate from 6.25 to 4.56%. We have been bond for the situation for the city for, at least since last summer. In December we looked at this and had xve done this in December, we'd be looking at about $196,000.00 in City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 savings. We established a threshold with the staff of about $200,000.00 in savings after all costs. These bills will result in 200, slightly over $205,000.00 in savings, xvhich is higher than the level of December. When we brought this to you back in March to set the process, it was $208,000.00...all savings or $3,000.00 less than that so we think though, the national markets have been bumping up. They haven't seen that same situation relatively...so that $205,000.00 is about 21% reduction in interest costs. So that I think would accomplish the objectives. We would like to...couple of weeks ago when Federal regulations kind of had sort of a stop gap.., so that was really, we were trying to deal with that situation. A little bit on your credit rating. Standard and Poors, xve affirmed an A- rating. Also they have a outlook. They give an outlook, either negative, positive or stable which is not something we saw at Moody's. They're providing a stable outlook for the city relative to that credit rating. They had 3 or 4 comments in summary form. They note the expanding tax base of the community. Above average income levels. Sound cash liquidity and over adequate overall financial position. And a high debt burden caused by city and school... I think you'll recall from some of our earlier discussions on credit rating, we talked about...Standard and Poors to the city to have a discussion. That's occurring on Thursday morning at between 8:30 and 10:30 at City Hall. Two of the people who worked on this issue will be at City Hall. If you have any questions, they'll be here for two hours to kind of meet everybody and see... That's an opportunity perhaps you'd like to take advantage of. With that, we do think we've accomplished the objectives. It's been a little bit interesting here in the financial market but...so we would recommend axvard to FBS Investment Services and I'd be glad to take any questions. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Are there any questions? Steve. Councilman Berquist: No sir. Mayor Chmiel: Colleen. Councilwoman Dockendorf: When will our next opportunity be to refinance some debt, or is this it for a while? Dave MacGillivrary: If this issue, first if you're going for a reduction in interest rate, I think that our crystal ball right now is saying onward and upward so I don't think holding your breath until July or something is necessarily going to be, we don't think there's going to be a lower interest rate market. The other thing you're finding is, as you move into the spring and summer, people start funding construction, rather than refunding so as there's more bond supply on the market which moves the rates up so that's why we have been looking at this now prior to December but, so I guess I don't know when the next opportunity is...been active with the city in refunding and realize a lot of savings in the past so I think...to have are fewer and farther between as well so... Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Michael. Councilman Mason: I have none. Mayor Chmiel: Mark. Councilman Senn: No. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Thank you. Appreciate it. Is there a motion? Councilwoman Dockendorf: I would move that we refund the general obligation currently funding Bond Series 1996A and award it to FBS Investment Services. 10 City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second? Councilman Mason: Yes there is. Resolution #96-33: Councilwoman Dockendorf moved, Councilman Mason seconded to awanl the General Obligation Improvement Refunding Bonds, Series 1996A to FBS Investment Services. Ali voted in favor and the motion carried. AWARD OF BIDS: MURRAY HILL TOWER RECONDITIONING CONTRACT~ PROJECT NO. 95-3. Charles Folch: Thank you Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. On Wednesday, March 27th, bids ~vere received and opened for the Murray Hill Tower reconstruction project. As expected a total of five bids were received and the lo~v bid was received from Odland Protective Coatings in the amount of $122,000.00. This is approximately 4 1/2% below the engineer's estimate of $127,600.00. The project engineer, Mr. Bob Kollmer of AEC Engineering has tabulated all the bids and has also inspected references...It is therefore recommended that the City Council award the Murray Hill Tower reconditioning project to Odland Protective Coatings in the amount of $122,000.00. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, are there any questions? Steve. Councilman Berquist: Yes. Is the engineer here? Charles Folch: No. Bob couldn't make it tonight. Councilman Berquist: The structural modifications xvere estimated at $5,200.00 and consistently with all five bidders they came in excess of double that. Any idea why? Charles Folch: Well there was a pre-bid walk through, if you xvill. Inspection of the tower. Evidently the bidders must have felt that there was more work involved with some of the structural repair than what was estimated with the engineer's estimate. That type of work was bid as a lump sum so it's not really spelled out in terms of so many feet of line repair, welding repair, things like that. It's basically a lump sum bid based on the condition so when the bidders go through the pre-bid walk through~ they look at it and they determine in their own minds how much level of effort they thing they're going to have to put into to recondition that work, up to acceptable standards. Councilman Berquist: The bid contractors of the primes, is that a subcontract item? Charles Folch: I ~vould say ~vith this outfit, it probably is a subcontract for that type of work. Councilman Berquist: Okay. And they're all xvithin dollars but they're ail double the amount. Charles Folch: Yeah, it's kind of strange. If you look at even like the interior reconditioning work, those jumped around quite a bit too. And it surprised us. We were kind of confused as to why there was such a variance in the interpretation of how much work was needed to do, complete what. Councilman Berquist: Did you ever ask why? 11 City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 Charles Folch: I believe the project engineer had made contact with the, at least the low bidder to verify his bid on the estimates, but I don't know if the other bidders were contacted. Councilman Berquist: Then the logo and lettering, is that a sub, that's got to be a subcontract item.'? Charles Folch: That's actually the painting contractor does that. Councilman Berquist: So that's the prime? The prime contractor does that? Charles Folch: Yes. In this particular bid, yes. On the low bid. Councilman Berquist: Okay. That's the only question I have. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Colleen. Councilwoman Dockendorf: No. Mayor Chmiel: Michael. Councilman Mason: No. Mayor Chmiel: Mark. Councilman Senn: I think Steve hit most of it. I guess the only concern that I had is you*ve got one bid that's below. Everything else is way high. I mean are we sure that we're going to get the work done for the bid and not be arguing over what level of work or repair is needed and be back here with change orders or whatever? Charles Folch: Basically the bid is specified again that all of the perspective bidders are invited to the pre-bid ~valk through so they could observe everything for themselves. One of the comments that the project engineer did make on the day of the bid opening was that again, most of these jobs are being bid out at least 6 months, more like a year to a year and a half out and the federal regulations keep changing practically every 6 months in regards to this type of work. So when we're bidding a job a year, year and a half up to conduct, they're betting and bidding not knowing exactly what the regulations might be or what changes might occur during the time between now, when they've been awarded the contract, and the year, or 18 months down the road when they're actually going to perform the work. So that level of insecurity probably has an effect on the prices that they provided that we're getting also. Councilman Senn: If I'm understanding what you're saying though, their pricing effectively is based on or predicated on the walk through or the observation. Charles Folch: Right. Councilman Senn: Okay. Now does that tie back to a very specific set of specifications saying xvhat needs to be repaired at where and at what level? Or are we just simply assuming that by observation they're making the same determination that our engineer has made in his inspection? 12 City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 Charles Folch: Well the specs which were presented probably 2 months ago do have detailed descriptions of the major work involved. There's also diagrams and pictures of the existing condition that are included in the specifications so. Councilman Senn: I remember the breakdown for the types of work. I did not remember actually saying, you know this needed to be done here. This needed to be done here. This needed to be done here. Now again, we see a lot of that stuff so I'm not saying I remember it right but so there was detail in there saying that specifically dealing with locations and level of repair at each location. Charles Folch: Of the major work items, yeah. Councilman Senn: Alright. Alright. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any other discussion? Councilman Berquist: Yeah, Mark's basically saying they're going to go into the inside and do $6,100.00 work of work and the middle guy's going to do $15,000.00 and the upper guy's going to do $38. I mean there's got to be a tremendous spread on the level and/or quality of xvork that had been outlined. I mean that $6,100.00 number got him the job in essence, and yet it's so far out of whack with the other bids as to be scary. Councilman Senn: That is scary. Charles Folch: But it's in line with what the engineer's estimate ~vas for that particular work item though basically. Councilman Berquist: Well that may be but then xvhy are the other ones so far out of line? It's the same walk through. The same engineer. Everything was the same. Councilman Senn: When you see them all up and down so much...comfort and I think that's. Councilman Berquist: When I see it, what it says to me is, who screwed up? That's in my business. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, that's what happens with, yeah. You're right. Charles Folch: Well if you feel more comfortable, I could certainly have the project engineer bring this back in 2 ~veeks and provide you more detail and have some sort of written response from the bidders that xvere there in terms of what may have caused the variation in the bids, if that would make you feel more comfortable. Councilman Senn: Well I'm not sure from our perspective what that would accomplish. I'd much rather see you very definitively put both the project engineer and the contractor on notice that you're going to expect strict adherence to the specifications and from the engineer's standpoint, strict compliance with and inspection of so there'd better not be a change order back from this project you know pushing it up to through the ceiling. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. And I guess that's where I'm more or less coming from as well. But as I see that bid tabulation and people just sometimes, depending upon how busy they are too, will also put bids up a little bit higher. If they get it, fine. If they don't, well I'm busy enough to keep going. 13 City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 Councilman Berquist: Well I understand that but I think that. Councilman Senn: This isn't that kind of spring. Councilman Berquist: Yeah. Mayor Chmiel: No, and I agree. But at least, as long as they're going to do the inspections of what we're looking at and making sure that everything is going to be according to what xve see in our specifications, I think I feel sort of comfortable with that. I would call for a motion. Councilman Senn: I'll move approval Charles, with making sure that those comments are passed on. Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second? Councilman Mason: Yes. Mayor Chmiel: Moved and seconded. Any other discussion? Councilwoman Dockendorf: Just a question. Are xve 6 months, a year out from getting this accomplished Charles? Charles Folch: Actually this one we specified to begin the last week in August, to be completed by October 15th. Resolution #96-34: Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to award the bid for file Murray Hill Water Tower Reconditioning Contract, Pm jeer No. 95-3, to Odland Protective Coatings in the amount of $122,000.00. All voted in favor and the motion carried. AWARD OF BIDS: POWERS BOULEVARD (CSAH 17) RECONSTRUCTION FROM TH 5 SOUTH TO LYMAN BOULEVARD~ CARVER COUNTY PROJECT SAP 10-617-14~ CITY PROJECT 93-29. Charles Folch: This past Tuesday, April 2nd bids xvere received and opened at Carver County for the Powers Boulevard reconstruction project. A total of five bids were received with the low bid being received from Brown & Cris Incorporated at a total of $3,276,366.44 which is approximately $200 and some thousand below the engineer's estimate. As we discussed with the City Council, at the time that the plans were approved, there was two bid alternates included in the bidding process. The first bid alternate was consisting of the mill and overlay of the Park Road and Park Drive area in the Chan Business Lake Park. And the engineer's estimate was $66,000.00. The alternate received from the low bidder was $63,583.78. Approximately $1,500.00 less than the engineer's estimate. I would probably estimate some $30,000.00 under what we would have probably received in bids if this xvas a stand alone smaller job. The second alternate was for the water quality project for Holly Lane and Christmas Lake. Again the engineer's estimate was $75,000.00. The low bid, received from Brown & Cris was $71,524.85. Again, some $3,500.00 below the engineer's estimate. Brown and Cris has a proven track record in the city of Chanhassen. They're most recent accomplishment is the street and utility reconstruction of the Chan Estates 1st and 3rd Additions. That project, from a construction standpoint xvent very, very smooth. The interaction and communication xvith the contractor, the engineer and the residents went real xvell so we have a high confidence level that they can complete this contract in a similar fashion so it is stafPs recommendation 14 City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 that the Powers Boulevard Reconstruction Project//93-29 be axvarded to Brown & Cris along with alternate, bid alternates #1 and #2. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you Charles. Any questions?? Councilman Berquist: In the memo you mentioned that the engineer's estimate for alternate 2 was $75,000.00 but in the letter from the engineer to the county engineer, his estimate was, now where am I9. Am I reading this wrong?? Charles Folch: $90,000.00, yeah. Actually I think he revised his numbers up at the last minute but the original amount that was presented to you at the time of final approval was $75,000.00. Councilman Berquist: Okay, thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Any other questions?? If not, is there a motion?? Councilman Mason: I'll move axvard of bids for Poxvers Boulevard reconstruction from Trunk Highway 5 south to Lyman Boulevard, Carver County Project SAP 10-617-14, City Project No. 93-29, awarded to Broxvn & Cris Inc., including bid alternate 1 and bid alternate 2, is that correct Charles?? Charles Folch: That's correct. Councilman Mason: Yes, okay. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, is there a second? Councilman Berquist: I'll second it. Resolution #96-35: Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Berquist seconded that the contract for the Po~vers Boulevard (CSAH 17) Reconstruction Project from Trunk High~vay 5 south to Lyman Boulevard, Carver County Project SAP 10-617-14~ City Project Nco 93-29 be anvarded to Brown & Cfis Inc. at a total base bid of $3,276,366.48 including Bid AItemate No. 1 at $63,583.78 and Bid Alternate No. 2 at $71~524.85. All voted in favor and the motion carried. APPROVE PLANS FOR THE INTERSECTION RECONSTRUCTION WORK ON CSAH 62 AND TH 101 (HENNEPIN COUNTY PROJECT) - CITY FILE NO. PW-197B. Charles Folch: Tonight we have representatives of Hermepin County, Mr. Craig Twinem and Bruce Polaczyk that are here tonight to advise you with a quotation of the project that's before you for consideration. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Bruce Polaczyk: Well good evening Mr. Mayor, members of Council. My name is Bruce Polaczyk. I'm a design engineer with Hennepin County and our neighbors to the east, we certainly welcome this opportunity to be here. With me tonight is Craig Twinem. He's the project design engineer for this project. My purpose actually is to kind of give you a brief overviexv and then I'll turn Craig over to go through the details of the project. But I assume that ~vith Charles and the information that he's provided in the Council packet, that you 15 City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 are aware of the background and so therefore I will not take the time to revie~v that aspect of it. As Charles mentioned, the project that's under consideration is an extension of the project that's currently under construction from Trunk Highway 101 east to County Road 4. This is a Hennepin County project with a combination of support from the cities of Eden Prairie and Minnetonka. That project that is currently under construction includes a temporary connection at Trunk Highway 101, and it also includes a temporary signal. Well what this project will do, and which is what Craig will walk us through, is actually to eliminate that temporary signal and it we'll actually put in a permanent signal along with permanent roadway on Trunk Highway 101, both east and west of the, perhaps north and south of the intersection of Crosstown. The major design elements of the project, as I mentioned, will include a temporary or a permanent signal at the intersection of TH 101, Crosstown and Dell Road. The project will also flatten the curve on Trunk Highway 101 at the west. It will include curb, gutter, storm sexver, and will include a landscape element that again, Craig ~vill go through and talk us through. We also will realign Vine Hill Road, with the connection there at Trunk High~vay 101. Insofar as the right-of- way. In Chanhassen there are four parcels that are affected and those parcels obviously are on the west side. They do include primarily temporary easements. There is a permanent easement that will be necessary for the construction of the wall and that wall will be explained by Craig when he goes through that. The project cost actually is $2 million. The funding for the construction will come primarily from four sources. There's Federal funds and State funds. By State funds I mean State Trunk Highway funds. And there will be municipal funds. Now the city of Chanhassen is not being called upon to participate in any of the construction costs. Hoxvever, the right-of-xvay that I had mentioned and the four parcels that are included as a part of this temporary easement, do have an estimated value associated with them about $10,000.00 for the four parcels. We will be entering into an agreement with the State of Minnesota to capture funds for the project an ~ve anticipate that those funds will include monies to cover the right-of-way costs. Now given the worst case scenario, if the State funds do not pick up all of the right-of-way cost, we may then ask the City of Chanhassen to pay for 50% of that right-of-way cost along that west side of the roadway, which would equate to approximately $5,000.00. Again, that's an estimate. We don't have, we're just in the process of negotiating with the property owners. We do have one property owner where we have a verbal agreement. The others we are xvorking on through staff's agreement with them. As far as the schedule. We are looking for opening bids around early June. Construction I would assume then xvould start in say mid to the later part of July. Possibly later. And construction will take us through this summer and more than likely will carry through into the following year. And I assume that if the contractor can get as early a start as possible... (There was a tape change at this point in the discussion.) Craig Twinem: This first drawing that I have up here shows the existing roadway. It's highlighted in orange and you can see the severe turn, curve at Vine Hill Road as well as xvhere Trunk Highway 101 turns to the north at the intersection of Dell Road and existing County Road, Hennepin County Road 62. As Bruce mentioned, the primary design feature of the revised intersection is flattening the curve. On this layout we got the permanent construction highlighted in orange and in Chanhassen the retaining wall that Bruce is talking about runs from this point to this point. The construction limits are the dashed line and you see the construction limits touch down prior to the existing wood fence along the west side of TH 101. So the construction limits do not go... There is, although it doesn't show on this drawing, there's a proposed bituminous trail along Vine Hill Road and on the north side of TH 101 to this intersection here. There's also bituminous path on the, proposed for the east side of TH 101 and on both sides of Hennepin County Road 62, as ~vell as this side of Dell Road. Again this intersection will have a signalized traffic signal. The other thing I wanted to show you was the landscape features, and we've just highlighted the proposed plantings in Chanhassen and they include some Colorado Green Spruce and some Ash trees. The existing, there's some trees along here that will be removed to 16 City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 construct the retaining xvall, and it's part of the reasons xvhy we proposed these plantings shown. I guess that's the end of my presentation. Do you have any questions about the plan? Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Steve, do you have any questions? Councilman Berquist: No. Not right now. Mayor Chmiel: Colleen. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Are you going to raise the elevation? Right now it's quite a bit down from where they'll be cutting into. Craig Twinem: Actually the elevation at this intersection will be loxvered about 6 to 7 feet and really the traffic will be maintained at all time throughout construction. So we have a very, kind of a complicated staging plan proposed. There will be some temporary widening and this is actually quite a challenging intersection to build. We propose maintain traffic at all time. Couneilxvoman Doekendorf: Well the grades, or not the grades but the elevations are different on the Vine Hill. Are you going to cut into all of that fill.'? I'm not explaining myself well. Will you need to make the curve more gradual? Craig Twinem: Where this? Councilwoman Dockendorf: Yeah right there. That right now is quite a bit higher than the road. Craig Twinem: It's lower. There's also retaining walls proposed on the Eden Prairie side, all along this area in here. So they can raise a large. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Mike. Councilman Mason: I'm going to be kind of sorry to see that old landmark go~ Councilwoman Dockcndorf: I actually attach nostalgia to concrete but I know what you mean. Councilman Mason: That's an old comer. No. Mayor Chmiel: Mark. Councilman Senn: I've got a couple. What are you going to do about the driveways that back directly out onto TH 101 on the north side? Craig Twinem: Off of Vine Hill? Councilman Senn: No. Go to the east. Right in there. You've got a couple driveways that back right into the right-of-way there. Are those going to remain back into the right-of-way? Craig Twinem: Yes. This one here? 17 City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 Councilman Senn: Well there's two noxv. Correct? Mayor Chmiel: Two existing but I don't think they're... Bruce Polaczyk: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. I think the one driveway that Councilmember Senn is referring to, is one that connects to the existing Trunk Highway 101, which will with this project, be connected in with that gooseneck, if you will. Where it comes into Vine Hill Road. So actually the one. Councilman Senn: You're going to eliminate one and you're not going to eliminate the other? Bruce Polaczyk: Right. Councilman Senn: Is,there anyway to eliminate that other one? Bruce Polaczyk: We'd certainly like to but I just don't see how we could do it. You're absolutely right. On any driveway intersection... Councilman Senn: I drive past there every morning. That's a daycare place too so. Bruce Polaczyk: But we have to give them access too. Councilman Senn: Yeah. Secondly, in terms of what you have planned trail wise, is there a reason why you aren't bringing your trails down to the south? Bruce Polaczyk: Well the, as Craig mentioned, there is a trail on the north side of TH 101. There was not one proposed to the south primarily because the addition of trails really is the municipal's charge and we xvere not requested by the city to extend that trail further to the south. I believe the City of Eden Prairie will extend a trail along the, correct me if I'm wrong Craig...along Dell Road I knoxv to the south. I don't know how far to the south but I know they will extend one along Dell Road. I don't believe they have any plans for extending a trail on the south side of TH 101, to extend it south. Councilman Senn: Now where you're constructing and going through there and building those walls, is there going to be room for a trail to go through there even? Bruce Polaczyk: Probably not. Probably not. In the future. Craig Twinem: There may be on the Eden Prairie side but the trail would be right adjacent to the curb. Charles Folch: On the Chanhassen side though Craig, there is, it appears from the cross sections that there is a flat area between the curb and the wall on the west side that you can put a trail, future trail through. At least on the Chanhassen side. Craig Twinem: Yeah, there's a bigger distance between the edge of the roadway... Mayor Chmiel: Alright, any other questions? Councilman Senn: No questions. 18 City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 Mayor Chmiel: Okay, is there a motion to approve these plans? Councilman Senn: Before we do I guess I'd like to make a comment. I guess I am somewhat disappointed and somewhat perplexed that there's no trail to the south. You're going to be dumping a huge amount of new traffic onto TH 101 effectively right into Chanhassen. Our neighborhoods along there are already isolated. Very difficult for them to get anyxvhere and the kids to get anywhere. And I see basically a trail system effeetively going in to serve the residents of Minnetonka and Shorewood very adequately and I see absolutely addressing- of that issue as it relates to Chanhassen, which would be a simple task of bringing a trail down and hooking it up to Pleasant View xvhich is effectively about as far as you're going with your improvements for now anyway. I just, I don't know. That continues to be a real problem. That road continues to be a real problem. What you're going to do with 62 dumping traffic onto it is going to make it an even huger problem. I think somebody ought to lean a little bit towards solving part of the problem. At least with this type of construction, accompanying it with some trails and stuff that at least the kids and stuff can use safely to get places. And I guess I'm really disappointed it's not there. Bruce Polaczyk: Well Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, the one thing ! can say though is that, as I mentioned there are several sources of funds that will be used to build this project. One of those obviously is a major fund... And in order to capture those funds there are elements that obviously ~vould be included as a part of this and trails would be one of those elements. The down side however is that because the project doesn't really extend too far to the south. I mean it goes beyond the curve and then goes maybe 1,500 feet to the south, we really don't have a logical termini in which to hook up to any kind of trail system. In order for the Feds and for the State to allow you to use money on this project, you ~vould have to come up with a trail system where there would have to be some logical terminus and to terminate it at, ~vhere Craig has got his pencil, xvould be not acceptable in the eyes of the State and in the eyes of the Federal government. Or as Charles had mentioned, there appears to be space on the west side of the roadxvay for maybe a trail at a future date, and it's something maybe that I should address in that I know that my boss, Jim Grew who is the Transportation Division Engineer with Hennepin County, I knoxv has had meetings with the State and I believe Charles has been involved in those. Or at least I knew of one where there have been discussions about the upgrade of Trunk Highway 101 from Trunk Highway 5 north up to County Road 62. I guess I'm here to say that Hennepin County is very supportive of that. We are continuing efforts to establish and continue dialogue with the city of Chanhassen, and also Carver County. And we are xvilling to take the lead on establishing those negotiations and come to an agreement so that eventually, in not too distant a future, we can establish a project to reconstruct TH 101 from TH 5 up to CR 62. Now with that construction, perhaps a trail can be included. Therefore you would have some logical termini. TH 5 all the ~vay up to CR 62. Councilman Senn: Don't get me ~vrong. I'm glad Hennepin County is supporting this and that. I'm aware that and I think that's really great but the turn back and the upgrade of TH 101 is several years away. You know this is going to happen now. It seems to me this is an ideal opportunity where we're going in and we're ripping up the landscape. We're widening the road. You're effectively coming within a few feet of Pleasant View which is a logical terminus at this point for a trail. At least coming into something in Chanhassen and you're not talking advantage of the opportunity. And we're going to be going back later and spending more dollars to construct the same thing which could really be constructed now because even if that area's there, you know as well as I do...lot more costly in building that trail than putting it in now. All of the funding you've cited here... very favorably upon trail systems which accommodate them and run with them and I see all of that treatment there but I don't see any coming south there and I think it shouldn't be an oversight. I think we should really bring it down and bring it down there. 19 City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 Bruce Polaczyk: Well Mr. Mayor, members of Council, I don't think it's an oversight. I think that again, it's something where, as I... to reiterate the point but there has to be a logical termini and it would have to be integrated in with the city's say master trail plan. Now the one thing that we can do and we certainly will, will be to work with Charles on reviexving what that master plan is and seeing if there is something that can be incorporated into the plan. If there is, then next step that we would have to do though is to consult with the State of Minnesota and the Federal Highway Administration determine if they would accept a trail as a part of this project on say the west side. Say from that pencil line north to some maybe unknown terminus. I don't know. We'd have to consult with them and check it out. Mayor Chmiel: Probably if you could work with Charles in regard to this and come up with some kind of a possible solution ~vith the concerns that ~ve have, or at least within our particular area. We would appreciate that as well. Bruce Polaczyk: Sure. And the other thing I should mention too Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, in doing that, we certainly will do that if there's something that can unfold that would be positive, then as I mentioned earlier where I said that there would not be a construction cost to the city, in this case if a trail xvould be added, that certainly would be added to the construction cost that would have to be part of the city's contribution. And then the other thing I did mention but I mentioned as far as...the right-of-way costs, that would be applied against the city for say 50%. We then would have to enter into a construction cooperative agreement with the city to retrieve those costs and that's something that we would put together say within the month or whatever... But we definitely, we'll work with Charles and see if there's anything that we can do. I know it's, our plans are completed and they've been submitted to the State for final approval but we will take that one last effort to see if there's something that xve can ~vork out. Councilman Berquist: Do you have your doubts? Councilman Senn: This is the last hour and we're hearing the issue. Councilman Berquist: What you're telling us is that the plans have already been submitted to the State for approval and you're out here for approval and that Federal funds are predicated, Federal funds that xvould include any sort of a trail would also have to include a terminus, and a terminus is not regarded as any...it has to exist. It can't be down the road. It can't be in the future when the turn back on TH I01 takes place. And you're also saying that the Federal funds are predicated, the Federal funds would come into play and pay for the trail but the City of Chanhassen would be responsible for the cost. Bruce Polaczyk: Well, no. See the Federal funds do not pay for any of the trail costs. That would be State Aid funds. Either State Aid funds or Trunk Highway funds. See ;ve've applied for what they call ISTEA, you've probably heard that. Charles has probably mentioned that word before. ISTEA. We've applied for Federal funds oh about a year, year and a half ago. We were successful in getting approval for our application and we would have $800,000.00 with Federal funds...but primarily those funds will be earmarked for the road purpose. The construction of the road. Mayor Chmiel: I understand what you're saying. I also sit on the Transportation Advisory Board of the Met Council so I'm aware of the discussions you've been having and the format that they normally go through. 20 City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 Councilman Berquist: Well I don't understand what he's saying. He's saying the Federal funds are tied in to having a terminus and yet Federal funds have nothing to do with the project. Or ~vhat he's saying is Federal funds have nothing to do with that side of the project. Councilman Senn: Steve that's not true. They've got ISTEA funds on this and one of the biggest evaluation criteria in getting ISTEA funds is multi-mode or more or less multi forms of transportation occurring within the same area. That's why if you go down and evaluate all the new CR 62 and ho~v it's being designed, it's designed with all the different modes of transportation built into it. That's why they got an ISTEA grant because that's one of the biggest, all that stuff is there. That's what they want to see for ISTEA. A big criteria so and you know, I'm going to go back to the beginning with my comments and I'm just, here we are getting this now. To approve the plans and we find out in the planning stages that the issue was not even brought up. It wasn't even addressed. It wasn't even considered. And that really bothers me. And here we're being asked to approve some plans here tonight which are already approved by the State and everybody else so the odds of ever getting anything changed on this I think are probably going to be slim to none. Councilman Berquist: That's why I said... Councilman Senn: And there's no xvay I'm going to vote for it. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Alright. Any other discussion? Seeing none, I'll call a question. All those, can I have a motion first? Councilman Mason: Yes. I'll move approval for plans for CSAH 62 and Trunk Highway 101 Intersection Reconstruction, Hennepin County Project No. 9423, City File PW-197B. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, is there a second? I'll move the second. Councilman Mason moved, Mayor Chmiel seconded to approve the plans for CSAH 62 and Trunk Highway 101 Intersection Reconstruction Work (Hennepin County Project No. 9423) dated Match 89 1996, City File PW197B, as ptcscnted. Councilman Mason and Mayor Chmiel voted in favor. Councilman Bentuist, Councilman Senn and Councilwoman Dockendorf voted in opposition. The motion failed with a vote of 2 to 3. Mayor Chmiel: 3 to 2. Councilman Berquist: At xvhat point do you correct short-sightedness? When it's done? Councilman Senn: I think it's before we approve it. Mayor Chmiel: I think basically there was some misunderstanding. In order to go through the process and get the approval to where the proposal has been, that was not part of that particular project. Nor the dollar allocations that could go into that. And I understand where you're coming from as to how it's really going to affect us from our particular side. Under the same token, they're also saying that they can look at this side and come up with hopefully a conclusion as to how this trail could be incorporated into this particular project. It can't be allocated from the Fed's but it can be from State Aid. And with those State Aid dollars they could make some changes. 21 City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 Councilwoman Dockendorf: For me it's not even so much a matter of getting the trail built but at least have some foresight in leaving some room for it on the westerly side. Mayor Chmiel: That's correct. Yeah. Councilman Senn: Those are the plans xve should approve when we have the answers to those questions. Right noxv they aren't even being addressed. Councilman Berquist: What strings do you put on it.'? If they approve with the stipulation that the exploration of the trail... Should you tie your hands tight enough to make that work happen? Bruce Polaczyk: Well you have, you certainly would have my commitment that we xvould evaluate and we'll have those discussions with city staff in determining if a trail should go in, or where it could go in. And then we would have to take that one step further and review that with the State of Minnesota. And as I mentioned, and you brought up the point. I mean granted, there are Federal funds in here and I think your concern is if it's Federal funds, why isn't it paying to pave the park and trail system. Councilman Berquist: I'm not smart enough to know. Bruce Polaczyk: The thing is, when there's Federal funds involved in a project, I think you know Charles obviously is aware of this, that there are certain conditions, stipulations and guidelines and hoops that you have to jump through in order to capture those Federal funds. As an example, Craig you could just push that down a little bit so it can show the trail on the east side of TH 101. I think it's the other one. The other one. Okay, there. There is a trail proposed along the east side of Trunk Highway 101. Right about, move your pencil. Stop. Go up a little bit further Craig. It was right about there that when the State was reviewing these plans, that they thought that the trail terminated. And what they told us is that you can't do that. You either don't put the trail in or you have to extend the trail up to that next intersecting street, which would be, and I'm not sure what it is. Craig Txvinem: Creekview Terrace. Bruce Polaczyk: Creekview Terrace. And so that's the point I was making about, you have to have a logical termini. Otherwise they'd just say that it's not appropriate to put a trail system in. Councilman Senn: Well xve have trails on Pleasant View and to Pleasant View, okay. So I mean they are there. So I mean to me that's the logical terminus as to where you should be bringing the construction of the trails. Councilman Mason: What trails are on Pleasant View? Councilman Senn: Right doxvn by the park. There's trails coming up from the south. Councilman Berquist: Even if they aren't any trails on Pleasant View, if in fact Creekside provides an effective terminus for a trail by the State's definition, then why wouldn't Pleasant Viexv? Bruce Polaczyk: If it's a street... Councilman Berquist: Well it's definitely a street. 22 City Council Meeting o April 8, 1996 Craig Twinem: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council if I could interrupt for a second. The ISTEA funding for this project only includes a trail along the north side of County Road 62 and the east side of TH 101. The trail that we had talked about that runs along the north side of TH 101 up to Vine Hill was added per the City of Minnetonka's request, and that is not part of the ISTEA application. One of the things that goes along with ISTEA funding is our design criteria to meet bicycle standards and some of the difficulties that we had in these relatively tight areas to provide the space that they say is needed. Now we did not have to meet those standards in Minnetonka. Essentially the trail is right adjacent to the curb and gutter. Councilman Senn: Well I mean, that may be the case we do in Chan but I mean it'd be nice if somebody... come talk to us about it versus just leaving it out. Maybe asking us to participate. Again, nobody's come here to ask us anything as far as I know. Councilman Berquist: Yeah I don't think the advocacy is for something from the Fed's or from the State. There's no cost implications to the city. The advocacy is for foresight. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Is there any way that we, as a city, could somehow have considerations in that location for a trail, even have a spot basically for it? Bruce Polaczyk: You mean to have, Mr. Mayor, members of Council, to have space set aside for a future trail? Councilman Senn: Or design one in so we know where it's going. Or maybe do it now. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. Because that does loop up, from that particular point, which goes back with Chanhassen being on the one side and Minnetonka being on the other, with Shorewood coming in to that particular area. Councilman Senn: I guess my real question is, how long does it take you to go back and design a plan with a trail? Whether it's built now or not is an issue we need to sit down and talk to the staff and this Council about. Who pays for it and what's the participation... Bruce Polacyzk: Yeah, and xve'll certainly work with Charles on reviewing that. Councilman Senn: But I mean how long would it take you to go back and put it in the design? Bruce Polaeyzk: Well if we had a system worked out, we could go to work on it immediately. Don Ashworth: Mr. Mayor? Mayor Chmiel: Yeah Don. Don Ashworth: If I might ask for Council consideration of one of two alternatives to get that in. You're right, we have been working with Jim and we're looking at those turn back dollars as they would apply to reconstruction of TH 101, which I would anticipate is, could include through this area or up to this area. So my suggestion would be two fold. One would be, Council approve all with the condition that the letter of understanding that currently is being drafted, that that letter of understanding would include the trail construction or two, if City staff were able to reach agreement with the State and Hennepin County as to who and how that part gets paid for. And just to clarify that later part. We did include as a part of that, Hennepin County tax increment district, this strip that literally goes up to this area. And dollars are available. The cost, if they do all 23 City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 of the grading and whatever else, the cost of the trail itself I consider to be very minor. And I'm hoping or believing that Hennepin County and the State would agree that we entered into a cooperative agreement like we talked about, and provide the funds to actually carry out the construction itself. That that in all likelihood would be very amenable to Hennepin County and I have no reason that Bob Brown wouldn't approve it. Maybe he's not the guy you have to go back to for this particular project. Bruce Polaczyk: Well either... Councilman Senn: I mean I would be more than happy to tail onto what Don just said, to forward a motion that we'd be happy to approve these plans and specifications along with their redesign to include a trail and that you sit down with city staff and work out how it's going to be paid for and what the best method of doing that is. Councilwoman Dockendorf: I'll second that. Mayor Chmiel: Motion on the floor as such xvith a second. And you do under xvhat that is noxv? Bruce Polaczyk: Well I do understand Mr. Mayor. I understand the comment but if, am I to believe then that if our efforts in implementing a trail are negative. Councilman Senn: You need to come back and talk to us. Bruce Polaczyk: Does that mean that the City Council then will reject the plans? Councilman Senn: Well no, you need to come back and talk to us. At least once we know the effort's been made and what the conclusions are, it might be a little easier for us to make a decision. I mean right now we're saying yes, we approve your plans and specifications contingent on the trail being there. If the only reason it's not there is who's paying for it, then we can be involved in that decision. If there's other reasons, then I guess let's hear what they are. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Councilman Berquist: Does that allow you to move forward? Bruce Polaczyk: Well it allows us, yeah right. It allows us to move forward. I guess the one thing I want to get cleared up though is if our efforts you know fail, for xvhatever reason. Beyond our control, then I guess the point blank question then is, does that mean the City Council rejects this plan? And that's something that I have to know. Councihnan Senn: I don't, I mean I can't speak for the rest of the Council. I can only speak for myself but if you come back here and the efforts been made and there's a darn good reason why we can't, no I'm not looking to stop the project. If that's the question. Bruce Polaczyk: Yeah, that is my question. That is a very important question. Not only for this project but for the future project. Councilman Senn: Well, this better be a very integral part of the future project too so... 24 City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 Mayor Chmiel: Okay. We have a motion on the floor with a second. Any other discussion? Resolution #96-36: Councilman Senn moved, Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded to approve the plans for CSAH 62 and Trunk Highway 101 Intersection Reconstruction Wot{ (Hennepin County Project No. 9423) dated March 8, 1996, City File PW197B contingent on the issue of a trail being designed and constmcted on the west side of TH 101 be discussed. All voted in favor and the motion canie{L PRELIMINARY PLAT TO SUBDIVIDE 0.862 ACRES INTO 2 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS1 LOCATED ON ORCHARD LANE, LINQUIST ADDITION. Kate Aanenson: This subdivision was given a metes and bounds approval by the Council back in December of 1994. You approved this one large lot. Since that time the applicant is discussing to subdivide the lot into two lots. What's involved with this, it's pretty much a straight forward subdivision. The lots meet all the requirements of the zone. The sewer will have to be extended approximately 160 feet to provide sewer services to both lots. In addition there will be some grading as shown on the grading plan here. In order to maintain the existing drainage pattern, there will be a swale between the lots. There was a concern from the homeowner here about extra xvater but it will continue to flow towards Highway 7 as it does now. Other than that, we believe it's pretty straight forward and are recommending approval with the conditions in the staff report. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Any questions of Kate? If not. Councilman Senn: I'll move approval. Councilman Mason: Second. Kate Aanenson: Can I make one clarification I forgot to mention, I'm sorry. Since this is a straight forward issue, it should have said preliminary and final plat so if you can make that as a part of your motion. Preliminary and final plat. Councilman Senn: Okay, move approval of preliminary and final. Councilman Mason: Second concurs with that. Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the preliminary and final plat for Linquist Addition, Subdivision #94-19, as shown on the plans dated March 1, 1996~ subject to the follo~ving conditions: The applicant shall be responsible for extending sanitary sewer service to Lots 1 and 2. The city shall be responsible for extending water service to Lot 2. Detailed construction plans and specifications in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates shall be submitted to the city engineer for review and City Council approval with final plat consideration. The applicant shall also enter into a development contract with the City and provide the city with a financial escrow to guarantee installation of the sewer line and street restoration. 2. Access to all lots shall be limited to Orchard Lane. 3. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the MWCC, Health Department, and PCA for extension of the sanitary sewer line. 25 City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 The applicant shall be responsible for a storm water quality/quantity charge of $768.00. These fees are payable to the city prior to final plat recording. 5. No landscape materials shall be planted within the northerly 25 feet of Lots 1 and 2. This area is reserved for future stormwater ponding. 6. Type I erosion control fence shall be installed along the front of Lots 1 and 2 during site grading and a rock construction entrance employed and maintained until truck hauling operations are completed. Lots 1 and 2 will be subject to sanitary sewer and water hook-up charges and Lot 2 xvill be subject to a water connection charge. These charges shall be collected per City Ordinance at time of building permit issuance. 8. Drainage swales shall be designed and constructed along the east line of Lot 2 and the west line of Lot I to maintain drainage between the houses to Highway 7. 9. Full park and trail fees be paid at the time of building permit approval in the amount of the park fee in force at the time of building permit application. 10. Tree preservation fencing must be installed prior to excavation or any construction on the site. The tree fencing may follow the proposed erosion control fence as drawn on the grading plan received by the city March 1, 1996. Erosion control fence shall also be extended along the east, west, and south sides of the lot at the grading limits. 11. The applicant shall preserve the 20 inch maple located on Lot I and consider transplanting the four pines within grading limits along the eastern property line of Lot 2. 12. The applicant shall plant 8 trees on site. Lots 1 and 2 shall receive two trees each in the front yard. The remaining 4 trees may be planted anywhere on site outside of drainage and utility easements. All voted in favor, except Councilman Berquist who abstained, and the motion carried. APPEAL DECISION OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS; REQUEST FOR A 1 FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK VARIANCE FROM THE SOUTH PROPERTY LINE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A GARAGE ADDITIONI 7270 CONESTOGA COURT~ DAVID BRAMER. John Rask: Thank you Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. On March 25th of 1996 the Board of Adjustments and Appeals held a public hearing to consider the variance request of Mr. David Bramer. The Board to deny the 1 foot side yard setback variance for the construction of a garage addition based on the findings presented in the staff report. In addition the Board expressed concern over granting the variance in the PUD zoning district where the developer was granted to reduce lot size and width, causing all lots within the subdivision to have a similar hardship. The Board noted that a variance should only be granted in situations where there does exist a unique hardship. I don't know if this was included in your packet or it may have been left out but this shows the approximate location of the proposed garage addition. It is a 10 foot wide addition. As you can see there's currently 19 feet between the home and the property line, needing a I foot variance. Staff is recommending denial of the variance as the applicant has reasonable use of the existing house and garage. I'd be happy to answer any questions that you have. 26 City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Do xve have any questions of John at this time? Okay, is Mr. Bremar here? David Bramer: Yes. Mayor Chmiel: Would you like to come forward? David Bramer: Please. John Rask: If I could add one more thing here while he's coming up. I did receive a letter today from Mr. Eric Johnson, 7271 Conestoga Court stating his support of Mr. Bramer's addition. It states, I see no negative impact on the neighborhood resulting from this plan. I find the thought of a 3 car garage to be much more aesthetically pleasing than a large shed or other out building. Dave has always demonstrated pride in ownership and meticulous care of his property. I have no doubt in my mind that any project that he undertakes xvould turn out ~vell, signed Eric Johnson. Mayor Chmiel: Good, thank you. David Bramer: Good evening Mr. Mayor, members of Council. My purpose here tonight is to request for an appeal. Just to let you all know, I built this house and a first time homebuyer. Had no knowledge of a variance into the setback. I moved into, this was my first home. I did not have any knowledge of what I was going to do in the future. Any plans. Ignorant to the fact of variances or how much...build on. I never requested or understood what the builder was telling me. What consisted in a survey. The research I've done since the appeal hearing has been trying to find other ways to make this smaller and still accommodate to what my needs are that I'm requesting for. I have searched and looked for, to go into the 9 feet to try and accommodate it. One of the vehicles, I'm not sure if you've read my letter of intent, is a tractor that the axles are a 7 foot 6 inch spread between the two outside edges which, with a 7 foot door, or even an 8 foot door, that only leaves me about 4 inches on each side to put the existing brick to match the facia on the house. Appearance wise I feel it's very unacceptable for myself and/or my neighbors. When I built this to look as good as the rest of the house, that is maintain the equal settings within the neighborhood. I've done also inspections of houses looking at what my neighbors have for room. Garage additions, so on and so forth and I'm not seeing where they could have the room to make their houses, most of my neighbors house plans are at least 300 to 500 square foot bigger than my house. If I would have known this, I would have moved the house over and then I could get the 12 foot that I really needed when I built the house, but I was young and ignorant. I knoxv an awful lot of people that have been there and I'm hoping that you'll understand that I did not know and am guilty of that fact of not being to ask the right questions when I built the house. I don't know if you have any questions for me but I'd be happy to answer anything. Mayor Chmiel: Good, thank you David. David Bramer: Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: We'll see if we have any questions. Any questions of David? Steve? Councilman Berquist: I can sure empathize but I don't think I've got any questions. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Colleen. 27 City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 Councilwoman Dockendorf: I have a question of staff. You said this originally was a PUD project. Were the lot sizes reduced as part of the agreement.'? John Rask: Correct. Yeah, they ranged front approximately 11,700 to 60,000 on the large end. Coun¢ilxvoman Dockendorf: So are you working with pretty tight? John Rask: Yeah. Some of the lot widths go down to about 80. Mayor Chmiel: His lot is probably the smallest. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Yeah, I went out and took a look at it this weekend. David Bramer: I still have about 22 feet between my house and my neighbor's house though. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Okay. No further questions. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Mike. Councilman Mason: No, I don't have any questions. Mayor Chmiel: Mark. Councilman Senn: There's really no way to offset the garage, a little bit one way or the other as far as I could see to give him the width that he needs. Isn't it true basically in our, you know with our PUD ordinance, one of the purposes of it is to give a little more leexvay on the breakdowns of interior lines for setback and things like that'?. John Rask: I don't know if, historically we have allowed some reduced setbacks in the Meadows and the Woods at Longacres. However, we did have a condition in there that said they had to maintain 20, whether they wanted to go closer on one and further on another lot. However, they worked out...I'm not axvare of any really granted... Councilman Senn: ...precedent setting if it's done, is that what I'm hearing? John Rask: Welt no variance sets a precedent but it certainly could open up the doors for further variances. Councilman Berquist: Which one of these, you know 7270 so 7260 and 80 are your neighbors. David Bramer: Right. Councilman Berquist: Which one is on the garage side? David Bramer: That would be Pam and Scott Janan 7280. Councilman Berquist: And they've got a 15 foot setback on the side. 28 City Council Meeting ~ April 8, 1996 David Bramer: Yes. Councilman Berquist: Okay. David Bramer: I was going to try to get an example, set up to get my other neighbors to do this. Councilman Berquist: No, that's not xvhere I ~vas going. I had the strange idea that if it was on the 31 foot setback, perhaps that we could strike a deal to buy a couple feet of land or who knows what. David Bramer: I have two vehicles that have been passed down in the family and the oldest one has been here 66 years and I have to find a home for it. Which means I need to find a home for it with me. It's been passed down now through 4 people and I'd like to keep it there. These things are very important to me so I'm asking, not only asking but begging for your understanding. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Any other discussion? It's really hard. Councilman Senn: Yeah, from any perspective you look at it, I mean it really seems kind of silly to be arguing over a foot, especially within a PUD and that's where my, I guess primary concern comes back to, you know I look at it from a PUD perspective and it seems fine. Who cares? I mean ~ve make deals xvithin PUD's. But then I'm hearing this kind of opens the door to a whole bunch of people coming in asking for the same deal and that's the part that bothers me and I don't know quite how to resolve it. Councilwoman Dockendorf: See and I'm coming from a different perspective. It is a PUD so concessions, a lot of concessions have already been made. Councilman Senn: Which cause the internal problems which just carries the concept of the PUD further which... deal. I mean that's what PUD's are... I don't know. If the house was a foot difference well then. Mayor Chmiel: Well that's right. Councilman Senn: Is the letter from the neighbor on the garage side or on the other side? John Rask: Across the street. Mayor Chmiel: Are there any neighbors from the neighborhood here this evening? David Bramer: If I may add. I did speak with one neighbor on the, on my garage side. Mayor Chmiel: Could you come up so we can get that on the mic please. David Bramer: Sure. I did speak with the neighbor on the garage side, both husband and wife, and they welcome it very much. The only comment I had from Mr. Janan was if you hurt my grass, you get it fixed. That was about all he said. I talked to him about this about a year ago is when the conversation came into play. When we were talking about...storage space for this at this time. And I didn't kno~v how I was going to take action on it. But I have, you know over get togethers and that with the neighborhood, I have mentioned it and nobody's ever opposed...and every one of the neighbors that live up and down my street as well have been aware that I came before the Board of Appeals and as well that I'm here tonight. 29 City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 Councihnan Senn: Do you think you can get a letter from him.'? Supporting the project. David Bramer: Well I'm sure I could. I'm guessing I could. I can't speak for my neighbors, and since they've known it, you knoxv if they had any objections, I feel if they had any objections they would be here to object to it. Councilman Senn: Yeah, we can't always assume that, plus everything, if he gave you a letter of support, maybe it gives us a little something extra to hang our hat on that, you 'know... David Bramer: Sure. Well if I may. Councilman Senn: I'm talking from a personal perspective. I'm not speaking for the Council. It just seems that you knoxv, in my mind, I thought maybe we'd take and table the thing and see if you can get it. If you can get it, then it maybe becomes an easier issue. If it doesn't in the rest of the Council's mind, then I guess I'm just treading water. David Bramer: Certainly. Well if you'd like, I had brought photographs and I'd be more than happy to show them to you. Councilman Senn: No, I've gone out and looked at it. I've seen it. David Bramer: You haven't seen the vehicles that are going in. If anybody would like to see it. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, these vehicles he did shoxv. Why don't you just shoxv that to Council. David Bramer: Okay, sure. These may be irrelevant... Mayor Chmiel: Come on up a little closer. David Bramer: That's me at about 9 years old. That's my wedding and I mean these, like I say, they've been in the family for years and I restored both of them from the dead. Neither one of them ran. And actually you might want to look at the tractor. You'll find that that was in the paper, the Chanhassen Villager. I worked with the Dimler corn field out here with that. So it's seen the streets of Chanhassen already. Councilman Mason: I think Mark's idea is something worth considering. Quite honestly I xvill admit, and you know each case is different but I worry about these kinds of variances. Not in your case necessarily but it certainly does tell everybody in that area, well you gave this guy a foot. I get 3 feet. You know or I want 5 feet or whatever. But I guess I am not quite honestly going to say how I would vote one way or the other but if all the neighbors around you were to sign off, it certainly xvould not hurt your cause in my view. Mayor Chmiel: Maybe what we could do is just table this item for 2 weeks and see what happens and then have it come back to Council within those 2 weeks. Okay, would there be a motion to table? Councilman Senn: I'll move to table. Councilman Mason: Second. 30 City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to table the appeal of the decision of the Boanl of Adjustment and Appeals for a request for a 1 foot side yanl setback variance from the south property line for constmction of a garage at 7270 Conestoga Court, David Bmmer. All voted in favor and the motion carded. SIGN VARIANCE TO PERMIT A SECOND WALL MOUNTED SIGN LOCATED NORTH OF It/GHWAY 5, EAST OF MARKET BOULEVARD ON WEST 79TH STREET~ TIRES PLUS GROUPE, INC. John Rask: Thank you Mr. Mayor. Tires Plus, the applicant is requesting a variance to allow a second wall mounted sign on the west elevation of the future Tires Plus building. On February 21st of this year the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the variance request for the second wall mounted sign. The Commission recommended, by unanimous vote, to deny the variance based on the findings presented in this staff report. The commission concurred with staff's analysis that the applicant has a reasonable opportunity to advertise their name and service with the wall sign on the south elevation and a monument sign. A little background on this one. The Council, on November 13th approved site plan for the Tires Plus building subject to 13 conditions. Condition 4 stated that signage only be permitted on the south elevation and must comply with city code. No panel signs will be permitted. Separate sign permit will be required. What the applicants are requesting here, this is what they're proposing on the south elevation. This does meet Code. The sign ordinance concerning wall mounted signs. We think the wording Tires Plus plus a display message here, low warehouse prices, fast work and service. And then this is the west elevation where they're requesting a second wall mounted sign. With that, staff is recommending denial of the variance as we feel the applicant has a reasonable use of the property and a reasonable opportunity to advertise with the existing signs. The wall sign . and the monument sign. I'd be happy to answer any questions. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, any questions of John. I guess we don't have any questions of John. Would the applicant like to come forward. Please state your name and your address and your representation. Ron Fiscus: My name's Ron Fiscus. I'm here with Yaggy Colby Associates from Rochester representing Tires Plus. We appreciate the fact that at your last meeting you were able to postpone this until tonight. We also appreciate even more the fact that the weather was a little more conducive to getting here...Mr. Jim Diamond from the Cardinal Development people could be with us tonight. Jim is the one who worked on the real estate side of putting this project together. What I'd like to do is just take a moment to review where all we've been with this project and how we've gotten to this point. Originally Tires Plus had optioned a piece of property across the street from where they're proposing to go now. Highway 5 here and Market Boulevard in this location. A site west of Chanhassen...was a piece of property that ~vas originally optioned. And as we talked with staff about the challenges that we ~vould be facing developing on that site, the primary challenge was that wetland. A very small portion of that site was available for development, and as talked through with staff and talked about the challenges they were facing on developing this four lot site to the north, and the small amount of wetland the existed there, the arrangements for exchanging properties for the right to develop on the back end of the PUD seemed to make a great deal of sense. Made particularly more sense to go on the back end of that as we looked at some of the signage that had been allowed elsewhere in the community. Of course Tires Plus first preference was to be on the front side but as we were working with Todd and Kate and understood some of their concerns, and as we looked at signage that had been allowed elsewhere, we thought that if we could get signage on three sides of this building, then that lot would work out fine. As the staff report suggests, the staff did advise us of the three, signs on three sides would not be permitted. As we went a little bit further with that, it was suggested to us that the appropriate way dealing with the site plan approval, dealing with the subdivision approval, and dealing with the desire to have signs on multiple faces, the appropriate way to deal with the sign issue was one of a point with a variance. So as we went through the site plan approval process, this was an 31 City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 issue that was kind of hanging out there but it was delayed until after the site plan approval was granted. So that's xvhy it wasn't included in the original package that came to you and that's why the approval ~vas granted as it was. We hadn't applied for the signage on the additional face at the time the PUD was being approved and the site plan was being approved. I've been in situations that John and Kate are being staff advisors to City Council. I have, as a consultant, helped other City Councils and Planning Commissions establish sign codes, sign requirements and we've all seen circumstances where uncontrolled signage is very detrimental to the proliferation of pylon signs and projecting signs out in front of buildings with everyone trying to get a little bit further out into the street visibility zone, is something that is not acceptable. And something that impresses me as I look at Chanhassen is the fact that you have established some sign standards and that there is some consistency with the amount of signage that's provided. As we look at a lot of the buildings that have been built recently, we see that there are a lot of pieces. Nearly all pieces where there are signs on multiple faces of the buildings. As we look at Boston Market, Perkins, Nutrition Center. A variety of the buildings at Market Place shopping center. We see that there are consistently signs on two or three faces. When you combine the, for Americana Bank for example right next door to our site. They do have two street frontages but by use of txvo ~vall signs and a monument sign on the west side of the building, they've effectively gotten signage identifying that building uses in the building on those three sides. One of the other things that's interesting about the way you enforce the sign code is that, even though you may have two street faces, the signs don't have to necessarily be on those faces. Boston Market is, and Perkins, a case in point to where the signs aren't physically on the street faces but we have two street faces, two signs. As you take those additional faces though an add pylon signs and monument signs you can get more than two faces of signs. By virtue of the fact that we're at, back into this property and technically will have any street face. We're not fronting on any street. We fall more into the category of some of the PUD's that have been approved. So as we look around at similar projects, xve look at Premiere Video where there are signs on two faces of that building where one of the streets... As xve look at Wendy's which is a similar situation. They have some street frontage but the other street frontage using the second sign is a private drive that serves the shopping center. As we look at Abra and Goodyear that was recently approved to have one face only, but they have two signs. Excuse me, signs on two of the building faces and so we see a lot of similarities to those things that have previously been approved and our project. Frequently though we've asked the staff about how some of those other signs were approved. Century Bank, for example, has signs on three building faces with the extension of the face of that building. And...in some cases through the PUD process, those additional signs were approved. As communities redevelop properties and in the cases of the city or HRA enters into that redevelopment process and becomes the developer of a piece of property, sometimes things happen differently than when a private developer comes in. And in the cases of private developers asking for PUD approvals, they may anticipate up front or they may have people in the development group at that time that ask for the additional signage through that process. In this case we asked the question and ~ve ~vere advised by staff to come in after the fact and ask for the variance, even though ~ve established up front however our goal and our desire to have signs on multiple faces of the building. What I've done is first of all to put together some photos of some of the...signs multiple faces put on some boards so you can have a look at those. And I want to draw some very close correlations between this project and the Abra and Goodyear project. One of the things that strikes me as I look at Abra and Goodyear is that one of the reasons I think they wanted signage on the second face is that Highway 5 curves as it goes around them. It gives them some interesting vantage points that are unlike a lot of other projects in the community, and I think that's one of the reasons they wanted a second sign face. Coincidentally as we look at some design streets coming through and as we look at the buildings that are going to be in front of there, we've taken some liberty to kind of anticipate what Todd is ultimately going to be able to develop on these other two parcels. But in keeping with the master plan that's been created for that, showing you want happens when you get down on the users point and try to get visual access to this piece of property in the back. Interestingly enough, the best vantage points to this property are through here, would give access to the front. The sign that has already been 32 City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 approved, but also an excellent visual access across here to a second sign face, which is different from the Applebee's condition in that we don't have that prominent location up front that we can try to make use of a face sign and a monument sign that xvill give a direct visual access to that prominent front location. So...users idea of it. We understand that...to suggest why there's a hardship in this case. I think the primary one is that of the shape of the site. And the fact that it almost functions as a corner site and the PUD aspect of it does make it unique and unusual circumstance. Frankly there is just as good visibility from the west as there is from the south of this property and effectively you have the parking on the west also. We would suggest that maybe there's some reason for identifying the building on the west side. Also, take a look at how Festival Foods has their sign. They have a railroad on the south side of the building and the signage occurs on the front and on the, excuse me. On the north side or the south side of the building. And frankly one of the most prominent signs backs up to Highway 5. As you look at Pauly Drive on the north side, this gives you very good visual access to this development and having an identifier on the west side of the Tires Plus building would certainly help identifying, what that destination is or ~vhat that building use is. As we look at the development style which you accomplish in this area, in the downtown, we suggest to you the type of signage that we're looking at is no different. Is very compatible with that signage that occurs elsewhere within the community. Frankly we don't think we're asking for something outlandish. We're suggesting that a 100 foot tall sign, or even a 50 foot tall sign with flashing lights and a reader board, then we xvould say gee, that goes over the edge of...to the development standards that you try to establish for the community been enforcing. What we're suggesting is something that is 30 inch high letters mounted on the side of the walls...that is very similar to what you're seeing elsewhere in the community. We agree with some of staff's positions that this doesn't impair access to, like once again a 'all sign was going to be blocking someone's visual access or access to light and air. We would see that '.-:¢:..intended within this development. We don't believe it's a public safety impairment. In fact, if we can do a better job of identifying who ~ve are for people who are southbound on Market Boulevard, before they get out to Highway 5, perhaps we reduce some of that congestion and some of that traffic... We're, frankly we are asking to be treated much as any other businesses in relatively recent years have been treated and respectively request your approval of this one additional sign on West 78th. If you have any questions... Mayor Chmiel: Steve, do you have any questions? Councilman Berquist: Does Tires Plus consider themselves to be a destination type of retailer? Ron Fiseus: They do. They understand that as part of the circumstance where you're driving down the highxvay and say, gee. Councilman Berquist: Gee, I need some tires. Ron Fiscus: ...but they do depend a great deal on the recognition that people have by driving past a site. Where you're located and... Councilman Berquist: Thank you. Councilwoman Dockendorf: I have the same question, and I guess I don't understand your answer. Are you saying that well, it's just my understanding of it. If I need new tires, I'm going to look in the Yellow Pages as opposed to, well I don't know. I may recognize it here in town. Ron Fiscus: The question is impulse or destination orientation. 33 City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 Councilwoman Dockendorf: Yeah. Yeah. Ron Fiscus: And the, '`'`,hat Tires Plus finds, and I think Jim's going to share something else with you as xvell, but what Tires Plus finds is that they very much depend on the identification of their building and the identification of where they are as opposed in the Yellow Pages search. Jim Diamond: ...Jim Diamond, Cardinal Development. I think if I gave some comparables of other communities with similar sites maybe that might help to ask what your, or answer what you're asking. For example, in Maple Grove the site is free standing. It's across from Champps. That type of visibility. In Burnsville, the site that ,,vas just built is between Boston Market and Walgreens Drug so it's very much, it's a group of three. It's in a PUD xvith those three uses. In Apple Valley where a new store was just built about a year and a half ago. It '`vas built as a PUD, in fact very much the same configuration or it was an infill replacement for what had been a car dealer site and it was four corners of a parcel and the other four uses are Brueggers, Taco Bell, Dairy Queen. Actually...those types of uses with very similar signage to those types of uses. So the kinds of things that Ron is talking about here, in talking about the variable signage that you have authorized buildings like Boston Market. Like Kinko's. Like the Premiere Video. Like Wendy's. These are the types of sites and the types of relationship with customers that Tires Plus has had in their other locations in other communities. Councilwoman Dockendorf: I kind of compare it to like the Maytag repair place. It's like, I see it all the time. I don't need it, but if I ever do, I know it's there. Is that the type of use you're looking for?... Jim Diamond: From an access point of view it doesn't necessarily need the same access of a fast food for example. But in terms of visibility, prominence and convenience, the focus of Tires Plus for a good number of years on looking for site locations, is site locations that are in the primal3, commercial district. They are in locations that are very accessible and friendly to all members of the family. They focus their stores on being friendly to all members of the family. Not the old style auto shop that was back on the back corner or dark or dirty but a friendly, bright, '`'`'ell lighted professional appearance so they want to be in those kind of locations in the center of retail and they do also want to be able to be recognized in those locations where people can recognize those. Mayor Chmiel: Michael. Councilman Mason: You know I've used the Tires Plus in Eden Prairie for at least three sets of tires. Mayor Chmiel: That doesn't get you any free ones. Councilman Mason: Well I understand that. However, I get lost every time I go in there and the biggest sign in the xvorld is not going to help me get in there. When I want tires, I go to where I'm going to get the best price. And I think all this, I guess I don't understand it. You know people when they want to buy tires, aren't driving down Highway 5 at 65 mph, which is illegal but they're doing it any~vay, and then quick. Pull into Tires Plus. Many of the stores and signs you talked about were installed previous to the new sign ordinance xvhich went in January of '95. I'd say just about everything you mentioned, those signs were put in prior to the adoption of this sign ordinance and I've got to believe you knew that before you said all this. Maybe not. If not, I'll take it back. But like I say, I get confused every time I go buy tires at Tires Plus in Eden Prairie but I find it and I buy tires there so I think this is all kind of a moot point personally. 34 City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 Mayor Chmiel: Thanks. Mark. Councilman Senn: I look at what's being suggested as it relates to the txvo sides and I don't find it offensive, just as I look at what was being suggested on Applebee's part on the two sides as being offensive, In fact I'd look at them and say they're pretty tasteful. The place in my mind I draw line is, I guess I can see the circumstance but what I'd rather see them do is see them and Applebee's both do that and get rid of the pylon out on the street because to me it causes a lot more, I'm going to say negative, at least in my mind in terms of signage than the facings on the building do. So I mean if you can, since this is a PUD, I mean if you get them both to give up the pylons. Councilman Berquist: The monument you mean? Councilman Senn: The monument out on the street, and both put up the ones on the side of the building, I stiIl contend when you go out and look at it, it's going to look like a lot nicer project. It's going to be a lot less cluttered. I think most of the clutter comes from not putting a tasteful sign on the building, from all the stuff that you pop around it such as monument signs or pylon signs, etc. And I talked to Kate about that today and we talked about it at length and I really look at that and say you kno~v, maybe that's, ~ve talk about looking at our sign ordinance and looking at different ways to look at things in our sign ordinance and every case isn't the same and maybe the way to look at some of these is to define outside parameters such as two signs, you know. Now let's get into where the signs really make the most sense on a project by project basis. Does it make the most sense on two building faces and not a monument, pylon out in front. Or does it make more sense to have the monument outside and one building face, or .whatever. I don't think as it relates to this project, and Kate speak for yourself, said she was opposed to what I was suggesting. Again I still think that would make this a better looking project. Now whether the applicant and whether Applebee's are willing to go along with that, would have to be the proof of the putting but you know, it seems to me that would be...right direction. Mayor Chmiel: Well, I think as we are going with this particular ordinance, ~ve've had more than one come in with that's what we want to see as an ordinance and I suggest that xve then relook at it and rewrite it. Rather than taking out the pylon and putting up another sign. I think it's something that maybe should be revisited if it's...at all. The visibility for that sign to the south, and you can see that probably from Market Boulevard some. I'm not sure if people are really looking that hard in that particular direction because of the road in itselfi You've got cars in two different directions and two on one side and two on the other. I guess I'd like to. keep my nose directly to where l'm going and looking so. I guess that's what I really see with this. If there's a real problem with it, then maybe we should revisit that ordinance and relook at it. But I think making these changes, or trying to...and moving to another location, that gets to be pretty difficult too. To handle it administratively as far as I see. Councilman Berquist: I'd like to make a couple of comments after. Mayor Chmiel: Go ahead. Councilman Berquist: During the interviews for the Planning Commission appointments, the Chairperson for the Planning Commission made mention of the fact that she enjoyed doing ordinance work the best. But one of the things she found lacking was the going back and revisiting the implication or implementation of the ordinance and the effects that the ordinance had. From my perspective, I'm not adverse to this wail sign at ail. I'm adverse to the xvall insofar as that it requires a variance and the sign ordinance is in place and there was a lot of work that ~vent on by man), members of the community in order to implement what they figured to be a 35 City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 very fair and equitable sign ordinance. However, from a practical point of view, in looking at this building, at this facility, that sign actually breaks the building up in a manner that will not be displeasing. Or that would not be displeasing. The fact that it's not going to be there because it's not going to get the variance is besides the point. The monument idea that Mark brings up as far as getting rid of that, monuments do have a tendency to clutter. Especially congested areas and whether it be Perkins, Boston Market, Target and Taco Bell, or it be Tires Plus and Applebee's and whatever and whatever, you've got another piece of ground clutter that is sitting there that is serving no real useful purpose to the people that are paying for it and paying to maintain it. I xvould not be adverse to looking at discontinuing the construction of the monument sign and exploring the side wall sign. But I'd also not be adverse to having the sign committee re-examine the sign ordinance on a semi- annual or annual basis. I think that probably makes a little bit more sense. How is this stuff xvorking9 I'm frankly surprised that Tires Plus is in here saying well we want a sign to the north because given the fact of what's going to happen to the north, I would think that that would be the better place to advertise. But that's besides the point. The other issue from a north, or from a west facing sign is, I wanted to knoxv what the landscaping plans ~vere as far as the berming and what not goes and maybe it's not going to affect the line of sight from Market Boulevard. That was more just a secondary note than anything else. So you're a destination retailer and. Ron Fiscus: With some impulse implications. Councilman Berquist: With some impulse implications. Councilman Mason: Geez, I've got to get tires. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any other discussions? Seeing none, is there a motion or a suggestion? Councilman Berquist: I will move for denial of the request to variance for the west facing sign for Tires Plus. Roger Knutson: Mayor? Mayor Chmiel: Yes. Roger Knutson: Councilmembers xvould you also, or could I suggest an adoption of the findings set forth by the staff. Councilman Berquist: You certainly can, thank you. Councilman Mason: And I will second that. Councilman Berquist moved, Councilman Mason seconded to deny the request for Sign Permit Variance #96-1 based on the findings presented in the staff report and the followlng: 1. The applicant has not demonstrated a hardship that would warrant the granting of a variance. 2. Tires Plus has a reasonable opportunity to advertise their name and service with the wall sign and monument sign. 36 City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 3. The variance is inconsistent with the purpose and findings of the sign ordinance. All voted in favor ami the motion carried. Ron Fiscus: May I pose somewhat of a question? When the ordinance was adopted that deleted the second wall signs, do you recall was there a sense that two wall signs on a building as we've seen all through the community, ~vas offensive? Kate Aanenson: Yes. Councilman Berquist: Well offensive may be too strong a word. Controlling that clutter perhaps I think would be a better... Kate Aanenson: The implication of sight line messages. Ron Fiscus: Tires Plus would be happy certainly and interested in working with staff if you want to re-examine those signing requirements...offering some point of view from some of the users. Councilman Berquist: When you're established and have some history in town and you're on the Chamber of Commerce, which is the people xvho provided the most impetus for the sign ordinance amendments, you'd be certainly welcome. Mayor Chmiel: Good, thanks. PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT APPROVAL TO SUBDIVIDE 1.22 ACRES INTO 2 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS; VARIANCE FROM SECTION 18.5(0) TO PERMIT A 10 FOOT WIDE PRIVATE STREET; 8508 GREAT PLAINS BOULEVARD~ TED SLATHAR. John Rask: Thank you Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. The applicant is requesting preliminary plat and final plat approval to subdivide an existing 1.22 acre parcel into two lots. Both lots meet the minimum width, depth area and impervious surface requirements of the zoning and subdivision regulations. The original preliminary plat submitted by the applicant contained 3 lots. However, with the proposed house pads and the proposed private drive, these impervious surfaces far exceeded what was permitted by ordinance. As well the staff and Planning Commission recommended that the applicant look into revising the plat by eliminating one lot. The elimination of this lot not only reduced impervious surface but greatly reduced the amount of tree removals that was necessary to accommodate the house pads. The two lots, one is a riparian lot. And the other would contain the existing home and be located to the rear. Staff is recommending approval of the driveway variance as it greatly reduces the amount of tree removal on the site. The fire marshal reviewed it and was also comfortable with the driveway width and with the access that is currently provided ~vith that driveway. The Planning Commission did recommend approval of the subdivision with the two lots and the 10 foot wide drive. And again staff is recommending approval subject to the conditions outlined in the staff report. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you John. Any questions of John? Any discussion? None? Is the applicant here? Is there anything that you'd like to say in regard to the site, or xvere you in agreement with the staff's recommendation? Ted Slathar: I'm in agreement with the staffs recommendation. 37 City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Councilman Mason: I'd like to move preliminary and final plat approval to subdivide 1.22 acres into 2 single family lots and a variance from Section 18-57(o) to allow a 10 foot private street, Slathar Addition. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Second. Councilman Mason moved, Councihvoman Dockendorf seconded to approve preliminary and final plat for two lots (SUB #96-3), Slathar Addition, and a variance from Section 18-58(o) Private Street Standards subject to the plans dated April 2, 1996, and the following conditions: 1. An individual grading, drainage, tree removal and erosion control plan will be required by the city with the building permit application for Lot 1. 2. No more than two (2) homes shall b served by the ten (10) foot wide private street unless approved by the City Council. The existing dwelling on Lot I may continue to use the well until the xvell system fails. At that time the well must be properly abandoned in accordance with City and State Health Department codes and the existing home then connected to city water. The existing pines along Trunk Highway 101 shall be trimmed back to improve sight lines. The existing driveway shall be paved to a xvidth of 10 feet. Cross-access and maintenance agreements will need to be prepared and recorded against the lots. 5. Full park and trail fees shall be paid at the time of building permit approval in the amount in force at the time of building permit application. 6. The applicant shall comply with the conditions recommended by the DNR as stated in the letter from Joe Richter dated February 7, 1996. 7. The applicant shall be responsible for SWMP xvater quality and water quantity connection charges in the amount of $368. and $911. respectively. These fees are payable to the City prior to recording the final plat. 8. Lot 2 will be subject to a sanitary sewer and water hook-up and connection charges in accordance with current city ordinance at time of building permit issuance. All voted in favor and thc motion carried. Councilman Berquist: Can I ask a question? The only comment that I had written to myself, the property owner has a right to do it. Is there going to be a lot of lot divisions coming in along that particular shoreline? Kate Aanenson: Yeah, I think throughout the city we're seeing a lot more of these as land values increase. We're seeing a lot of people that are taking the opportunity to subdivide, which is an issue that we're trying to address. Eliminating the number of driveways coming out onto collector streets. You're going to be seeing that before the Planning Commission in the next meeting. 38 City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 Councilman Berquist: I mean that whole, virtually that whole strip from their property, whatever west. Kate Aanenson: You're right. We looked at that with this plat. John, if you want to put that up. We did look to see if there was other ways to tie in driveways but based on the topography, it didn't make a lot of sense but we're certainly looking at that. Eventually when TH 101 is realigned and this becomes just their own street, without the collector. Eventually when TH 101 is realigned, this could be just a drive servicing these homes. They won't have the conflict but in the short run, you're right. It will be a problem. We are, as each one comes in, assessing to make sure there's not a way to combine some of these properties. Councilman Berquist: What other areas of the city do we have similar situations where we have narrow and the depth? Kate Aanenson: In the north end of the city. Councilman Berquist: Carver Beach area? Kate Aanenson: Yeah. I was thinking the old, as you get towards Excelsior. That old part. Councilman Senn: Probably more towards Excelsior. Kate Aanenson: More towards Excelsior. There's a fexv up'there. Councilman Senn: The north end, a lot of the lots off Pleasant View. Up there. Kate Aanenson: You get 3/4 an acre lot... Mayor Chmiel: Okay, we'll move on. APPOINTMENTS TO PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION. Scott Harr: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. As you know there's two openings on the commission. We'd like to suggest an alternate be appointed in the event that there, an opening because someone resigns for an unforeseen purpose. The Public Safety Commission as a group has met and interviewed the applicants. Their recommendation is that incumbent Brian Beniek be re-appointed. That Jim Sloss be appointed for the position vacated by Dave Dummer and that Dave Johnson be appointed as the alternate for the next year. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Is there any questions? Councilman Berquist: Well Mark and I got an opportunity to interview the two members that didn't make the interviews 2 weeks ago. We interviewed, or the two applicants. We interviewed Dave Johnson and Brian Beniek. I would move, and they're both, they're qualified candidates. Obviously I think we both, we all knew that. I would move that we name Brian Beniek and Dave Johnson to the Public Safety Commission with Jim Sloss as an alternate. Mayor Chmiel: Maybe before that as a motion, I'd like to go around to the rest of the Council. Before that's done. Do you have any specifics on this Colleen? 39 City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 Councilxvoman Dockendorf: Well, I mean I kno~v Brian and I know Dave. And ~ve did interview Jim Sloss and... I think, I know one of, we're trying to achieve some balance and I guess, insofar as Dave is, for lack of a better term, a lay person. Not involved specifically in public safety arena. However Mr. Sloss, I'm not sure, I mean I differ with my colleagues as to whether that's directly a public safety profession that he's in. Scott Harr: Councilwoman Dockendorf, I'm confused. I don't know of any public safety involvement Jim Sloss has. Councilman Senn: Well in his interview he referenced it a couple times. Scott Harr: As what Mark? Councilman Senn: As responsible for security and overall public safety issues throughout, basically the public schools. Scott Harr: Building and Grounds Superintendent. Councilman Senn: Throughout the schools too though. Scott Harr: Yeah, he's a Building and Grounds Superintendent. But he has no police or fire background. Councilwoman Dockendorf: I don't see the connection. Scott Harr: No, there isn't. Councilxvoman Dockendorf: The other issue I have is whether xve should appoint an alternate and in light of the fact that we are trying to get someone with some inspections background, maybe we should reapply, if and when a vacancy should occur. Those are my issues. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Michael. Councilman Mason: Well, we had that discussion over whether it should he Jim Sloss or Dave Johnson. Which should be alternate, xvhich shouldn't. If I wasn't extremely comfortable with what Public Safety is doing, I think I would probably agree with Mark and Steve. I'm comfortable with the recommendation from the Public Safety Commission and that's Brian and Jim be appointed and Dave be alternate. Mayor Chmiel: Mark. Councilman Senn: I don't know, after interviewing them I feel the same way Steve does. I'd really like to see Brian and Dave Johnson and I agree with Colleen as it relates to the alternate issue. I mean our process really doesn't allow, the way we set it up or we set our own process up. The way we set it up doesn't really allow us to appoint alternatives to occur. Maybe down the road is somebody retires or maybe if a position comes open we're supposed to effectively re-advertise it at that point and I think that...trying to achieve some of the balance that we're trying to achieve on that commission so my... Mayor Chmiel: I guess sitting in on the Public Safety Commission. We did the interviews as such and I wasn't there of course but their recommendation as it came forth. But as far as the alternate, I knoxv that one of the 40 City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 members of the Commission will be leaving very quickly, and that was the reason xvhy they suggested that they have an alternate, rather than having it come back again because a review by Councik But ~vith that I guess ! would agree with your proposal as to what has been submitted by the Public Safety Commission. So xvould you like to make a motion? Councilman Berquist: I want to know the compelling reasons for one over the other. They're all three great candidates. Mayor Chmiel: That's exactly right. Exactly right. Their reasoning for it? Councilman Berquist: Yes. The commission's reasoning. Mayor Chmiel: I think they said exactly what you said. They're all great applicants and I think it was just a choice that they thought Mr. Sloss would probably add just a little bit more of an informational background to be provided back to the commission. As you all know, Mr. Johnson was on the commission for some time and had to leave because of business reasons. I know he does a good job as well. I think it was just that choice that came up and, correct me if I'm wrong Scott. Scott Harr: Well that's right. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Councilman Berquist: Well I xvould move that we appoint, re-appoint Brian Beniek to the Public Safety Commission. Appoint Dave Johnson to the Public Safety Commission and in the spirit of compromise, name Jim Sloss as the alternate to be named if and when a reigning member retires. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Is there a second? Councilman Senn: I was going to ask xvithin ~vhat time period? Councilman Berquist: Oh let's say 6 months. Councilman Senn: I'll second that. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, motion's on the floor with a second. Councilman Mason: Discussion? Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. Councilman Mason: Ho~v soon do you think this vacancy will occur? Mayor Chmiel: Do you have any idea? Scott Hart: I don't know that it will. It's up in the air. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, that's something I really don't consider. Okay, motion's on the floor with a second. 41 City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 Councilman Berquist moved, Councilman Senn seconded to appoint Brian Beniek and Dave Johnson to the Public Safety Colmnlssion with Jim Sloss being appointed as an alternate should a vacancy occur within the next 6 months. Councihmm Senn and Councilman Berquist voted in favor. Couneihnan Mason, Councilwoman Doekendorf and Mayor Chmiel voted in opposition. The motion failed with a vote of 2 to 3. Councilwoman Dockendorf: I would make a motion that we appoint, re-appoint Brian Beniek and appoint Jim Sloss to the Public Safety Commission with an alternate of Dave Johnson should a vacancy occur within the next 6 months. And the reason I make this motion is to support the Public Safety Commission's wishes. For the same reasons that Mike stated. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, is there a second? Councilman Mason: Yes there is. Councilwoman Dockendorf moved, Councilman Mason seconded to appoint Brian Beniek and aim Sloss to the Public Safety Commission with Dave Johnson as an alternate if a vacancy shouht occur within the next 6 months. All voted in favor, except Councilman Senn and Councilman Benluist, and the motion carried with a vote of 3 to 2, APPOINTMENTS TO PARK & RECREATION COMMISSION. Don Ashworth: The Park Commission has gone through their interview process. They're making a recommendation that the City Council consider re-appointing Commissioners Lash and Roeser and the other vacant position xvould be given to Michael Howe. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any questions? Discussions. Councilman Berquist: Discussions. Discussions. So the Park and Rec is advocating re-naming Ron, Jan and naming Michael Howe? Mayor Chmiel: Right. Councilman Berquist: This is one of those situations you love to be in and you hate to be in because someone that's applied is going to be disappointed. I have not been participator5, in the interview process for commissions for very long but this is the first time that I have been thoroughly impressed with all five individuals. And not to name two of them is going to be a darn shame. I hope there's someway we can continue to get them involved. I look at it from the standpoint that the value of experience for the two re- applying members is important but I think a fresh approach and ideas brought by new people are also important. Ron is really the only member that has an active interest in the arts community, such as it is. Within the city of Chanhassen. Although I'm sure the others have some interest. Jan's knowledge and experience is certainly an asset. Mr. Howe would work very hard and be a real asset. Mr. Corwine xvould be an asset as well. He speaks very well. Joni Nelson, she knows the development pressures. She's searching for balance. There's not a clinker in the bunch. I don't know exactly what to do so I'm going to listen to my peer group. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Colleen. 42 City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 Councilwoman Dockendorf: Boy can I pass the buck on this one. I wasn't able to make the interviews and I can only relate to my knowledge of Jan and Ron who are just fabulous. And the applications of the balance. Sorry, I pass. Councilman Mason: Well I also xvas unable to make those interviews. However I know Jan's and Ron's work to exemplary and what I'm hearing Mr. Berquist say is that all the candidates did a fine job. I would certainly stand by the recommendations of Park and Rec. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Mark. Councilman Senn: I xvould have to agree with Steve. I think this is the, of any of the commission appointments or applications we've had, I've never seen five so even, strong people. I wish we had other places to put them. Because any one of them I think would be fine for the job. Mayor Chmiel: You're right, I fully agree. And as I indicated in their interviews, don't stop now if you're not chosen because we want you to come back and have the thoughts of doing something for the city and that's a need that we need within the city. So is there a motion? Councilman Mason: I would move the re-appointment of Commissioners Lash and Roeser and appoint Michael Howe to Park and Rec. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, is there a second? I'll second. Councilman Mason moved, Mayor Chmiel seconded to appoint Jan Lash, Ron Roeser, and Michael Hoxve to the Park and Recreation Commission. All voted in favor and the motion carded. SET WORK SESSION DATES: INTERVIEW REMAINING CANDIDATES FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION. 2_[ COMMUNITY CENTER? IS SO, WHERE? Don Ashworth: I'd like to at least give the staff report as 1 and then you may want to break up the 1-2. We have yet to interview the remaining candidates. We're not even sure exactly hoxv many we have. We did I think five the last time. I think we had four, at least on board as of right now but you may pick up an additional one before the... The second item is, the Mayor and I have had a number of discussions and you heard part of it this evening, the need for additional soccer fields. We've met with the hockey people. We've met with people interested in a community center. We've got a couple of different ideas as to where a future community center may go and I guess we would at least like the opportunity to make sure that the City Council as a whole knoxvs what it is that's being looked at and so we would like to set a work session date to go through some of the ideas that have at least surfaced. Two potential dates come to mind. The off Mondays of April 29th and May 6th. Those are both off Mondays. Hypothetical start 5:30 on both of them. Councilman Mason: I can do either one. April 29th or May 6th. Councilman Berquist: It's a Monday night isn't it? Mayor Chmiel: Yep. 43 City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 Councilman Senn: What is our, yeah I thought we changed our May schedule because of Memorial Day. Moved it to the first and third and that's... Councilman Mason: By gosh, I think he's right. Don Ashworth: Okay. Well that would mean the 13th. Councilman Mason: He was planning on being here the 13th anyways. Councilman Berquist: So that will be the time at which the Council would be brought up to speed on something or another that you guys have been cooking, and the environmental commission xvill be the other day. Mayor Chmiel: Right. Don Ashworth: Yeah. I'm assuming the 29th will be environmental and the 13th will be the community center. Councilman Senn: On the environmental commission, when are we going to, is that going to be interviews and some discussion time on the commission issue? Don Ashworth: We should have, I mean we only have the 4 or 5 candidates that evening so by rights you should be done by the interview process. If xve start at 5:30, we should be done by 7:00. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Well let's not waste people's time if there are a certain number of the Council who don't feel that this commission is necessary. Councilman Mason: I thought we already decided we were having one. I'm not quite sure why we're discussing it further. Councilman Berquist: Jill put together a pretty good mission statement. My position is that we carry the process forward. However, if in fact we've only got 5 additional people to interview on the 29th of April, I would advocate that we hold the 13th open for something else and you make your community center presentation that night. Councilman Mason: That sounds good to me. Don Ashworth: We'll do that. Mayor Chmiel: We'll leave the 13th open. LETTER OF SUPPORT~ OEA GRANT~ ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES COORDINATOR. Kate Aanenson: I'll cover that. This is in for your edification. It is a grant that we're applying for. The reason it's here before you is one of the requirements of the grant is there be a letter of support, which there is a copy of the letter. We wanted to make sure that was okay with you. Again this is for environmental waste. We'll be putting together a recycling brochure. Money is in the city budget, the $3,799.00 so xvhat we're asking for is a 44 City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 matching, approximate matching grant. Again the reason that's in here, we wanted you to approve the letter of support which is a requirement of the grant application. So if you have any comments on that letter. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Is there any questions of Kate on this? Councilman Senn: One question. This all seems great but the only question that kind of popped into my mind, especial given where we're sitting as it relates to organized collection, is why aren't we maybe applying for this on a broader scale in terms of an education effort as it would relate to the organized collection situation and that whole thing? Kate Aanenson: We can certainly make that a component of the brochure. Or looking at neighborhoods to kind of organize on their own? Councilman Senn: Well yeah. I don't know. Again, it's always harder when you're commenting and you're seeing from the outside but I mean if those grant funds are available, it would seem to me that we would stand a pretty significant opportunity of increasing our grant funds to really do that with a bang in relationship with what we're trying to achieve right noxv in organized collections so I'm just thinking before we kind of run ahead with that and maybe bite off just a little chunk, maybe we should look at really doing it on a grander scale and including the whole organized collection, and really doing it big, and bigger and better so to speak. Kate Aanenson: Sure. I think that's a great comment. Again, when we looked back when the last recycling brochure was put together, xve've had a lot new residents and it's education to let those residents know what we do recycle. Where you can take things and our work that we do ~vith Carver County and what they have housed out at the Public Works facility so it's kind of an educational... Certainly I think it's a great opportunity to incorporate what you're saying. Councilman Senn: Yeah I guess, and I haven't formed a definite opinion on this but my kind of first thought is those should be separate things rather than something consolidated because I think they're both important and I'd really hate to see one get lost within the other. Especially if we can get the grant funds to help us do it. Councilman Berquist: Grant funds. Free money. Councilman Senn: Well it's not free money. We have to match it. Nothing's free... Mayor Chmiel: Okay. There's no action that's required on that. Kate Aanenson: No, just for your edification. As long as you're okay with that letter. I(C). AMENDMENT TO SECTION 20-482 OF CITY CODE REGARDING REMOVAL OR ALTERATION OF VEGETATION IN THE SHORELAND DISTRICT; SECOND AND FINAL READING AND SUMMARY ORDINANCE FOR PUBLICATION PURPOSES. Councilman Senn: The problem I'm having with this ordinance is that, probably the issue I guess is go right to it and point to it, if I can find what. There we go. Okay. Basically the ordinance refers to effectively correcting a situation and then sites, effectively the clearing of trees and that sort of thing. But then it also kind of throxvs shrubs in there. If you look at 1 here, you know it talks about the following vegetation alterations okay. And maybe what we're doing is mixing too many definitions here but then we get into 2 and we talk 45 City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 about removal an alteration of vegetation. We get a lot more specific about talking about trees and about shrubs and stuff like that and the thing that's bothering me most about this is not in terms of new development where it seems this is very clear but we're not saying very clearly that this relates to new development. It seems to me we're potentially creating a situation here where we're going to kind of form a basis for a lot of people to start arguing with each other over how them or their neighbors should be treating their lakeshore, regardless of what historically or whatever has been done. And I talked to John today about it. I talked to Kate today about it. I kicked back and forth trying to find a way to develop it and at least today hadn't found a way to resolve it but you kno~v, we have a lot of people living on lakeshores where you have one property owner who wants an all natural yard right next to a property owner who has a perfectly manicured yard. Well, I think this is kind of vague enough that it's going to allow one to kind of say to the other that they can't do what they're doing or they can be doing what they're doing and we're going to be put in the middle of a lot of little skirmishes. Councilman Dockendorf: Well it's my, I mean I never had the understanding that this applied to new development. I thought this was existing. I mean you can't clear cut all the way down to the lake. That's detrimental to the lake. Councilman Senn: No, but this does apply. I mean the main, one of the main problems here is a loose element that's causing this. It's not an existing. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Yeah but I think it should apply to all. I mean if there are instances in the city, I don't care how long you've had the property, that they're not conforming to the intent of the current ordinance and the intent of this new one, then I think this gives a means to rectify that. Councilman Senn: Okay, so what's vegetation? What's a shrub? What can be cleared? What can't be cleared? I mean can you not cut down a tree but you can cut down a bush? Can you not cut down a bush but can you cut down certain types of grasses or not other certain types of grasses or, I mean there's not a lot of detail in here. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Well there's not a lot of detail in our current ordinance. Councilman Senn: Well I understand that but we're trying to fix it. Mayor Chmiel: Let Kate address this. Kate Aanenson: I think we're splitting hairs over this issue. This is trying to bring clarity to a specific issue where we've said you cannot clear cut and that's in that first 30 foot strip...75 foot setback. What we're trying to do is bring some clarity to a specific area. There are certainly circumstances where homeowners have had property 30 years that continue to maintain and mow their property all the way down. Can they do that today? If they were to come in, no. Can they continue doing it? They've done it all that way, that's fine. The intent is th~'~ ~ve're trying to bring clarity to a specific part of the ordinance that we're having problems with because it doesn't, it's not specific enough when it says clear cutting. What does that mean? That's what we're trying to bring clarity to. You ultimately have the final interpretation of what this means. We've given you what we believe the interpretation and if there's some misunderstanding about that, then obviously it comes before you to your Board of Adjustments to make an interpretation but I'm with Colleen. That's how we always envisioned it to be. We're not going to go back and tell people now you've got to let all your stuff grow back. If you continue to mow it. Just like sand blankets. You can't put sand blankets across your xvhole across your xvhole lakeshore. People have done that in the past. They're maintaining those. We're not going back and, part of the 46 City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 lake management plan, there's been an educational component to try to reduce that. There ~vas an article in the Tribune about that this weekend, if you read that about what they're trying to do in Minneapolis. So this is part of the educational component but really what is involved is for the new development where we're trying to do that. I understand Mark's issue but those people have been out there and will continue to do that so we're not trying to get that specific. What Mark was asking for is somehow trying to put in here, and we believe it's covered in the intent statement. Again you're looking at the components that we're pulling out. If you go back and read the entire intent statement of the shoreland regulations, we believe it's addressed in that whole ordinance but what Mark was looking for was some sort of to bring clarity to people that are already existing. but we don't believe that it's necessary. I don't know if Roger had wanted to say anything about grandfather rights. Roger Knutson: Well if it's already cut down, this doesn't apply. Kate Aanenson: Exactly, that's what we're saying. Right. You can continue to let it gro~v up. If it's not there. Councilman Mason: Well that's good enough for me. Councilman Senn: And it's on the record. Councilwoman Dockendorf: I would move item l(c). Councilman Mason: Second. Councilwoman Dockendorf moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve an amendment to Section 20-482 of City Code Regarding Removal or Alteration of Vegetation in the Shoreland District; Second and Final Reading and Summary Ordinance for Publication Purposes. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Mayor Chmiel: Is there a motion for adjournment? Councilman Senn: Don? One point. On number 10 down below. Approval of lease for Chanhassen Depot, which was dropped off the agenda tonight. I guess Council can comment as it wishes but basically those negotiations are continuing. There are a lot of alterations being made to the lease but there are no alterations being made to the prime issues that the Council and what staff...can work out. There's absolutely no change in the language as it relates to the property oxvner being able to cancel the lease on 6 months notice and I think we're spending a lot of time, effort and everything else negotiating the balance of the lease when that was the key issue that we identified and I don't know, I get the feeling it's going to be coming back with all these changes to it but no change in that key issue. In redrafts I've seen, that's ~vhere we're sitting. Mayor Chmiel: Well being it's not on the agenda, we'll discuss it when it comes back to us. If there's some points that you bring up, that's fine. Unless you have something to. Todd Gerhardt: Well the 6 month notice is if the railroad depot impedes Bloomberg Companies development of the piece of property. We feel because of it's location. You know he's not going to build next to the railroad track. He's not going to move his driveway. We feel that it would not be a detriment to his development. But he doesn't know. You know he wants that language in there. Councilman Berquist: Is he xvithin his rights to relocate his driveway? 47 City Council Meeting - April 8, 1996 Todd Gerhardt: He could. But the odds are, pushing it close to the railroad tracks is not going to be amenable to our engineering department. Kate Aanenson: For sight lines and stuff like that. Councilman Berquist: Well I may be amendable and having it be permissible are quite different. Todd Gerhardt: He has the right. Councilman Senn: And for any reason. He doesn't have to prove that it impedes or doesn't impede his property. He can simply give 6 months notice and cancel the lease once he's submitted that development plan. Todd Gerhardt: I think it says something in here that it has to impede development. I haven't looked at it in detail. Mayor Chmiel: Is there a motion for adjournment? Councilman Mason moved, CounciBvoman Dockendorf seconded to adjoum the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carrie{l. The meeting was adjourned at 10:30 ll.m. Submitted by Don Ashworth City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim 48