Loading...
1f. Minutes CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING BOARD OF EQUALIZATION AND REVIEW May 20, 1991 Mayor Chmiel called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. . The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag. ' COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Chmiel, Councilman Wing, Councilman Mason, Councilwoman Dimler and Councilman Workman. STAFF PRESENT: Don Ashworth, City Manager ; Elliott Knetsch, City Attorney; Orlin Shafer and Scott Winter from the Carver County Assessor's Office. ' APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Workman seconded to approve the Minutes of the Board of Equalization and Review dated April 29, 1991 as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. ' CONTINUATION OF BOARD OF REVIEW AND EQUALIZATION. Mayor Chmiel made a brief comment about the general purpose of this evening's ' meeting and the City Manager outlined the procedure for the Board. Mayor Chmiel then opened the floor for any specific comments from the public. ' Mrs. Dusoski : I was just wondering if they ever did anything. They never contacted us for Leonard Dusoski. Mayor Chmiel : And what 's your address? Mrs. Dusoski: Address is 1000 Western Drive. Mayor Chmiel: Would you please spell that? ' Mrs. Dusoski: D U S O S K I. Scott Winter: Number 85. Mrs. Dusoski: Was there anything done on it? Mayor Chmiel : According to this there's been no adjustment . Mrs. Dusoski: No adjustment huh. Why? We could never list that house for that price and get it . Councilwoman Dimler: That 's true. Mayor Chmiel: Are you familiar with the house? ' Councilwoman Dimler: Yes. I'm familiar with that area. Mrs. Dusoski: It 's right across from your father. I I Board of Equalization and Review - May120, 1991 11 Mayor Chmiel: We would open that for some `discussion. Orlin? 1 Orlin Schafer: As we stated in our reply to the Board, we attempted to contact you repeatedly by phone and we received no answers. An appraiser did go out and look at the property. Came back and just reviewed the sales and the field data that we collected and recalculated the values to make sure there had not been an error committed and came up with relatively the same number and there'd be no adjustment indicated. Mrs. Dusoski: Yc_'d never get that for it . Orlin Schafer: What would you think you would get for it ma'am? Mrs. Dusoski: The way it was appraised the first time would be more fair. Orlin Schafer: Now when you say first time, you mean last year? Mrs. Dusoski: Well yes. Orlin Schafer: Which was what , do you know? Mrs. Dusoski: Was it $73,900? Orlin Schafer: So we're talking like, you had a $20,000.00 increase? Okay. How old is your home? Mrs. Dusoski: It was built in '64? Leonard Dusoski: '62. ' Orlin Schafer: Do you recall Scott who took care of this one? Scott Winter: Ann. Orlin Schafer: I'm sorry. We did try to contact you and apparently there has not been an inside review of your property in some time. Have you seen an ' assessor in the last 2 years? Mrs. Dusoski: Last 2 years? Orlin Schafer: Yeah, was Ann there? Mrs. Dusoski: Yeah. Orlin Schafer: When was she there? ' Mrs. Dusoski: I don't remember but I remember showing her around. It wasn't very long ago. ' Orlin Schafer: But she was inside? Mrs. Dusoski : Yes. I 2 11 Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 Orlin Schafer: Then I guess I'll stand with the numbers that we have and we felt no adjustment was needed. Mrs. Dusoski: Yeah, there was a lady there. Councilwoman Dimler: Mrs. Ousoski; could you tell me how far you are from number 41, Kermit Audstad? You're in the same neighborhood aren't you? Mrs. Dusoski: I'm right . . . father-in-law. Across the street from Wally Christensen. Do you know where that is? Okay. Councilwoman Dimler: Are you familiar with Kermit Austad? Because if the Council would turn to number 41. Mrs. Ousoski: Austad's up on Carver Beach Road? Councilwoman Dimler: Yes. Mrs. Dusoski: Okay, we're directly behind them. Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, and his was reduced by $16,100.00 down to $80,800.00. Now I don't know, and I had a question as I was going through this because I'm familiar wit:, some of the homes. Some got reductions and some ' didn't and I guess I was a little bit disappointed to see that because it did seem unfair to me as I was going through this. Mayor Chmiel: What you're saying is most the homes are comparable? ' Councilwoman Dimler: In that area yes. Mayor Chmiel: From the outside? Okay. Councilwoman Dimler: This is Carver Beach. , Mrs. Dusoski: They're older homes. These are one of the first ones in there. Orlin Schafer: Yeah. As noted in our notes, if we found something that I instilled us with a notion of more depreciation Councilwoman Dimler and by saying noting the condition of the home, that brought more depreciation factor into that . In other words, there might be something in the interior inspection that was not . . . Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah, I understand that . ' Mayor Chmiel: Right . That 's what I'm just saying. From the outside because we don't know what the inside. Orlin Schafer: That in itself would be enough to change that value. Mayor Chmiel: Has there been any additional construction within your home in the past? Mrs. Dusoski: Since we bought it? Not since we bought it. 3 I Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 1 Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Everything is basically the same from the day you bought it to what it is presently now? Mrs. Dusoski: Yep. Orlin Schafer: Well the fact that my• appraiser had viewed your property recently, I mean within the last 6 months, and she is quite good, I would go with her recommendation of no adjustment . The Council can do as they wish on 1 this. Mayor Chmiel : As I look here Orlin at Mr. Kermit Austad's property, the estimated market value on his was $96,900.00 and on Mrs. Dusoski's it was. Mrs. Dusoski: $93,000.00. ' Mayor Chmiel: Right . Councilwoman Dimler: Yet Kermit was reduced by $16,100.00. ' Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, they have a reduction on that of $16,100.00 to bring that down to $80,800.00. Councilman Workman: What 's the estimated property value of your lot? Just the lot . Any ideas? ' Scott Winter: Knowing the area you're in, I would say that value is probably $22,000.00. ' Councilman Workman: Is this a split entry? Mrs. Dusoski: No. Just a rambler. And the garage is a concrete garage. Councilman Workman: How much square footage do you have? Leonard Dusoski: About 1,600 square feet . 1 Councilman Workman: One of the things I'm going on is I have a home insured on the road and I'm sure it's insured for $70,000.00. Now you wouldn't insure a lot but if I did, and that 's a split entry and more square footage. Based on ' that , the $70,000.00 with the $22,000.00 lot meaning it'd be worth $92,000.00. Is that a step down from a split entry? Is a rambler a step down from a split entry or a step up? ' Mrs. Dusoski: A rambler's down. Leonard Dusoski: It's going to cost me about $7,000.00-$8,000.00 to repair my garage. It 's caving in. The floor has got high water level. All that drainage tile in there. It's going to cost me $7,000.00 to $8,000.00 to rework it. Mrs. Dusoski: Before we could sell it. Leonard Dusoski: Before I could even sell it . Put drain tile all the way around the house. My garage is caving in right now. I can go down 6 inches i 4 1 Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 II deep in the ground and I hit water. You can look on the outside of the house, you've got to go inside that garage and, I'd be glad to sell that house for that price. If you want to give me that price, I'd gladly move out tomorrow. Councilwoman Dimler: I know they couldn't get that for their house. Mayor Chmiel: I think I'd like to make a recommendation on this. I would say . that, as I'm looking at others within the particular area, I don't know what 's there and I'm not in an assessor. I'm just trying to be fair when it comes to this. I would like to see us drop this $13,000.00. Councilwoman Dimler: I'll second that. Councilman Workman: To 80? Mayor Chmiel: That would drop it down to $80,900.00. Any other discussion? ' Councilman Wing: Other than to clap. • Mayor Chmiel: Being that we're not going to vote on these at this particular I time. Well this one I think we should because it's not adjustable. I would like a motion on that. , Councilwoman Dimler: You made the motion. Mayor Chmiel: I made the motion, you seconded it. Okay. ' Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to reduce the assessment $13,1000.00 for Mr. and Mrs. Leonard Dusoski, 1000 Western Drive, R25.1600110 to an Estimated Market Value of $80,900.00. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Charlie Coffee: Charlie Coffee and I live at 7474 Saratoga Drive. Mayor Chmiel: Is that with a C or K? I Charlie Coffee: C, the same way you drink it. Scott Winter: 71. ' Charlie Coffee: I wasn't contacted. I contacted the assessors myself. I don't know if I could have been contacted. I gave them, I called them after being at the first meeting I left a message and then I called and got Scott's office. Is the other assessor, is that Ann? Okay, and I talked to her and she said that she had to get to another meeting. That she would get back to me and I gave her my office hours and I never was contacted for, oh I don't know. I guess it was 10 days or so. Finally I called them and I guess I'm not very well prepared tonight because I didn't have an assessor come in and reappraise my house or anything like that. I assume that probably with the large bump they gave me - that there would be an adjustment. Now in 1988 'my house jumped $40,000.00 in assessment and we came up to the meetings and all here and there was a changing at that time and I assumed well after it jumps $26,000.00 the next time that 5 Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 coming u g p to the meeting and calling and talking, that there would be an 1 adjustment there. I assumed that. Well, after not being called I finally called again and talked to them and they said, well we're turning it in today but we're not making any changes on yours. I said well, . I didn't say a whole lot. We talked a little bit about different parcels. Now I see that when I was ' here before this place was packed and there were 233 people apparently or situations and now I guess there's a lot of happy campers around because I don't see too many in here. I don't have a large beef like maybe some people do. ' Like there's a large difference like the one fellow that came up and said that how the homes around him were $30,000.00 less than his and the homes were all the same, etc. and he had a bad yard. I guess my case isn't that extreme. It's just that I feel $26,000.00 is a large jump and I don't think my home will sell for the amount and then comparing, I talked to a few people around. I just happened to run into a friend of mine yesterday that was selling his house. ' He's moving to Burnsville and he said that he had up for $149,000.00 and I said ' well that 's what they're selling, they're estimating mine at. He said well my house is bigger and I said well, what is your tax for next year? He says 105. I said oh, 105. That would be a real good deal. I guess I don't understand why ' we have the large variances. I have people around me and I don't like to go say well Joe is paying this, why don't I pay that and stuff like this. But I guess after a home sells and there was a home that sold for, it was on the market for $149,000. A rambler walkout quite similar to mine but a smaller house with a ' similar lot and it sold for, it was on the market for $149,000.00. Sold for $137,000.00. Well the taxes for that for next year I was told will be $125.00. I guess I don't understand the differences in the various situations that we have in homes. I don't understand why we have so many variances. The one fellow says I'm paying $105.00. I've got neighbors that are paying 2/3 of what their estimate is 2/3 of what my value is. and I'm not saying mine's way off. ' I'm just saying I don't think I could sell mine for $149,000.00. I think it could probably go for $139,000.00. Probably $137,000.00 and if they say they try to get 96% of that. Try to get as accurate as they can, well maybe my assessment should be $135,000.00-$134,000.00. I'm not saying I want a great ' deal. I'm just saying I want a fair deal. I see some real good deals around that people have but I don't have one. I have kind of the other end of it and I see that there were 233 different people that felt the same and apparently 220 ' of them, as Don mentioned, had their situations, they've come to a situation where they felt that was just. The person that got up in front of me, they had some situations and they measured some homes around and I think it was fair that you kind of split a difference. And I'm not asking for hey I want to be back ' where I was but I think it should be fairly done from what I. . . Now there was a home just sold down the way from me and like I say, I'm not prepared. A few blocks away. I guess I'd like to see what the Zaborski's sold their home for ' and what their taxes are for next year. But I didn't get a chance to get a hold of them since I had short notice that the decision was made. I don't want else we need to say. I'd like it looked into farther. I would have gotten an ' assessor out and gone through my home and done this if I thought it was going to be necessary. I didn't think it was and I wasn't contacted. I had to make the contacts myself. I did give them hours to be contacted. I've had people in my home. Scott's been in my home a couple of times and I just don't think it's quite at what it is and I think I see other people with lesser taxes than what their homes are being assessed at. I guess I don't always understand that. There's too much of a variance it seems to me. r 6 i Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 Mayor Chmiel: Good, thank you. How long have you been in your home? Charlie Coffee: We built the home, I think it was 1978. 1 Mayor Chmiel: '78. Do you know how many approximate .finished area of square footage you have? Charlie Coffee: We have a rambler and we have about, I think it's 1,900 feet - finished area in the house. Maybe it's 1,920 or 1,940. It's 19 something. I put an addition on myself about 9-10 years ago. I added a bedroom. Mayor Chmiel: Any other discussion? Councilman Workman: We have no basis from which to start from on this one. Mayor Chmiel: You said your taxes for your assessment last year was $109,000.00? Charlie Coffee: No. It was $123,000.00 last year. It was $108,000.00 in 1987 and it was raised $40,000.00 at that time and I came up here and it was, I don't ' know what you'd call it . Adjusted I guess and then it was raised again 26 and in talking to neighbors and sniffing around and so forth, I thought that was quite high for similiar homes around me. And then I assumed there would be an adjustment or something after we came up and I talked. I guess I would have done more research if I thought that there wouldn't be one and I guess the reason I was a little left out was because I wasn't contacted and I was told I would be. I gave hours that I'm able to be contacted. Orlin Schafer: Mr. Mayor, I'd like to comment on that contacting. We did contact everyone that we possibly could. We kept trying until the day I had to resubmit this to the Board. Those people that we list here as not being contacted were the only ones that we never talked to. If you had contacted us 10 days after this started, you probably still hadn't given us a chance. I mean we had 230 some people and Scott spent 4 days strictly telephoning and then he spent the better part of 4 or 5 hours a day on the phone with these people and you would have been worked into that. We had 20 days to do this in and we were pressed for time. But as far as not being contacted, you took it upon your own volition, that 's fine. I have no problem with that. But don't use that as an excuse against us for not being contacted. Charlie Coffee: Okay, I called and talked to, called the office and talked to I Ann and she was, we talked and then she said she had to get to some meeting of some type which I'm sure she did. Orlin Schafer: She was reviewing some other property I'm sure. Charlie Coffee: Right. So she did that and she said that she'd get back to me. Now, I not knowing what day was what. I didn't hear from anyone for a length of time so I called back again and the day I called was the day she said she was submitting the final whatever it would be. The reports. And that was the time that I had given that I could be contacted. Now if she was going to call me let's say 20 minutes later, then they would have made the contact as you're saying that they were trying to make but you're saying I called ahead of that. 7 i Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 But it was the day that she was turning them in was the 9 day I called. I would just kind of wonder if she was still planning to call me. 1 Orlin Schafer: You mean your initial contact was the day you called? ' Charlie Coffee: No. No, I didn't say that . I said I called the office originally. Scott 's office and. . .talk to Ann because that 's who I talked to. Okay, and that was just a few days after we met here. I was told then, she told ' me then, we talked for I don't know, 10-15 minutes. I had to get to class. She had to do something. She had to go to a meeting. That she would recontact me. Okay? So now I waited, you know I had these office hours and I waited and I wasn't contacted. Okay, now. I called them back and that was the day she was ' turning them in and she said she had them all done. Orlin Schafer: Okay. I'll take the blame for this myself because of one simple thing and that is, had you requested her come out and view the property? Or Scott? Anybody? ' Charlie Coffee: Scott had done that . Orlin Schafer: Okay. I had made the determination we did not have the time to make these follow-ups after we had once contacted and had the discussion with you. She could not give you a number or an indication whether it was going up or down anyhow because she does not have the power to do that. I do not have the power to do that. At this point in time only this Board has that power and the assessments stood until they decide what to do about it. We never recontacted anyone a second time unless they said I have to know because of some reason or another. We did not give any numbers at that point in time. No one knew what these numbers were going to be unless they said that's acceptable to ' me. If they said that was acceptable, then that's the way the adjustments were indicated. That's all. ' Charlie Coffee: Well what the situation amounts to then is that I was I guess kind of misled as to how the operation works because I was told that, by her that they would get back to me. I guess this is what happened in 1988 is when ' Scott got back to me and told me the situation of what was happening with my parcel so I knew. I assumed this would happen this time because I was told it would and it happened before. Whether it was going to be changed or not changed, I assumed they'd get back to me. Now this would have given me some ' time, like I had before, to go out and maybe get an. . . Orlin Schafer: Well, you see Mr. Coffee the way the system works is when you come here in your original appeal, you're to document everything that you're talking about . Everything that you have is supposed to be presented at that first meeting. Through the courtesy of this Board, you are addressing them a second time. Because this is not how it works. This is cut and dried on April 29th. All the documentation was to be submitted that night or shortly thereafter when our appraiser contacted you. That material's all gathered together and brought back to this Board. A week ago they had this documentation ' to then go through all this. And they could do it at their leisure. You're not being fair to this Board at this point in time asking them to make a judgment on this tonight with no time to respond to it or to invetigate it. That 's what Mr. Ashworth was referring to. That is simply the same answer I gave the other 1 8 1 Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 Y appraiser le that was here. I'll stand on the numbers that m a raiser had because I P don't know any different now and I can't take the time, at this point in time, to investigate it . I don't care, if the Board wants to make an adjustment , that 's fine. That 's fine with me. Mayor Chmiel: I'd like to make a recommendation on this one. I see that some property was sold for $137,000.00 recently. _ I recalculated values. I would make a motion on this at this particular time to mark that at $140,000.00. Councilwoman Dimmer: Second. , Mayor Chmiel: That would be reducing it $9,000.00. Any other discussion? Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilwoman Dialer seconded to reduce the assessment $9,000.00 for Mr. Charlie Coffee, 7474 Saratoga Drive, R25.7610090 to an Estimated Market Value of $140,000.00. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Pam Freiberg: Pam Freiberg, 2730 Orchard Lane. , Mayor Chmiel: Can you spell your last name Pam? Pam Freiberg: F R E I B E R G. Scott Winter: Number 10. Mayor Chmiel: This is one where there has been a reduction. Your market value was at $212,100.00. A reduction of $11,000.00 is proposed on that which is bringing it down to $201,100.00. ' Pam Freiberg: Is there anything that, we're done there? We just had an appraisal. We're still trying to get a mortgage on the house. We just had an appraisal this week and the gentleman appraised it for $155,000.00. Mayor Chmiel: Do you have that written information that you have on an appraisal for getting loans on that house? Pam Freiberg: We've gotten 3 so far because we're probably going to sell the house since, anyway that 's not here nor there but we can't you know, for the taxes it's going to hard to sell the house. I don't know what that kind of change will do to the house. $11,000.00. If that 's going to make a real difference in the taxes. ' Mayor Chmiel: That brings it down to $201,100.00. Pam Freiberg: Okay, but what does that do to the taxes? I know nothing about. ' Councilwoman Dimler: That we don't know. Pam Freiberg: You don't know? 9 Board of Equali>>tion and Review - May 20, 1991 Scott Winter: At this point we don't know because the legislature still's in 11 session. Mayor Chmiel: By midnight tonight we may know but I wouldn't make any bets. ' Pam Freiberg: . . .two houses over from us that it 's the same lot size. Similar. Their's was dropped $4,000.00. Their taxes. And their house is appraised at $224,000.00. Scott Winter: This one was appraised on the appraisal that they had on it before in 1988 or 1989. . .and it was based on that information from the ' appraisal. Pam Freiberg: Yeah, the house is 2 years old. We built it. ' Mayor Chmiel: Well as I see that they've gone through and relooked at it. If there was no adjustment then I'd probably sit here and arbitrate that just a little bit but being that I see that they've gone ahead and made a reduction of $11,000.00, I think I'd have to stand with the assessor on that particular one. Scott Winter: And it was based on an appraisal they had at that time. Pam Freiberg: Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Anyone else? ' Councilman Workman: We don't need to act on it then? Mayor Chmiel: No. That particular one has already been, we will. Don Ashworth: You'll have the larger motion at the end that basically adopts all of those that you did not specifically act on. Mayor Chmiel: Right . Anyone else? If not. Councilwoman Dimler: I have one. Mr. Dave Zamjahn. He's number 230 on the last page. Bottom of the page. He was not able to be here tonight but he asked me if I would leave this pause. He has a valuation of $151,800.00. He feels ' that 's too high for the neighborhood and he said he has made lots of unsuccessful attempts to have the assessor come out and look at it. He was even willing to reschedule some patients so that he could meet with them and was not able to have that happen. Would you like to explain that? ' Scott Winter: We contacted him on May 1st and talked to his wife I think at that time. I wasn't the appraiser that did it but had conversations with who ' did. They said they would contact him within a week. He did contact us back on May 15th is the date he contacted us back to ask for the review of his property. The day we were writing up the information for this Board. We did contact him 11 and he said. . .but he waited until May 15th to call back. . . Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, but between that time you didn't make any effort to go out . Between the time you talked to his wife you didn't make an effort to go out and see? ' 10 Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 Scott Winter: At that point he indicated that he didn't want us out . He would call us to set up an appointment when to come out and look at it so we waited for him to do such. And like I said, on May 15th was the day that he called. Orlin Schafer: Councilwoman, at that time we did, on every one of these properties, whether they requested a review or not or if we went out and looked at their property or not , we did recalculate and check all the field data that we had. So if the property had been looked at within the last couple years, the field data should have been relatively correct. And we chart that back against , our schedules and if there's no errors or anything, we left it go. Councilwoman Dimler: He also indicated that the homes in the area, some of them have been for sale there for quite a while and have not sold. Are you familiar with that? Orlin Schafer: Is their asking price exceeding our estimated market value? ' Councilwoman Dimler: I don't think so. I think he said it was a home that was in reposession. ' Orlin Schafer: I mean this is what we find many times is even $10,000.00 or $12,000.00 difference between our value and their asking price is enough to prohibit a sale and we are at market value. We are very close to it. Councilman Wing: Mr. Zamjahn lists several properties that sold in the last year and this is one that I was called on personally. I looked at the'home. They have an unfinished basement and the homes pointed out in the neighborhood that sold for $130,000.00 and the one house that went for $141,000.00 I believe is the number he used. Clearly was a larger home than his. And I see his house as selling in the 130 range up to the 140 range. I find this one very excessive. Mayor Chmiel: What number is that Dick? 1 Councilwoman Dimler: Number 230. The same one I was talking about . Orlin Schafer: Which property were you referring to that sold for $130,000.00? Councilman Wing: I'm just using his numbers that he's got. Orlin Schafer: Where did you get those numbers? Oh, off his data sheet. Councilman Wing: Off his data sheet and then we walked through the neighborhood ' pointing them out. I don't see that his house as a leader in that neighborhood by any means. Councilwoman Dimler: Right. Councilman Wing: So not when I saw him appraised well over what the houses had sold for, what I anticipated the neighborhood selling for, I was rather startled. I clearly support his case. Councilman Workman: Have you got a motion for a number? ' 11 ' 1 Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 Councilwoman Dimler: I'll move that we go with $142,000.00. ' Councilman Wing: I think that 's higher than he would have wanted but I'll compromise with a second. IMayor Chmiel: It 's been moved and seconded to lower the market value. Councilwoman Dimler: From $151,800.00 to $142,000.00. IICouncilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Wing seconded to reduce the assessment $9,800.00 for Mr. David Zamjahn, 7506 77th Street, Chaska, R25.8610040 to an Estimated Market Value of $142,000.00. All voted in favor and the motion ' carried unanimously. IMayor Chmiel: I too had just one more. That was number 35. Frances Jacques. Councilwoman Dimler: She got a good reduction. IIMayor Chmiel: Yeah, they lowered that $23,100.00 which is making the value of that $87,900.00. Again, I'm not appraiser. I'm not in the real estate business but I have a pretty good handle as to total dollars that I would pay for a home. II've only bought 7 homes so I think I might be a bit qualified for that. That is over the past 35 years. I don't own all 7. I own one for clarification. And in looking at this home, $87,900.00 to me still seems rather excessive. Can ' you enlighten me? Scott Winter: . . .reviewed this one because she kicked me off the property and I IIwasn't going to go back there. So Ann Wise went out there. So I can't give you, I wasn't in it . I didn't get to measure it. I have no idea what the property is like. IMayor Chmiel: Well I've been in the home and I know the downstairs is not done. And it's just the upstairs and it's probably about , I was told the age of the home and I don't recall. IOrlin Schafer: Is this sitting on a larger lot? Scott Winter: It 's a double lot in original town but it's not , where the house Iand that sits I don't think allows for any type of use of any of the additional land but it is a much larger lot than most. . . IOrlin Schafer: I think that's a comment that Ann had made is that there was more lot value involved in this one than normal. But she did note the additional depreciation of things like you're talking about. IIScott Winter: The basement and garage were in very terrible shape. Things like that she took 'into consideration. ' Orlin Schafer: And I had looked at that myself. And as I said, I had been in the home before so I know what's there and $87,900.,00 to me seems excessive yet . And from where it was increased from what it was, the $50,000.00, I would almost suggest that we drop that another $10,000.00. I'd probably pay $75,000.00 for 12 Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 it if I were to buy it . Just my own. Councilman Wing: Mr. Mayor, the one you're discussing, it dropped $23,000.00. r Okay and as a resident of the community you're suggesting that it goes down another 10, which I have no problem with. This $111,000.00 then is an extreme. I mean we're talking a major over valuation. Mayor Chmiel: Well that's one way the assessor gets an opportunity to get back inside the door. ' Scott Winter: Again, without having any information, we had to stand at the curb and say the house looks this big .to me. It looks this good and we put it at the top of the range for those types of houses. I mean if the property owner isn't going to allow you any information about the house, that's what you have to do. Orlin Schafer: And it isn't that small a property as I recall. Ann did not think it was, I mean with her measurements and so forth, it calculated out very close to $111,000.00 or $112,000.00 if it had been in better condition. The decrease that we gave it was strictly because of it's condition. Added depreciation expressly for the basement where they're having a wall problem and the garage. Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, so the decrease was not based on getting inside the home? Orlin Schafer: Well it was on that because we didn't know those things existed. I mean if it had been in average condition for the size of the home based on the lot it's on, it 'd be worth $110,000.00 or $112,000.00. Mayor Chmiel: Scott, I can understand if she tells you to get out, you'd move. You'd go. There's no question. Orlin Schafer: And we used the depreciation that we used on other homes to reduce it that $23,100.00. I mean I caution my staff that these are substantial reductions. Why were we so high to begin with? I mean that's why I wrote the note to the Board outlining the fact that these are substantial reductions. Acknowledging of course that there had been some substantial increases so it's kind of a two edge sword there that we're dealing with. Mayor Chmiel: Right. Well I have on the floor a motion. Councilwoman Dimler: I'd second that motion. That brings it to $77,900.00? Mayor Chmiel: That brings it to $77,900.00. Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah, bring it to $77,900.00. ' Mayor Chmiel: Any further discussion? Councilman Wing: I just wish we had the power tp do that to all of these Don. I support your position though. 13 ' • Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 1 Mayor Chmiel: Well, if I had time to o out and look g at each one I probably would but as I say, I don't . I don't know their particular job. It 's just my gut reaction. What I feel. Orlin Schafer: I think there comes a, excuse me Mr. Mayor. I think there comes ' a point in time, the Board members do have to take our expertise to account for something. We're not doing this to pass the time of day. You're employing us. You're paying us under contract . You do have to acknowledge our expertise at ' some point in time. Councilman Wing: Appreciate that we're starting at the State level. The system and then coming down to where you're really not guilty other than following the ' State system. There's obviously disagreement with the State system but there's so many reductions here which means there are so many that are inaccurate and over their market value and these are the only ones that complained. I know if ' we had advertised and made this clear what the rules are, we could have filled up an auditorium and we could have had a real. Well, with the number of people that complained, for everyone that complained there's 2 that didn't because they ' gave up or they didn't think it was worthwhile or don't even know the process. So we're only at the tip of the iceberg. It just, at any rate Mr. Mayor. I didn't mean to get . ' Orlin Schafer: The other side of that Councilman Wing is that 60% of these received some kind of a reduction. 40% did not . There's like 60 of them that received nothing, or at least our indication was that there was nothing ' warranted. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, this is still raising this particular one $20,000.00 more than it was before. We have a motion on the floor with a second. Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilwoman Dialer seconded to further reduce the assessment $10,000.00 for Frances Jacques, 308 Chanview, R25.0500390 from the ' Assessor's recommended Esimated Market Value of $87,900.00 to $77,900.00. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Mayor Chmiel: There's one other thing I would like to bring out. I'd like to add a parcel which I had asked Oon to add to our last packet. The parcel is the Eckankar parcel. I asked the Board to consider leaving 10 acres of this parcel tax exempt with the remaining 170 acres as tillable farm property with a dollar ' assessed as such and I would make that motion. Orlin Schafer: Excuse me Mr. Mayor. Are you representing Eckankar? Mayor Chmiel: I'm representing the City. ' Orlin Schafer: I'm sorry, this is not the forum for that one. Mayor Chmiel: In accordance with our Attorney, I think we can do this. Orlin Schafer: The Board of Equalization rests with the County level. . Mayor Chmiel: Well, I'm going to put this through to such and I have made the motion. I'm looking for a second. ' 14 • Board of Equal: ation and Review - May 20, 1991 II Councilwoman Dimler: Would you say that again please? I didn't catch it. Mayor Chmiel: I'd like to add a parcel which I had asked Don to add to our last packet . Maybe if I just give you some background on that . I think most the Council was aware of it because I've also talked to the County Board. Whereas the Eckankar presently has a complete exemption on that parcel. At one time we were receiving about $13,000.00 in taxes. That was dropped. According to the Assessor, if I'm not wrong, he has the authority to do that and to move it as such. In my opinion we have never been, the City was never brought into discussion. I feel that that's not an appropriate move for us and I'm proposing this particular motion to clarify that because I don't think, whether it be my church, St . Hubert 's or any other church in town, I would not allow that to happen. And I feel that we should at least have them taxed at that farm rate as I mentioned. Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, the 10 acres is exempt but the 170, the remaining at the farm rate? Mayor Chmiel: That's correct . ' Councilwoman Dimler: I'll second that motion. Mayor Chmiel: Any other discussion? Councilman Mason: So you're doing this, could you just repeat why you're doing this Mayor? I'll admit to not quite following what's going on here. Mayor Chmiel: I'm saying technically that the parcel in total is under church and I think churches are entitled to tax exemption with a certain portion but not the entirety of the parcel that they own. Of that being the balance of roughly 170 acres, or a total of 170 acres is what they have. In other words, the entirety of the 170 acres would completely be tax exempt. I don't think that's right. As I said, it wouldn't be right for St. Hubert's. It wouldn't be right for the Lutherans or the Methodist or anyone else. It 's. . .and I feel that we should reach a solution to this in making that parcel taxable back to at least the $13,000.00 that we did have previously. Richard? Councilman Wing: I support your position. I would only ask a clarification that this be the proper forum. I don't understand that. Can that be accomplished? Mayor Chmiel: From my understanding with discussion, yes we can. ' Councilman Workman: So we are in effect ordering the Assessor to? Mayor Chmiel: No. I guess basically what we're doing is appealing to the , County Board the decision that was made. Orlin Schafer: The decision as I understood it, being clarified by the County ' Attorney and by the State Department of Revenue is that they made application for the exemption and that is empowered in my department and I made the recommendation or I made the decision to make it tax exempt based on their application. Now I don't know exactly how, that would have to clarified to me 15 , Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 1 by our County Attorney how the Board would turn around and start taxing something when it 's listed as tax exempt. I have no way of knowing that . That would have to get clarification. Mayor Chmiel: Well Orlin I'm not arguing the point that Eckankar is entitled to ' be where they're at . I'm just saying- that if we, as a City, have 1,500 churches come into town and acquire the balance of the property, where do our taxes go? There has to be a stop somewhere and that's what I'm saying. They're entitled ' to tax exemption but not the entirety of the property. Orlin Schafer: I'm not going to belabor the point here either Mayor but I guess I question the route we're taking on this. I mean I have no problem with them paying tax on that property. I still have to look at how it 's being used for the taxation of it and you know, that aspect of it will be something else again. If you as a Board are suggesting that they become taxable on any ' portion, you must then give them notice that they will be taxed in 10 days. Within a 10 day period and again hold another Board, hold another hearing and go through those. . .and give them a chance to appeal. ' Mayor Chmiel: What we're doing is making this as a recommendation to the County Board. If the County Board so chooses, then you go through your process and they'll give direction for that. Councilwoman Dimler: Can we put that in the form of a resolution? We as a body can have a resolution. ' Orlin Schafer: I don't think Boards of Review can make resolutions. I think they have to refer that to the Council as a whole and then the Council makes a resolution. So it comes out of these Minutes. It can't come out of these ' Minutes as a resolution. Scott Winter: If I could make one point. For point of equalization then are ' you saying you're using 10 acres for this. I don't know if it's Lutheran or whatever church on TH 5, or used to have their access off of TH 5 right by the hill. Now they have 15 or 20 acres. Are you saying then 10 or 15 acres of their should be taxed. . . Mayor Chmiel: I'll go as much as up to 20 acres on this particular one. ' Councilman Mason: Well if it's 20 acres for one it 's got to be 20 acres for another. ' Mayor Chmiel: That's right. That's why I changed it from the 10 to the 20. Councilwoman Dimler: Basically what we're saying is churches are tax exempt now up to 20 acres. Scott Winter: I just wanted to get that point of view because I think you should do it as a city wide equalization. Mayor Chmiel: I went and looked at the other churches and each of the other churches are much less. Now the Lutheran church, are you sure that it's at 20 acres? It doesn't look like a 20 acre parcel. 16 Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 Scott Winter: It 's a long strip along. Orlin Schafer: Long narrow strip. I Scott Winter: Along the highway there. Councilman Workman: All the way to the new TH 101? Scott Winter: No. Yeah. Councilman Workman: That 's not their's anymore. Scott Winter: It isn't their's anymore? ' • Mayor Chmiel: No. Don Ashworth: Yeah, Rosemount purchased the first portion and actually the City had purchased part of it . That was part of that whole assessment question. Then there was further acreage reduction, I'm not sure if that was a reduction but Roberts Automatic straightened out the line. The line used to jog and they straightened the line out. Scott Winter: I just wanted to make sure that you didn't say one and point to another one as over that acreage amount and that 's really what. . . Mayor Chmiel: Whatever the Lutheran church size is, that's what we'll limit it to. Councilwoman Dimler: Or the largest parcel already in existence. Mayor Chmiel: Right . Any additional discussion? Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilwoman Dialer seconded to ask the County Board to ' consider making the Eckankar parcel tax exempt for the total acreage equal to the largest church parcel currently in the city and the remainder of the Eckankar property to be taxed at the farm rate. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Don Ashworth: We need one motion now that would adopt all of the changes by the Assessor not already made. Councilwoman Dimler: Can I make the motion? ' Mayor Chmiel: Certainly. Be my guest. Councilwoman Dimler: I have a surprise. I move to approve all the reductions ' as recommended by the Assessor's office and all those with which we dealt here this evening. And then also on top of that, all other residential properties that didn't get an adjustment be reduced by 2%. _ Mayor Chmiel: All other no adjustments or is it 2%? 1 17 , Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 1 Councilwoman Dimler: All residents. II Don Ashworth: The question becomes, is the residential values. Councilman Wing had asked me earlier today you know, what does that equate to and I had thrown out , I don't know. I would guess somewhere around 2'c. I have no idea if that's II a correct number or not . • Councilwoman Dimler: Is our legal limit 1%? Then I'll go with that . Whatever our legal limit is. Don Ashworth: But as I mentioned to Councilmember Wing, that type of an adjustment could very easily put us into a theshhold where the State could come I in and move all parcels back up 5'c or 6%c. You get to a point with that type of a change that you may create more harm than good. Orlin? ' Orlin Schafer: In fact I've got to go before the State Board June 3rd and argue three jurisdictions already in the County that we are on the threshhold of 89.9 and they were going to give us 5% increase. I mean I do not want to see Chan I back in that situation that we had only 1%c to play with in years past . It happened many times. It was due to the assessment process that we boosted it out of the 89 percentile over the 90. This year we started out at 93%c and we were hoping to hold that. I mean this is the first year we've managed to do 1 that in the 3 years I've been here. I really don't want to see that happen where we have to go down there and spend 45 minutes arguing with people who don't care one way or the other and they'll just put a blanket on. IICouncilwoman Dimler: I understand that . I guess the reason, as I read this report I was really frustrated because I saw that out of the 232 that we had presented, 139 of them received adjustments which is well over 1/2. Then the I lowest satisfaction that anyone got was $900.00 and then all the way up to $136,500.00 and I know that was commercial but still, and I just was real frustrated with what again, seeing homes in the same neighborhood. Some got ' adjustments. Some didn't get any and so I thought the way to equalize that was to give them the legal limit of reduction. ' Mayor Chmiel: But if you look at the total numbers. . .within the city, this would rank about a 5;, which is not bad. Councilman Wing: It 's like an election. You know only a certain percentage Ivote and the one's that vote speak and I think the ones that came in and took the time to complain or filed this adjustment are the ones we're dealing with on a percentage wise. And it left me also feeling that the valuations are maybe a ' little higher than they need be. They've been created artificially high and if we allow them to sit at what I consider to be somewhat artificially high based on these adjustments, then the next adjustment is just continuing this trend of ' going out of sight and I don't know when it's going to stop. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, that's true and if I can just ride on that a little bit. My market value went up also. I didn't contest it only because of the position IIthat I'm sitting but mine went up another $23,000.00 as well. Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah, I'm in the same boat. But I think those that took the time you know, if it isn't going to bust our whole system here. 18 Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 Mayor Chmiel: Well I get concerned with that and I sort of agree with Orlin on that particular point of if we start changing it and start requesting for the additional 2 then he's got to go back and fight with the system and it is a problem. I would just as soon not, at this particular time but you have a motion on the floor and I'll call for the second. Is there a second? Councilman Wing: I'm going to second that only because I think I'd like to see the Council take a stand and kind of draw the line. I guess I would have preferred even 1% less complication but at least allow us to say, that 's really not a large devaluation but it says we hear what you're saying and we think things are getting out of hand. Councilwoman Dimler: And I don't mean to throw us into trouble so can we just leave it at the percentage? Like I said, if it 's 1% that keeps us out of trouble, I'll go with 1. Orlin Schafer: Can I ask a question? Mayor Chmiel: Yes. Orlin Schafer: When you stated that, did you mean only those people listed here or are we talking. . .? t Councilwoman Dimler: Yes. Only the people that came in and didn't get any = adjustments. Or do you want to go. Mayor Chmiel: No, I couldn't go that. Councilwoman Dimler: Do you want to go total? Okay, total. ' Councilman Workman: Didn't the City of Minnetonka 2 years ago do that? A blanket 1%. It isn't 1'c. Orlin Schafer: 1'c is the maximum you can take off your roll. Councilwoman Dimler: Then that's fine. Councilman Workman: That's what I thought you were talking about . Councilwoman Dimler: Well that's fine with me. I'd love that. ' Mayor Chmiel: Then you're going to have everyone come in and start. Orlin Schafer: These reductions already indicate a fourth of 1% that are in here so if you're going to add to that, you're dealing with less than a half a percent. And a half a percent on a $68,000.00 house is not going to amount to a whole lot except a lot of book work. (There was a tape change at this point in the meeting. ) Don Ashworth: . . .1%c of all values within the community. 1 19 ' Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 1 Orlin Schafer: That 's why I cautioned you not to lower, I mean not to reduce or decrease the amount we were dropping on some of these because we recognize, in a lot of these as you read through this, you'll find that we were not allowed access on the initial assessments. On the initial review of the property and so as a result of those reviews, we have gained access when we made the adjustments ' and we did them numerically. It was not done by percentages or broad based blankets. 1 Mayor Chmiel: I tr nk too that what we're looking at is everybody's assessments are going up. There's no question. There's got to be a leveling spot and a stopping point because before we know it, people who can afford those houses right now, I think as I mentioned before, can afford to pay even $10,000.00 or • $12,000.00 in taxes. But when it comes to them selling their home, they've got problems because there aren't that many people that want to assume that amount of taxation. But on the other hand, we as a city in the past 3 years have ' reduced taxes as far as the city is concerned. We have kept our taxes down by being as efficient as we have been in reviewing budgets and the rest of it. I think it would probably be not in the best interest at this time other than ' making the motion of, well we've got a motion and a second on the floor. We'll have to vote on it . Let me finish what I was going to say. At least making our concerns back to the County indicating what we basically feel. And I think part of your motion did stress that point. Discussion Tom? ' Councilman Workman: I'm out there looking at homes right now. I sold my home and now I have to buy one. It 's real depressing out there. Now what home ' sellers are basing the price of their home on I don't know but I tell yod what, we as younger people in the community pull up to these houses and say you've got to be kidding me you know. And not only would I not give you what you want but I wouldn't give you half of what you want. So I don't know who's fluffing it all up but it 's fluffed up. I guess I sold my home, I'll tell you guys later what I sold my home for. I sold my home for higher than the assessed value and you know where I live Scott and I probably sold it for more than anybody's sold ' their home in the neighborhood. I'm proud to say that. So people are willing to pay a little bit more and a little bit more and it 's creeping up somehow but I like the flavor of Ursula's idea and I guess I've been thinking about that ever since I knew I was going to sit on this ugly Board again. I don't know that I see that it really throws things out of kilter as much as it does say to people, and we don't have a whole lot to base on this 1%. How it's affecting I things but to say to people that we've got this tool to use and we're going to use it . And when people have come here to talk about their high assessed value and they start talking about the taxes, we all say wait a minute. Wait a minute. We're not talking about taxes. We're talking about assessed values. Well I'm going to turn that around and say I am talking about taxes tonight in how they relate to the assessed value in that we're all really frustrated and believe me we're going to be even more frustrated in the next couple years. Mike ' and I were talking about you know it's tough to have any respect for legislature these days and what they're trying to pull off. Do we dig ourselves a hole by reducing it 1%c? Do we cause problems? Do we cause budgetary problems down the road? I don't think we do but I don't know that for certain but I like the flavor of that idea and that we're, we don't have very many tools and we're kind of all sitting around. What can we do and that's one thing we can do so let's do it. I 20 I Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 II Orlin Schafer: Mr. Mayor? Mayor Chmiel: Yes Orlin. I Orlin Schafer: You as a Board can do as you wish. I'm not trying to you know insinuate that you shouldn't even think about it but I will caution you a bit and that is that anytime any Board has ever moved to make that 1 percentile decrease in value, by whatever percent it took to do it , the State has jumped on them like bees or honey. I mean they scrutinize us the way it is and they will scrutinize you for the next 5 years. As soon as and if something is a little bit out of kilter, they are on our doorstep. Councilman Workman: And again, that's why I don't have a whole heck of a lot of respect for looking down towards St . Paul and all the players down there. We're clean aren't we Don? If they wanted to look at us. Scott Winter: I just want to, as a person that 's going to be out knocking on 1 people's doors next year also, or as soon as this Board gets over in fact . Tomorrow I'll start again on next year's assessment. Looking at number one on your, from the appeal. Mr. Tchen from Cascade Circle which is an area I'm going to go through. You are going to lower that and say Ursula's decision goes through at 2%. Next year I'm going to go in where this person just bought this home at $138,000.00 and is assessed at $119,000.00. I'm going to raise him from your lowered value up. Where am I to stand then at that? I mean you're already .saying that he came in. You're going to lower it and you expect me to go out there and say hey I'm going to raise you up $20,000.00? I mean where do you want to put me in this position also because I have to deal with all these people now too. Councilwoman Dimler: Are you saying 2% would bring him down to what? 1 Orlin Schafer: You'd only lower him $1,000.00 but it's still, how do you go out and explain then that you're going to add $18,000.00 when this Board established a value at . Scott Winter: Saying that he was too high. You're going to lower him 2% already and then how am I going to go out and say that I need to raise his value. Mayor Chmiel: Right . I understand your position. Councilman Mason: I'm all for making statements too. Heaven knows I've made more than my share in the past but I think something like the ramifications of something like this, I think perhaps are a little further reaching than just making a statement to the State saying we don't like what you're doing. I think we can do that in other ways. I'd love to give 10% to everybody you know but I don't know that that's our place. And I disagreed with some of the stuff the gentlemen over there have said tonight but on the other hand I think what Scott said is true. If we take out 1% now, he's got to put that back on next year and then more than one person's going to tell him to get lost and I think we're just kind of, I don't know. Kind of the old Don Quixote at the windmills right now with that . I mean I think we should make a statement but I wonder if there's a better way to do it. Not a better way. Different way. 21 a I Board of Equalize+ ion and Review - May 20, 1991 II Councilman Workman: But that 's going to get put on their next year no matter what . If we don't do this or if we do do this. Councilwoman Dimler: It will just be $1,000.00 more next year. Councilman Mason: I guess I take into account what Mr. Schafer said about being scrutinized the next 5 years too and the paperwork involved with all this. I guess I question if it 's worth to do that but . ' Councilwoman Dimler: Mr. Mayor if I might make a friendly amendment to my own motion? Mayor Chmiel: I'm open for a friendly amendment . Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, again I will move now to approve all the reductions ' as recommended by the Assessor's office and those with which we dealt here this evening plus a 1% reduction for all other residential property in the city. ' Mayor Chmiel: Will the second accept the friendly amendment? Councilman Wing: With due respect to Mr. Mason and Mr. Schafer's comments, I ' will . Mayor Chmiel: Okay. We now have a motion on the floor with a 1% overall reduction. ' Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Wing seconded to approve the recommendations by the County Assessor's office plus a 1% reduction for all other residential property in the city. All voted in favor except Mayor Chmiel and Councilman Mason who opposed and the motion carried with a vote of 3 to 2. Mayor Chmiel: Would you like to restate yours for your no vote? Councilman Mason: I'll just stand by what I said. I hope we're not creating a tempest in a teapot here. Making more trouble than it 's worth I guess. ' Mayor Chmiel: I guess that 's really my position. If I had the opportunity to reduce taxes as much as we have in the past and continue to do that, I'd love to do it but I don't want to see us get into a precarious position with the State. Councilwoman Dimler: I don't either. Mayor Chmiel: With that I would move for adjournment . Orlin Schafer: Mr. Mayor, if I could only have just a comment. So I understand ' this motion because we have to push a lot of buttons here. The reductions made in the listing will stand? They don't get the additional lx? Councilwoman Dimler: Right . Orlin Schafer: Then all other residential in the city will get lx, according to your motion? ' 22 1 Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 1 Mayor Chmiel: That 's exactly it . I Don Ashworth: May I ask. There's different classes of residential right? I mean we're not talking about multi family? Solely single family residential? ' Orlin Schafer: Right. I understood it to be all residential. Don Ashworth: All residential? ' Orlin Schafer: Apartments and everything. Don Ashworth: That could exceed the lk overall. Orlin Schafer: It definitely will. It will put you well over 2%. , Don Ashworth: Then we're negating the Board's action. You've just taken an action that can't be taken. So I mean what we've just done is thrown out everything that you've done from before. Mayor Chmiel: Do you understand? Councilwoman Dimler: I understand. We've made our statement. , Don Ashworth: If you would further restrict it to single family residential, you might squeak under. He said a quarter of 1% so it 's 3/4. I don't know the commercial and industrial. Councilman Wing: That was my intent of the second. I Don Ashworth: All single family might make it. Councilwoman Dimler: I have all other residential by 1%. ' Councilman Workman: What's single family? I don't live in single family. Don Ashworth: I think a duplex is still counted as single family right? Orlin Schafer: You can word your motion any way you'd like. I mean I just want to clarify it because I have nothing to do about it. I mean we'll do it. . . Councilwoman Dimler: I move for reconsideration to amend the motion. ' Councilman Workman: Can you do that? Mayor Chmiel: Yes, the majority can. Councilman Wing: Then I will second that. Councilwoman Dialler moved, Councilman Wing seconded to reconsider the previous motion. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Councilwoman Dimler: And now I will amend the motion to make the last portion ' of it all other single family residential reduce by 1%. 23 ' Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 II Councilman Workman: And I will need a clarification on what single family fa ily means. Don Ashworth: Well what Orlin is saying is you can make that definition. You can say that that includes duplexes, fourplexes, apartments. Orlin Schafer: Triplexes. Fourplexes won't . Triplexes and under. Don Ashworth: Okay. Mayor Chmiel: Triplexes and under. Does everyone understand the motion? Councilman Workman: I've got a whole neighborhood full of that . Scott Winter: No, see your's are individual owner units so they're single family residences. Yours are single family. It 's in a fourplex building but your a single family residence. Councilman Mason: How can you decide that triplexes are going to get 1% and ' other people aren't? I mean that doesn't seem very equitable to me. Councilwoman Dimler: I guess my main point here is that we take a small step in ' the right direction and let 's see how it comes out for this tax year and then if we didn't get into trouble, then we'll take action next year at looking at the other residential. Councilman Workman: Meaning if one person owns a triplex and rents it out . Orlin Schafer: He qualifies. Councilman Workman: But the person who owns a quad and rents them out doesn't? ' Orlin Schafer: Doesn't . Councilman Workman: But a person who owns one, okay. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, does everyone understand the motion? Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Wing seconded to approve the following recommendations of the County Assessor's office plus a 1% reduction for all other single family residential property in the city. All voted in favor except Mayor Chmiel and Councilman Mason who opposed and the motion carried with a vote of 3 to 2. Mayor Chmiel: I'm still standing by my position of what I said before. 1 r 24 Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 Ref. Name, Address No. and Phone No. PIN Comments 1. Jon T. Chen R25.5500140 Purchased home November, 1990. 93 Cascade Circle Their home was assessed approx. 470-9239 $30,000.00 more than the rest II of the neighborhood. No - landscaping in their yard, with pictures illustrating this. ' County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment EMV $119,200.00 2. Anne Karels R25.0350800 Bed & Breakfast business in city. 1 1161 Bluff Creek Dr. Purchased in 1988, assessed at 445-2735 $76,200. In 1990 it increased to $81,100. and 1991 to $123,600. No changes in property. Land value of $61,000. is real problem. 1 acre between 212 and swampland. Land in Hesse Farm, of 4 and 5 acres, is assessed between $80,000. and $90,000. Feels her land should be around $16,000. and $20,000. County Assessor's Recommendation: No Adjustment EMV $123,600.00 I 3. Kevin/Valette Finger R25.0241300 Assessment went up almost $42,000. 9151 Great Plains Blvd. Feels assessment should be gradual 445-2735 instead of all in one year. If assessment is correct, would like to sell to City. Two houses on property. One valued at $94,200. and the other at $199,700. Three years ago bought house $141,000. Owns 5 acres total of which about 2 1/2 acres is unbuildable plus 150 foot wide easement for Pipeline which amounts to about 1 acre which is unbuildable. No city services, i.e. sewer, water. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $293,900. by $18,100. to $275,800. 4. Joy Tanner R25.7950220 Smallest home on street. 24 x 48 9243 Lake Riley Blvd. with 20 x 24 attached garage. EMV 445-5661 jumped 47% since 1990. Refinanced a month ago and EMV was $3,300.00 higher than mortgage company would refinance. I 25 ' Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 Ref. Name, Address No. and Phone No. PIN Comments . II 4. Joy Tanner (Con't ) 1 County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $128,300. by $3,800. to $124,500. 1 5. Jim Duchene R25.1620200 Appeal in District Court so he 961 Lake Lucy Rd. waived his right until he meets 474-8829 with the Court . IICounty Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment EMV $194,900. I 6. Dan Beckman 6895 Chaparral Lane R25.2000680 Would like map of neighborhood to compare similar property values 474-1065 and wanted to know if new building I influenced assessment values. The County Assessor stated they did. Property value increased 35%. I County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $95,200. by $6,100. to $89,100. l 7.* Rosemary Mingo 825.0123000 Stated she had submitted a written 7601 Great Plains Blvd. explanation. II County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $118,700. by $8,000. to $110,700. 8. Douglas Rood R25.1600470 Bought property for $6,500. about I 6650 Mohawk 474-0729 5 years ago. Basic metal building with shed behind it. Upgraded electrical and plumbing in it . 1 Assessment increased 400% from $10,000. 3 years ago to $41,000. this year. He owns four lots of 20 x 100 which are unbuildable. 1 County Assessor stated that they did not have the information stating lot was unbuildable. IICounty Assessor's Recommendation: No Adjustment EMV $41,200. II 9. John/Elaine Malakowsky R25.1200050 Live on TH101 next to huge ravine. 10301 Great Plains Blvd. Assessment jumped $25,000. with 445-1425 no improvements in last 10 years. II Feel ravine is a real deterrent to property value. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $112,900. by $10,300. II to $102,600. II26 II Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 Ref. Name, Address No. and Phone No. PIN Comments I 10. Lawrence/Pam Freiberg R25.2950010 Built new house in established 2730 Orchard Lane - neighborhood. Last lot which was 470-1193 basically a swamp with a hill on it . Agreement with Watershed District and ONR to not disturb drainage ditch on property. Mortgage appraisals, highest of three was $195,000. with a number of discredits, i.e. located on TH 7, drainage encumbrance, and Mother-in-law apartment that is not rentable. Assessed at $212,000. which he feels is too high with the discredits. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $212,100. by $11,000. ' to $201,100. 11. Robert Harrington R25.8580090 Land value in comparison to , 481 Trap Line Lane neighbor is too high at $43,000. 474-0704 Would like consideration of land value as well as the price of the property in relation to others in marketplace. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $266,200. by $6,800. to $259,400. 12. John T. Daniel R25.7610070 1991 EMV was $85,500. and for 1992 7478 Saratoga Dr. jumped to $131,400. with no 934-0206 improvements. Real estate evalua- tion to sell house at $116,000. and taking out realtor fees, etc. might get about $103,000. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $131,300. by $8,300. to $123,000. 13. Karen Oleson R25.0030800 Assessment increased $34,600. with 1935 Stoughton no improvements or repairs. House Chaska built in 1927. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $84,000. by $19,600. to $64,400. 14. Kenneth/Mary Pung R25.0253500 Have lived in house for 26 years. I 620 West 96th Street 1980 EMV was $44,000. 1981 was 445-2097 $64,000. 1982 was $66,700. during which time he put a $20,000. addi- 27 I Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 IRef. Name, Address No. and Phone No. PIN Comments _ I 14. Ken/Mary Pung (Can't) tion onto house. 1983 EMV went up ' to $96,000. Should have contested at that time, but didn't . Value is higher than comparable ' property. 1984 went to $98,000. In 1986 it dropped to $95,000. and has been at $95,000. since 1986. This year value increased to ' $135,000. , an increase of $40,400. Feels his house is assessed higher • than rest of neighborhood. County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $135,400. 15. Cecil/Jane Kubitz R25.7600070 Assessment jumped $20,700. in one 7492 Saratoga year. Statement says Saratoga First Addition, Green Acres which he would like clarified. Have new ' subdivision behind their home which has caused water problems. Home is not comparable in value to ' rest of neighborhood. County Assessor's Recommendation: No Adjustment to EMV $100,700. 16. Curtis Bardal R25.3320200 Built house in 1986 and moved in 10301 Heidi Lane in November of 1986. In 1989 added Chaska a deck which Scott Winter came out ' 445-8253 and looked at which raised assess- ments 14%. Didn't protest at that time. 1991 assessment increased 17% for total of 33% mark-up. No city services to home. Feels home is assessed higher than comparable property in Chanhassen. ' County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $243,200. by $13,500. to $229,700. 17.* Donald E. Halla R25.0252300 Property is Green Acres which was 10000 Great Plains Blvd. valued at $90,000. in 1990. 1991 445-6555 was $128,100. at first and then revalued at $234,700. on Green Acres. Changing Green Acres of $144,000. Was forced to subdivide ' due to City pressures in order to. maintain land values. Subdivision was not registered until March of 1991. Understands assessments are 28 Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 Ref. Name, Address No. and Phone No. PIN Comments I 17. Donald E. Halla (Con't ) established on January 2, 1991, which should have been under Green _ II Acres. . County Assessor's Recommendation: No Adjustment to EMV $264,400. GA $224,300. 18. Richard A. Derhaag R25.0251900 Value last year was $84,200. and 711 West 96th Street jumped to $117,500. this year. 445-6817 An increase of $33,300. which he feels is excessive. County Assessor's Recommendation: No Adjustment to EMV $117,500. 19. Wm E. Engebretson R25.3000780 Realtors stated that assessment 7120 Utica Lane is 15% higher than market value. 474-5634 County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $108,700. by $8,700. , to $100,000. 20. Nick Evanoff R25.3300180 $60,000. increase this year from 1401 Hesse Farm Rd. last. EMV jumped from $139,000. 445-4552 to $198,000. Modest house as compared to neighborhood with no ' city services available and property can't be subdivided in the future. Isn't fair when neighbors built very expensive houses which caused their value to increase so dramatically. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $198,000. by $7,300. to $190,700. 21. Bruce Naustad R25.8060030 Assessed property on 1/2/91 at ' 3940 Stratford Ridge $187,300. when house was under 587-9522 construction. House will be completed in May and will sell for approximately $200,000. Money invested in the property as of 1/2/91 was $138,150. so would like his assessment reduced. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $187,300. by $47,300. to $140,000. • 29 ' Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 IIRef. Name, Address No. and Phone No. PIN Comments . II 22.E David/Kris Struyk R25.7500040 Purchased house on February 8, I 1941 Crestview Circle R25.0032000 1991 for $122,000. which they felt 474-3186 to be a fair market value. Was previously assessed at $102,500. I which was 84c of purchase price. Assessed at $134,300. this year which they feel is excessive compared to fair market value. IICounty Assessor's Recommendation: No Adjustment to $2000 EMV of • $112,800. Reduce $0040 EMV of I $21,500. by $12,300. to $9,200. 23. Robert J. Kahl R25.0500280 Built house in 1959. Have made no I 203 West 77th St . improvements since. Don't think 934-7745 could sell it for assessed value without making some improvements i.e. new roof and new siding. I 32% increase from $63,100. to $82,300. I County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $82,300. by $5,600. to $76,700. 24. Ginny Schuelke R25.1200080 Purchased house in 1983 for I10251 Great Plains Blvd. $71,500. and was assessed at 445-9043 $79,900. Reviewed property record and found there are no notations II of property's detractions, i.e. faces TH 101, in high drainage area where neighborhood drains II through their property and during power outages, they flood. Had to have mound septic system installed which takes away from I the looks of house. Assessment is higher than neighbors. I County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $106,600. by $8,200. to $98,400. I 25. Bruce Koehnen R25,6030160 Vacant lot in subdivision and 1789 Koehnen Circle can't dispute valuation but would 474-9263 like to change property classifi- cation which is adjacent to home- , stead property. Would like to . incgrporate it into homestead lot. Wants homestead classification extended to Don Ashworth suggested he talk IIthis lot. Classification changed. to Paul Krauss. II 30 II Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 Ref. Name, Address No. and Phone No. PIN Comments I 26. Sunil Chojar R25.8520060 2 1/2 lot in Timberwood Estates. 7480 Longview R25.8820070 Bought for future home before II 934-6108 found out how much taxes were. 1989 value was $20,500. 1990 value was same. 1991 value is $41,000. Vacant lot with no services. One-third of lot is wetland. Trying to sell lot for $37,000. to $40,000. for 2 years and can't sell it. County Assessor's Recommendation: No Adjustment to $0070 EMV of ' $95,700. Reduce $0060 EMV of $41,000. by $2,000. to $39,000. 27. Walter Whitehill R25.0092500 Assessment increased 35% and tax 7250 Hazeltine Blvd. increased 71%. Assessor stated 474-4561 assessment was in comparison to ' neighboring property whose assess ments increased 6%, 15%, 11%, 17%, 31%, and 30%. Is looking for equity. When values increased in such wide range, doesn't feel he's getting equitable treatment. Also, doesn't like the notice which says property is evaluated each year when it's not. County Assessor's Recommendation: No Adjustment to EMV $100,400. ' 28. James Cranston R25.1602160 Has a discrepancy with Mr. Winters 474-9327 on square footage of house, upper and lower levels. House is assessed at $165,000. which is far higher than neighborhood. , County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $165,600. by $13,100. to $152,500. 29. Joan Rask R25.6600130 Red Cedar Point area. Seasonal 3728 Hickory Rd. R25.6600131 summer cabin on Lake Minnewashta. 488-8150 250% increase in value this year. Property is a vacant lot which is 40 feet wide which value increased $24,800. The other parcel is also 40 feet wide with a 60 year old - cabin on it which increased $28,900. in value. Both parcels flood every spring. Feel being 31 ' Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 IRef. Name, Address No. and Phone No. PIN Comments I 29. Joan Rask penalized for having 1 of 3 ' remaining cabins. County Assessor's Recommendation: No Adjustment to #0130 EMV of ' $47,100. No Adjustment to #0131 EMV of $36,800. 30. Bev Ricker R25.3500230 25 year old home in downtown ' 7608 Huron Chanhassen near railroad tracks. EMV last year was $74,800. and this year is $99,400. with no ' improvements made to the house. Roof leaks and basement leaks due to a City problem. ICounty Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $99,400. by $5,400. to $94,000. I 31. Phil Gossard RC5.2000010 Homestead property value increased 901 Carver Beach Road R25.1601130 21% this year. Vacant lot is 20 feet wide which abuts homestead. Bought lot at auction for $25.00. Value was $500. last year and $1,000. this year. Unbuildable lot. Would like to know when ' value is going to stop escalating. Would like to know what basis is for valuating a vacant , useless lot . ' County Assessor's Recommendation: No Adjustment to #0010 EMV of $103,900. Reduce #1130 EMV of $1,000. by $500. to $500. II 32. Bob Eickholt R25.2660040 Built house in 1978 and moved in 9390 Kiowa Trail in 1980. In 1986 used same plan and built same house next door with not as many amenities as first house. One house was valued at $112,000. and other ' house was valued at $134,000. from $91,000. which he feels is excessive. The one house sold for $117,000. and he doesn't think he ' can sell other house for $134,000. with less amenities. 32 Board of Equal_ ;-ation and Review - May 20, 1991 Ref. Name, Address No. and Phone No. PIN Comments . 32. Bob Eickholt (Con't ) County Assessor's Recommendation: - Reduce EMV $134,300. by $14,600. to $119,700. 33.* Mrs. Donald Sather R25.8800040 Bought house in 1982 for $125,000. i 418 Santa Fe Circle and it was assessed at $110,000. and the assessments have been going up each year since so should have been complaining 6 to 7 years ago. The whole issue isn't necessarily assessment as much as taxes. Government has to stop spending more money each year and just raising taxes to cover it. County Assessor's Recommendation: No Adjustment to EMV $134,100. 34.* Ann Osborne Bought house for $60,000. almost ' 3815 Red Cedar Point 20 years ago. About 2 years ago piece of property next door was sold for half a million dollars and made into a development . This year their assessment was $232,000. due to development next door. Would like some sort of equity. Remodeled house in 1984 but have made no improvements since then. A year ago it went from $138,000. to $232,000. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $232,400. by $11,700. to $220,700. 35.* Frances Jacques Value increased almost $50,000. 11 House was built in 1948 with no improvements for last 10 years. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $111,000. by ' $23,100. to $87,900. Board of Equalizaton Action: See Page 14. 33 Board of Equaliz,q+ion and Review - May 20, 1991 IRef. Name, Address No. and Phone No. PIN Comments . I 36. Robert/LeAnn Amoruso R25.0122800 Purchase home in Dec. , 1990 with I 7600 Erie Ave market value of $88,100. Assessed 934-8399 in Jan, 1991 at $106,500. County Assessor's f :commendation= No Adjustment to EMV $106,600. 37. Mark/Kathy Ancevic R25.2700510 Assessed in 1989 and 1990 at I 6561 Fox Path $268,200. Assessed for 1991 at 870-5354 (Mark) $336,200. , an increase of . 591-6681 (Kathy) $68,000. in one year with no improvements to house and is Iassessed higher than neighbors. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $336,200. by $31,000. II to $305,200. 38. Gary/Debra Anderson R25.0363500 Assessment increased 66% since II 725 Creekwood 1990 and have no city services, 445-8315 i.e. sewer, water, electric, etc. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $122,400. by $4,900. IIto $117,500. 39. Charles/Ada Anding R25.6600360 Assessment increased 33% from I 3631 So. Cedar Drive R25.6600500 last year on homestead and 150% on unbuildable garden lot with no improvements. Increase has II them in third tier for taxes which increased by 110% due to assessment. II County Assessor's Recommendation: No Adjustment to $0500 EMV of $2,000. Reduce #0360 EMV $153,000. by $5,000. to $148,000. II40. Don Ashworth R25.8820040 Assessed too high when compared to 7401 Longview Circle neighbors. Assessor has incorrect square footage figures on the Ihouse, deck and other amenities. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $115,900. by $1,700. IIto $114,200. 41. Kermit/Adeline Austad R25.1600830 No comment. 980 Carver Beach Road II470-9348 or 474-2277 County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $96,900. by $16,100. Ito $80,800. I 34 II Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 Ref. Name, Address ' No. and Phone No. PIN Comments 1 42. Gary/Amy Bachler R25.6150290 Assessed too high when compared 3911 Crestview Drive with neighboring homes and the cost of building the home. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $117,400. by $13,000. to $104,400. 43. Steve Bainbridge R25.0082600 Assessments increased 38% in one 7351 Minnewashta Pkwy year with no improvements and is 828-8828 higher than neighbors. County Assessor's Recommendation: No Adjustment to EMV $247,900. , 44. Dennis/Ann Baker R25.7950130 Assessment doubled from $107,900. 9219 Lake Riley Blvd. to $206,400. in one year. Was appraised 18 months ago for $160,000. provided a new roof was put on the house. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $206,400. by $31,400. to $175,000. 45. Nella E. Barnes R25.05O0180 Assessment increased from $66,500. ' 203 Chan View to $87.200. with no changes. 934-8444 County Assessor's Recommendation: No Adjustment to EMV $87,200. 46. David/Louise Barness R25.7610170 Assessment rose from $101,000. to 7489 Saratoga Drive $131,500. which is higher than 934-0417 appraisal done on house. Think $105,000. would be more in line. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $131,500. by $8,500. to $123,000. 47. Terrence A. Beauchane R25.0363300 Have an Appraisal Report which 240 Flying Cloud Drive indicates the house is valued at 445-7321 $99,000. ' County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $110,700. by $11,700. to $99,000. 48. Jeffrey/Cindy Beegle R25.2700460 Assessment went up 30% from 3 6471 Fox Path year ago, which means 1O% per 470-5050 or 448-1207 year. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $254,500. by $25,500. to $229,000. 35 Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 II Ref. Name, Address No. and Phone No. PIN Comments . II 49. Hebert Berens R25.0170500 Property was donated to the U of M I U of M Real Estate Office as a life estate. Mrs. Berens has 335 Morrill Hall life tenancy with U of M paying • Minneapolis, MN 55455 real estate taxes. Asssessment 443-2460 increase from $96,900. to I $241,600. in one year with no recent improvements or utilities. ICounty Assessor's Recommendation: No Adjustment to EMV $241,600. 50. Mrs. Timothy Bernier R25.0134300 "Humungous" increaes in market I 8155 Groundview Road value of older home with new homes 934-7424 surrounding it. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $110,200. by $3,900. Ito $106,300. 51. Joe Betz R25.1820630 1990 value was $82,100 and 1991 II 8107 Dakota Lane value was $110,100. for an 934-9328 increase of 34%. ICounty Assessor's Recommendation: No Adjustment to EMV $110,100. 52. Dixon Blosberg R25.0241900 Assessment increased 36% from 530 Lyman Blvd. $67,500. to $91,900. which is I934-1952 excessive. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $91,900. by $7,100. Ito $84,800. 53. Tim Bloudek R25.6100180 Assessment increased 36.8% from 1171 Homestead Lane $127,800. to $174,900. Appraisal I 445-0168 was significantly less. $140,000. would be more realistic. I County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $174,900. by $24,900. to $150,000. I 54. Arlis Bovy R25.8200030 "The increase in the value of my 7339 Frontier Trail property for 1 year is terrible. " 934-8496 IICounty Assessor's Recommendation: No Adjustment to EMV $164,600. II 36 II II Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 Ref. Name, Address No. and Phone No. PIN Comments 55. Arlis Bovy R25.3500240 Double bungalow that is 23 yrs. 7610-7612 Huron Ave. old. Charges rent according to II 934-8496 taxes and can't charge any more than what she is getting now. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $126,000. by $22,000. ' to $104,000. 56. David R. Brenke R25.2021480 Townhome taxes went from $744.00 1035 Pontiac Lane last year to $882.00 this year 470-1266 with no improvements. County Assessor's Recommendation: No Adjustment to EMV $72,600. 57. Roger Brown R25.3300040 Purchased lot for $20,500. and 1200 Hesse Farm Rd. built home for 65,000. in 1980. 445-7575 Assessed value was then $87,000. It gradually increased to $134,000. at which time the Assessor's office said it would probably not increase over the next few years. Increased this year to $205,000. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $205,400. by $24,200. to $181,200. 58. Steve Brown R25.2021370 Purchased home in Dec. 1990 for 7091 Red Wing Lane $85,000. Assessments increased I 474-4401 from $83,100. in 1990 to $97,700. in 1991 with no improvements. The house is in need of repairs. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $97,700. by $12,700. to $85,000. 59. Charles/Annette Buenger R25.7930090 Feels lot value of $45,000. is 520 Bighorn Drive correct and the house should be 949-1306 valued at $145,000. for a total assessment of $190,000. rather than $249,000. which it is presently assessed at. ' County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $216,900. by $900. to $216,000. 37 ' Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 IIRef. Name, Address No. and Phone No. PIN Comments . 60. Robert J. Buresh R25.1510020 1990 values for the two lots are I 5817 Hansen Road 825.1510010 set at $24,800. and $29,300. 1991 Edina, MN 55436 values are $29,300. and $33,800. with no city services available to Iproperty. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce $0020 EMV of $33,800. by $11,300. to $22,500. Reduce $0010 IIEMV of $29,300. by $6,800. to $22,500. I 61. R.L. Carlson 825.7900100 $42,600.00 increase (48X) 7606 Iroquios 934-8351 IICounty Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $130,700. by $8,300. to $122,400. I 62A. Robert Carlson House currently under 3801 Meadow Lane construction. 1 County Assessor's Recommendation: No Adjustment to EMV $112,100. 62. Gary Carlson R25.5080160 Assessed values are higher than I 3831 West 62nd Street R25.5080050 comparable undeveloped lots in 474-3354 R25.5080140 northern Chanhassen 825.5080030 R25.5080120 and R25.5080130 ICounty Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce $0030, $0050, $0120 and $0140 EMV of $30,000. by $2,000. II to $28,000; Reduce $0160 EMV $29,300. by $1,300. to $28,000. 63. Richard Carruth R25.6100120 Assessment value jumped $20,000. I1001 Homestead Lane in 2 years without improvements 496-3317 for an increase of 13.5X. I County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $172,500. by $12,500. to $160,000. II 64. James D. Castleberry R25.8520140 Feels assessment is overvalued 2051 Oakwood Ridge when compared to neighbors. 474-2224 Would have to sell home for II $20,000.-$30,000. less than assessed value. County Assessor's Recommendation: No Adjustment to EMV $263,500. II II 38 II Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 Ref. Name, Address I No. and Phone No. PIN Comments . II 65. Chan Realty 25.1730010 "Should be $303,300. " 33 10th Ave S Suite 100 II Hopkins, MN 55343 County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $439,800. by II$136,500. to $303,300. 66. John D. Rice Law Firm 25.7750030 Assessed values for downtown Chanhassen Bank/ 25.7750040 properties are too high. States II Mithun Properties 25.7750050 proposed resolutions in attached 25.0122200 letter. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce $0030 EMV of $101,000. by I $43,000. to $58,000.; Reduce $0040 EMV $92,500. by $40,000. to II$52.000.; Reduce $2200 EMV of $1,617,000. by $292,000. to TIF agreement of $1,325,000.; and Reduce $0050 EMV of $405,000. by I $180,600. to $225,000. 67. Chan Bowl R25.1950020 Assessed value too high. Are II Daniel F. Dahlin R25.1950021 currently getting appraisals. John Dorek (934-6603) 581 West 78th Street 690-1387 I County Assessor's Recommendation: No Adjustment $0020 to EMV of $1,683,700. and no adjustment II$0021 to EMV $137,600. 68. W.R. Christensen R25.1600720 Questions how valuation is arrived II 1001 Western Drive at. Real valuation or square 474-9310 footage picked out of hat. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $101,000. by II $2,000. to $99,000. 69. Shirley A. Clausen R25.2030800 "Paid $58,000. December 1, 1991" II 7264 Pontiac Circle 474-6108 County Assessor's Recommendation: No Adjustment to EMV $68,200. I 70. Donald C. Coban R25.0231100 Assessment increased from $78,600. 8821 Sunset Trail to $96,600. (over 22%) with no II 448-4803 city services provided. County Assessor's Recommendation: No Adjustment to EMV $123,900. II 39 I II Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 Ref. Name, Address No. and Phone No. PIN Comments 11 71. Charles Coffee R25.7610090 Assessment of $158,000. is higher II 7474 Saratoga Drive than market value. Assessment 934-6757 should be around $132,000. to $134,000. IICounty Assessor's Recommendation: No Adjustment to EMV of $149,000. Board of Equalization and Review Action: See Page 9. 1 72. Leigh Colby R25.8200090 Assessment of $123,000. is "far" 7307 Laredo Drive too high due to shape of lot, I in comparison to neighboring lots, and condition of home. II County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $123,300. by $3,800. to $119,500. 73. Kyle/Sandra Colvin R25.0252000 Assessment increased from $88,000. I 701 West 96th Street last year to $141,200. this year. 445-2972 $50,000. increase which is larger than cost of improvements. IICounty Assessor's Recommendation: No Adjustment to EMV $141,200. 74. Sandra L. Craig R25.1820650 Assessed at $81,000. in 1990 and I 8111 Erie Circle and $105,700. in 1991. Has been for sale for past 6 months at $119,900. without selling which IIindicates it 's overpriced. County Assessor's Recommendation: No Adjustment to EMV $105,700. II75. Jerry Cronable R25.3320120 Assessment increased $70,000. in 10320 Heidi Lane one year. Chaska, MN 55318 I445-8357 or 341-6361 County Assessor's Recommendation: No Adjustment to EMV $292,400. II76. Richard M. Czeck 825.8520100 Lot is assessed higher than paid 6147 Chasewood Pkwy #101 for 2 months ago. Paid $35,000. IIMinnetonka, MN 55343 and assessed $40,000. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $40,500. by $5,500. to $35,000. 1 II 40 II Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 Ref. Name, Address li No. and Phone No. PIN Comments . II 77. Peter Dahl R25.0800040 Valuation is excessive to market 2200 Frontier Court paid. 937-5256 County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $99,200. by II $7,300. to $91,900. 78. Karon A. Davis R25.7900290 Assessment is high compared to II 7602 Kiowa Avenue neighbors and condition of house. 934-6696 ' County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $98,200. by I $11,000. to $87,200. 79. Richard/Karen Dee R25.3300140 Excessive increases in valuation 1201 Hesse Farm Circle over last 3 years. $157,400. in II 1989; $204,300. in 1990 and $237,800. in 1991. I County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $237,900. by $8,300. to $229,500. 80. George/Marian DeWitt R25.7950160 Assessment too high when compared II 3127 4th Street S.E. with neighboring properties. 331-2817 Lot is valued too high at $44,500. II Empty lot in area is valued at $22,500. County Assessor's Recommendation: No Adjustment to EMV $68,200. 1 81. Alan Dirks R25.795OO8O Assessments increased 3O% and 100% 9203 Lake Riley Blvd. R25.7950150 during a time when the market has II 496-1599 "nose-dived" or at the very least , "flattened". County Assessor's Recommendation: No Adjustment to $0080 EMV of I $168,900. and no adjustment to $0150 EMV of $22,700. II 82. Jim Dockendorf R25.852O150 Purchased lot for $38,400. and 7601 Chanhassen Road was assessed at $40,500. Would like assessed dropped. I County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $40,500. by $2,100. to $38,400. I II 41 1 I Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 II ' Ref. Name, Address No. and Phone No. PIN Comments 11 83. Richard/Kathy Dorfner R25.1800280 Assessment increaesd $50,000. II 8026 Cheyenne Avenue since 1979 and $22,000. last year Chanhassen Estates Increase is higher than neighbors. I County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $112,000. by $3,400. to $108,600. 84. Robert E. Drury R25.0361100 Assessment and taxes too high. /I 575 Flying Cloud Drive 445-3414 or 445-3414 I County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $143,100. by $5,800. to $137,300. 85. Len/Marlene Dusoski R25.1600110 "Cashier check for assessed value 1 1000 Western Drive of house and it's t'our's_! " 474-7819 IICounty Assessor's Recommendation: No Adjustment to EMV $93,900. Board of Equalization and Review Action: See Page 5 II86. Randy Dusoski 825.0920010 House is not worth assessment . 9270 Kiowa Trail 496-2556 ICounty Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $105,700. by $12,900. to $92,800. II87. Milt Edgren R25.2670080 Assessment should reflect purchase 6257 Chaska Road price last June of $204,000. I474-7725 or 933-2135 rather than $215,900. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $215,900. by $11,900. to $204,000. II88. Rollin W. Fahning R25.0253210 Assessment of $123,900. is too 720 West 96th Street high considering half of land is 1 swampland and no improvements to justify 39% increase. II County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $123,900. by $10,400. to $113,500. 89. Robert/Gwen Filippi R25.6070070 Assessed too high in comparison II1731 Wood Duck Lane to neighbors. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $205,900. by II $26,300. to $179,600. 42 II II Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 Ref. Name, Address No. and Phone No. PIN Comments i 90. Russell L. Frederick R25.0241200 36% increase in valuation with no 540 Lyman Blvd. city services available now or I 934-1951 or 553-6603 near future. County Assessor's Recommendation: No Adjustment to EMV $106,900. ' 91. Frisk Incorporated 825.5570010 Empty lot and house under 13817 Frontier Lane R25.5570020 construction until Jan, 1991 are Burnsville, MN taxed way too high. 432-4584 County Assessor's Recommendation: No Adjustment to $0010 EMV of $30,000. and no adjustment to $0020 EMV of $106,900. 92. Scott Gavin R25.4070130 Appraised in April, 1991 for ' 1851 Lake Lucy Lane $232,000. and assessed for 474-2164 $248,700. . County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $248,700. by $16,700. to $232,000. 93. Dale/Mary Anne Geving R25.3500200 Market appraisal done last year 7602 Huron was $102,000. and assessed at 934-7761 $111,000. Would probably have a difficult time selling house for $98,000. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $111,300. by ' $9,300. to $102,000. 94. Earl C. Gilbert III 825.6930030 Taxes increased from $1,246. to 6901 Galpin Lake Blvd. $1,782. with no improvements. 470-1718 County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $108,800. by I $5,800. to $103,000. 95. William Goers R25.0232200 Assessed higher than neighbors 1601 Lyman Blvd. 825.0231300 with comparable property. 448-6593 or 448-1322 County Assessor's Recommendation: No Adjustment to $2200 EMV of , $65,100. and no adjustment to $1300 EMV of $140,000. 43 11 Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 Ref. Name, Address No. and Phone No. PIN Comments . II 96. Robert/Barbara Grant R25.6200020 Assessment in 1989 were $244,400. II 6454 Murray Hill Rd. and in 1991 were $282,600. Added Excelsior , MN 55331 -a swimming pool which should only 470-0213 or 448-8016 add $10,000. to assessment. 1 County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $282,600. 97. Dale/Peggy Gunderson R25.8720010 Assessment increased 27.8% in one II 845 Creekwood 445-8985 or 884-5622 year with no city services and • living on private driveway with public easement for Bluff Creek IIGolf Course. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $139,100. by I $9,100. to $130,000. 98. Jim Gunville 825.7900320 Misclassification of house which 7608 Kiowa Avenue resulted in higher assessment. I Assessment of $130,200. should be $106,300. II County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $130,200. by $23,900. to $106,300. 99. William Haeuser R25.6100050 Property had been listed for II9600 Flintlock Trail $169,900. with no offers. Assessed at $183,300. which is a gross overestimation. ICounty Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $182,800. by $19,000. to $163,800. II100. Howard R. Hanson R25.3100020 Increase in assessment is not 6210 Cardinal Road comparable to cost of living 474-1387 increases with no improvements. IICounty Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $98,500. I 101. Maynard Happe R25.1300030 R25.0362200 One parcel increased 45% and the 495 Lakota Lane other 27%. He is 91 years old. II County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to $0030 EMV of $139,900. and no adjustment to $2200 EMV of $84,100. II II II 44 1 Board of Equalization.and Review - May 20, 1991 Ref. Name, Address No. and Phone No. PIN Comments _ f 102. Eileen Hassel R25.2700290 Assessed at $284,500. and house Lake Region Properties, Inc. is new construction which is I 1055 E. Wayzata Blvd. - presently for sale at $299,000. Wayzata, MN 55391 Assessed too high in comparison to neighboring properties. , County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $284,500. by $5,500. to $279,000. 103. Joseph W. Hautman R25.7400030 Assessment increased from $167,100 8551 Tigua Circle to $219,000. Purchased home for $200,000. 2 years ago. TH 212, which is going to be very close, will actually decrease value. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $219,900. by 1 $19,900. to $200,000. 104. Michael/Debbie Hayaock R25.2700110 "Why the increase? Why so much?" , 6460 Fox Path 474-9461 County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $272,400. 1 105. James R. Hedberg R25.0260500 71? increase in taxes and 36% 750 Pioneer Trail increase in valuation is excessive 445-6908 for one year. 1990 Tax Statement lists property value at $103,300 and postcard states $107,800. House is in need of extensive repairs. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $107,800. by r $10,800. to $97,000. 106. Joel W. Hedtke R25.7900380 Assessments should be raised over ' 7611 Laredo Drive a 5 year period rather than 1 934-5365 or 646-Beep year. County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV. 107. Dan/Karen Herbst R25.2610040 Assessed at $530,600. when should 7640 Crimson Bay Road be no greater than $450,000. when 474-5031 or 888-9561 compared with neighboring property and appraisals done. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $530,600. by $65,700. to $464,900. I 45 11 Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 IIRef. Name, Address No. and Phone No. PIN Comments . I 108. Alphonse/Mary Herzog R25.6100200 Increase of $43,000. or 34% is not I1191 Homestead Lane comparable to professionally appraised value. I County Assessor's Rr-ommendation: Reduce EMV of $167,900. by $20,900. to $147,000. I 109. Walt/Cheryl Hobbs 8850 Sunset Trail R25.2500030 Assessment increased 21; from $177,600. to $214,700. with no city services available. ICounty Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $214,700. 110. George/Susan Hoff R25.2450030 Incresed from $185,000. to II 221 Frontier Court $198,900. this year, $14,000. 949-2885 or 941-9220 increase when property is in same condition as last year when IIAssessor did valuation. County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $198,900. II 111. Gerald Hoffmann R25.3000130 Questions how assessments compare 6830 Utica Terrace with neighbors. 474-4851 or 934-1810 ICounty Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $142,600. 112. Keith/Mary Hoffman R25.2700120 Increase of $36,400. with no II 6470 Fox Path improvements. 474-4702 or 593-7367 1 County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $278,600. 113. George E. Holasek R25.2020320 "Property value" II 1046 Pontiac Lane 474-8839 County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $70,500. I114. Doyle/Linda Honstad R25.7930010 Assessed value of $207,200. is too 600 Big Horn Drive high due to comparable properties II 949-3957 in neighborhood, creek encroachment problem and leaking basement . County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $207,200. by $10,400. to $196,800. II I 46 1 Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 • Ref. Name, Address 1 No. and Phone No. PIN Comments . 115. Thomas/Susan Huberty R25.2700100 Increase of $41,800. Based on 6450 Fox Path what? 470-1657 or 884-3366 County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $253,900. by $20,100. to $233,800. 116. Alfred A. Iversen R25.1930040 Valuation of addition is too high PMT Corp R25.6420010 and assessment for parcel 1930040 1500 Park Road increased 88.1% from $120,300 to • $226,300. County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to #0010 EMV ' $2,326,000. and no adjustment to $0040 EMV $226,300. 117. Anna Iverson R25.0500120 Question who determines valuation. 223 Chan View County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $73,000. by $9,300. to $64,700. • 118. Bailey Janssen R25.0242000 Assessment went from $97,500. to 500 Lyman Blvd. $151,600. Property is not worth 934-1871 or 448-7445 97,500. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $151,600. by $44,100. to $107,500. 119. James F. Jessup R25.7950240 Property is currently unbuildable I 3323 Lakeshore Court and unsellable due to "Stop Work 448-7148 Order" for gasoline contamination to soil. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $35,800. by $20,000. to $15,800. 120. Bruce Johansson Vacant lots which are assessed Johansson Builders Inc. and taxed too high. 2670 Stillwater St. White Bear Lake, MN 426-8660 or 426-1111 County Assessor's Recommendation: No action warranted as this was considered as a tax appeal. I 47 Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 I ' Ref.' Name, Address No. and Phone No. PIN Comments II 121. David/Clare Johnson R25.0260900 Increased from $93,000. to I821 Creekwood $156,900. with no improvements. ounty Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $156,900. II 122. Linda Larson Johnson R25.2020720 Purchased home in 1987 for 6950 Chaparral Lane $62,500. Assessment of $71,200. 474-9419 is too high. Could maybe sell it II for $64,000. without a realtor and their commission. II County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $71,200. by $8,200. to $63,000. 123. Conrad/Susan Johnsrud R25.3000610 60% increase in assessment and I 7061 Shawnee Lane 100% increase in taxes on an older home (60-100 yrs old) ICounty Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $92,400. 124. Eugene W. Junker R25.2300030 Assessment too high with no city 1250 Hesse Farm Road services. I445-5425 or 448-8620 County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $219,600. by I $15,700. to $203,900. 125. Georgia Kandiko R25.3320270 Increase of $75,000. in one year. I 10421 Bluff Circle Professional appraisal is lower Chaska, MN 55318 445-3406 than assessment . County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $255,100. by $33,600. to $221,500. 1126. James W. Keeler, Jr. R25.2100030 6206 Cascade Pass Purchased home in Oct . , 1990 and market value was $119,700. The 474-9563 or 448-1200 assessment remains at $119,700. II Questioning what will happen in the future. County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $119,700. I127. Norbert Kerber R25.8810560 $17,000. increase (20%) which is 508 Del Rio Drive is higher than neighboring II934-1391 or 939-1382 property. County Assessor's Recommendation: No'adjustment to EMV $111,700. II 48 II II Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 • Ref. Name, Address No. and Phone No. PIN Comments _ 128. Stephen J. Kerkvliet R25.2030080 Purchased home for $76,000. on 7301 Pontiac Circle December, 1989 and have since I 470-1694 finished basement and installed central air conditioning for total of $6,600. Assessment should be higher than presently is. County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $74,800. 129. Joyce E. King R25.0900100 Increase of $52,000. in one year. 9391 Kiowa Trail Due to divorce and refinancing 445-4321 or 949-9001 have had the following appraisals done: 1988 for $123,800; 1989 for $157,000 and 1990 for $170,000. The highest being after some needed repairs. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $193,000. by $20,100. to $172,900. 130. Wayne Kinion R25.4080250 Due to comparable properties in 9451 Foxford Road neighborhood should be assessed at 496-3734 or 944-2110 $249,700. rather than $279,800. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $279,800. by $28,800. to $251,000. 131. W.W. Kirkvold R25.2450040 Assessed 50% higher than next 201 Frontier Court highest valued home in 785-4703 or 934-4856 neighborhood. County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $291,800. , 132. Nancy M. Kiskis R25.7930160 Purchased home for $382,300. on 491 Bighorn Drive August , 1990. Assessed at 937-5669 or 347-0385 $415,500. County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $415,500. 133. Michael/Mary Koester R25.6070220 Appealed assessment last year and 1641 Wood Duck Lane it was cowered from $180,000. to 474-6016 155,000. 1991 assessment is $184,700. . County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $184,700. by $12,300. to $172,400. ' 1 49 I 1 Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 II Ref. Name, Address No. and Phone No. PIN Comments _ II 134 . Thomas F. Kordonowy R25.0083310 - Property is being taxed as three I 3301 Tanadoona Drive 825.0083320 separate parcels when it is one Excelsior, MN 55331 825.0083330 homestead and assessors have used incorrect figures in square Ifootage. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce $3330 EMV of $952,200. by ' $39,700. to $912,500. No adjust- ment in $3320 and $3310 EMV. 135. Tim Kosir R25.2010340 Assessment of $98,900. is higher I 7190 Frontier Trail 926-6504 (w) than comparable neighbors. ICounty Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $98,600. 136. John F. Kreger R25.7900310 $30,000. increase in one year 7606 Kiowa Avenue when house is in need of repairs. II934-5196 . County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $104,600. II137. Mary Kurvers Estate R25.3920180 Assessments exceed market value Mel Kurvers P.R. R25.3920190 of comparable lots. II 7240 Chanhassen Road R25.3920200 • 825.3920250 R25.3920260 R25.3920270 ICounty Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustments to parcels $0180, $0250 and $0200. Reduce the I following EMV's on 50190 from $44,300. by $2,300. to $42,000. ; 50260 from $44,300. by $6,300. U to $38,000.; and 50270 from $43,500. by $8,500. to 35,000. 138. Paul/Jean Larson R25.6600300 Assessment is greatly in excess of I 3609 Ped Cedar Point Drive market value of property. For the purpose or resale, $50,000. worth of improvements are needed. IICounty Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $144,400. by $9,800. to $134,600. I . 1 II50 II Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 Ref. Name, Address No. and Phone No. PIN Comments 139. Roy R25.4100010 There needs to be a top put on 11 3738 Hickory Road taxation. In 15 years will have 474-5518 5518 paid for house again. County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $218,500. , 140. Roger Lee R25.0253300 Assessment increased $18,000. in 600 West 96th Street one year. 496-1343 or 291-8900 County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $95,000. 141. Ken/Judy Lindeman R25.7900110 No improvements over last 10 7608 Iroquois Avenue years. If anything, values have 934-8931 decreased. , County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $106,700. by $10,700. to $96,000. 142. Wyck R. Linder R25.3890020 Increased 100% 7550 Great Plains Blvd.R25.3890010 Increased 32% County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to $0010 EMV of $131,800. and no adjustment to $0020 EMV of $24,500. , 143. Jane Loos R25.1820340 $20,000. increase with one of the 8030 Erie Avenue smaller homes in neighborhood. 934-6521 or 869-0361 County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $91,200. 144. Steve Masterson R25.1820170 Would like review of assessment . 8031 Erie Avenue 934-3187 or 544-6463 County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $106,100. by $3,400. to $102,700. 145. Earl McAllister R25.0800160 Home is 31 years old. Increase of 7510 Erie Avenue $30,000. from $78,700. to $109,900. ' County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $109,900. 51 11 Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 IRef. Name, Address No. and Phone No. PIN Comments I 146. Paul McCallister R25.407O110 Market value in 1990 was $18,100. ' Eden Prairie 941-4687 and market value in 1991 is $30,100. Why double? County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $30,100. 147. Christopher McGrath R25.81001O0 "Why such an increase?' 331 Deerfoot Trail 1 445-6436 or 896-1538 County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $178,600. II148. Leon/Delores Mesenbrink R25.0363200 Assessment increased $31,000. to 250 Flying Cloud Drive $97,200. Private appraisal was 445-3963 or 895-6455 much lower. IICounty Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $97,200. by $9,700. to $87,500. II149. William/Jennifer Meyer R25.3320110 Lot assessment increaesd from 600 East 4th Street $73,900. to $77,400. in recession- Chaska, MN 55318 ary real estate market. 935-7480 or 241-2346 County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $77,400. by ' $4,900. to $72,500. 150. LeRoy Miller R25.275O010 Commercial property assessment I Landco exceeds other commercial property. P.O. Box. 498, Chanhassen ' County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $482,500. by $15,000. to $467,500. 151. Tanna Moore R25.2O60020 On 4-25 purchased these parcels ' 2800 Stone Arch Road R25.2O50030 combined assessed value far Wayzata, MN 55391 exceeds purchase price of $180,000 449-9042 or 449-9043 ICounty Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce 125.2060020 EMV of $222,400. by $72,400. to $150,000. and on Parcel 125.2050030 buyer agreed to remove house EMV of $58,600. A reduction of $28,700. to $29,900. 52 Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 Ref. Name, Address II No. and Phone No. PIN Comments . 1 152. Bennett/Sharon Morgan R25.1620090 Purchased in August , 1990 for 940 Lake Lucy Road $162,500. which is market value of II 470-1782 or 542-0506 property. Assessed for 1991 at . $180,600. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $180,600. by II $18,100. to $162,500. 153. Robyn N. Moschet R25.2300150 Completed building home 11-1-90 II 7600 Cheyenne Trail Lot and constructions costs were 937-1218 or 831-4980 $232,885. Assessed at $249,100. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $249,100. by II $22,800. to $226,300. 154. Edward T. Mueller R25.3300160 60% increase from 130,300. in 1990 II 1251 Hesse Farm Circle to $208,400. in 1991. 445-4314 or 781-3461 Ext . 306 II County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $208,400. by $4,800. to $203,600. 155. Rick Murray R25.4200010 23.25% increase from $140,200. in I 15 Choctaw Circle 1990 to $172,800. in 1991 with the 934-3874 or 473-8511 only addition, a third stall to II the garage. County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $172,800. 156. Bonnie Nelson R25.8200290 Assessment is higher than market II 401 Highland Drive value. Assessed at $103,500. and 934-3749 or 296-7830 should be $100,000. 1 County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $103,500. by ' $3,700. to $99,800. II 157. Dave Nickolay R25.7400060 35.9% increase, or $44,600. for 8500 Tigua Circle property that is half in Rice 934-6761 or 782-2450 Marsh Lake and near proposed I Hwy. 212. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $168,800. by I $16,900. to $151,900. 1 53 I I/ Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 ' Ref. Name, Address No. and Phone No. PIN Comments _ II 158. Richard D. Niemi R25.3320240 Construction not yet completed. II 10460 Bluff Circle Cost of building and land so far 445-0990 is approximately $490,000. and assessed at $605,600. IICounty Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $605,600. 159. Richard/Jane Niemi R25.3320190 Assessment of $221,300. is $35,000 I 10460 Bluff Circle less than cost of land, basement 445-0990 and framing. ICounty Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $221,300. 160. Joseph R. Notermann R25.0351300 Assessment should be $60,000. I 1205 West 6th Avenue rather than $107,000. Shakopee, MN 55379 County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $107,000. I161 . John A. Oberstar R25.2700240 $70,000. increase (40X) from 796 Lake Point $177,000. last year to $243,600. II with no improvements since purchased the home in 1988 for $199,000. House has unique II "Powderpost Beetle" infestation of hardwood floors. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $243,600. by II $16,200. to $227,400. 162. Richard/Frieda Olin R25.7940060 $54,400. increase from $119,000. I9125 Lake Riley Blvd. to $173,400. in one year. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $173,400. by I $13,100. to $160,300. 163. Kurt W. Papke R25.8810120 Assessment of $117,000. is too 403 Highland Drive high compared to neighbors. At II .934-8808 or 368-1225 90% valuation should be $99,000. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $117,000. by I $6,400. to $110,600. 164. Charlotte Pauly R25.8810040 Assessed at $31,600. higher than 506 Highland Drive neighbor with same house with II937-2676 exception of pool and fence. - County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $131,200. II i S4 II Board of Equalization and Review May 20, 1991 Ref. Name, Address II No. and Phone No. PIN Comments . II 165. Patrick F. Pavelko R25.8210020 $74,700. increase from $180,200. 7203 Frontier Trail $254,700. II 934-3262 . County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $254,700. II 166. Raymond C. Peitz R25.7900180 $30,000. increase from $78,000. 7607 Kiowa Avenue $108,900. with market value of I 934-7416 probably $90,000. County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $108,900. Asking Reduced 11 167. James Peterson Assessed Price Price Nelson Group R25.4110060 $40,600. $39,900. $37,000. II 1660 So. Hwy 101 R25.4080210 $41,300. $34,500. $34,000. Suite 428 R25.4080220 $42,200. $34,500. $34,000. Minneapolis, MN 55416 R25.2640020 $40,500. $37,500. $37,000. II County Assessor's Recommendation: See Reduced Prices listed above: 168. Joseph Pfankuch R25.8010180 Purchased property April 25, 1991 II Margery Morgan for $130,500. Assessed at 7664 South Shore Drive $160,700. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $160,700. by I/ $29,800. to $130,900. 169. James/Marilyn Pinkerton R25.1820530 $20,300. increase in one year , 8039 Cheyenne Avenue from $104,300. to $124,700. with no improvements. County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $124,700. I 170. Phyllis Pope R25.0125700 28% increase in assessment from II 620 Carver Beach Road $124,200. to $159,000. Appraised to sell between $142,900. and $150,000. . County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $159,000. II 171. Stephen E. Rademacher R25.0500170 Increased from $65,100 to $92,000 203 1/2 Chan View Why? II 934-0469 after 4:00 County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $92,000. by I *10,600. to $81,400. 55 I II Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 IIRef. Name, Address No. and Phone No. PIN Comments . il 172. Timothy J. Rainey R25.2850020 11: increase from $119,100. to I 6271 Hummingbird Road $131,900. with improvements Excelsior, MN 55331 consisting of upgrading kitchen. IICounty Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $131,900. 173. Mike/Lisa Reilly R25.75420090 Taxes increased from $1,064. in c/o Colleen Wahl 1990 to $6,600. on an unimproved I 2305 Idian Ridge Drive lot with no city sewer or water. • 929-4847 or 927-7701 ICounty Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $116,600. 174. Mitchell/Deanna Remmich R25.8570110 Purchased home March 28, 1991 for I 6301 Trapline Circle $196,000. Assessed at $199,600. 470-5179 or 667-0018 County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $199,600. by I $3,600. to $196,000. 175. Thomas A. Rhode 825.1602060 Taxes increased from $140. to II 6465 Tanager Lane R25.1602070 $1,198. on property that is 934-0482 or 646-8677 R25.1602080 wetland and undevelopabie. County Assessor's Recommendation: All three sites are considered 11 to be buildable: Reduce 12060 EMV $20,300. by $12,300. to $8,000. ; 12070 EMV $2,000. I increase by $5,000. to $7,000. ; and 11080 EMV $2,000. increase $5,000. to $7,000. Total value II of all three lots would be $22,000.00 176. Richard Riegert R25.0242200 $53,000. increase on property I 520 Lyman Blvd. with no city services and no homes 934-1953 or 448-2261 have sold in area for 20 years. How can you determine value? IICounty Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $155,200. II 177. Curtis Robinson R25.0122600 R25.0122600 Questions if independent appraisal 202 West 77th Street 934-6069 or 830-6520 would influence assessment value. IICounty Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $100,500. II II56 Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 Ref. Name, Address No. and Phone No. PIN Comments I 178. Daniel/Linda Robinson R25.1800340 Assessment increased from $102,200 8014 Cheyenne Avenue in 1990 to $115,200. in 1991 with 949-9482 or 949-7029 no improvements. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $115,200. by $4,500. to $110,700. 179. Roman R. Roos R25.1930030 From $74,800 to $165,500. (110%c) 10341 Heidi Lane R25.3320180 From $262,100 to $367,100. (50%) 445-6274 or 474-2125 County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce 90180 EMV of $367,100. by $28,900. to $338,200. and no adjustment in $0030 EMV of $165,500. , 180. Bruce/Susan Savik R25.8220020 Assessment increased $26,300. in 7215 Frontier Trail one year. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $120,000. by $2,800. to $117,200. 181. Tom/Marian Schmitz R25.0151300 Had been trying to sell house for ' 8190 Galpin Blvd. $114,900. and recently lowered it to $109,900. Assessed at $112,800 is too high when can't sell it for $110,000. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $112,800. by $10,800. to $102,000. 182. Gladys Schueren R25.0122500 No comment . 204 West 77th Street 934-6606 or 934-7373 County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $77,500. by ' $7,800. to $69,700. 183. No Schutrop R25.0500410 No comment. 302 Chan View 934-6654 County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $65,100. by ' $4,300. to $60,800. I 57 1 Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 II 'Ref. ' Name, Address No. and Phone No. PIN Comments 184 . Kevin Sharkey Assessed too high in comparison ' 380 Deerfoot Trail with neighboring properties. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $143,100. by $11,600. to $131,500. I185. Thomas L. Shear R25.0500210 Must be a mistake. Please correct 7721 Erie Avenue County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment in EMV $86,600. 186. Dean A. Simpson $64,800. increase from $155,800. ' 7185 Hazeltine Blvd. $220,600. (40k) 474-5523 or 474-3713 ' County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $220,600. by $30,400. to $190,200. 187. Albert/Jean Sinnen R25.0134100 $82,000. assessment on 40 x 24 8150 Grand View Road. home with no city services. County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMU $92,800. II 188. Donald Sitter R25.0240700 26% increase in assessment with 9249 Lake Riley Blvd. no improvements and in a depressed 445-5728 or 448-8094 housing market. County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $189,200. 1 189. Gary A. Skalberg R25.0241800 Increase from $66,700. to $101,700 510 Lyman Blvd. in one year with no improvements. or 452-1116 1934-1903 County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $101,700. ' 190. Adeline M. Skluzacek R25.3500060 Assessment increased $36,400. with 410 West 76th Street the only improvement being an air 934-6895 conditioner. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $116,700. by $14,100. to $102,600. 191. Duane Skluzacek R25.3530090 Would like re-assessment . 1190 Lyman Blvd. 934-6802 or 934-1500 IICounty Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $133,000. by $8,000. to $125,000. 1 58 1 Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 Ref. Name, Address No. and Phone No. PIN Comments 192. Bob Skubic R25.1860400 Constructed house for $140,000. 8619 Chanhassen Hills Drive North and assessed for $151,900. Adjacent properties are assessed between $161,900. 'and $146,000. County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $151,900. U 193. Michael/Jeanne Sorensen R25.0124400 Too High. 7606 Erie Avenue R25.0123600 934-9448 • County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce $4400 EMV $12,400. by $9,900. to $2,500.; and reduce $3600 EMV $124,300. by $6,100. to $118,200. 194 . Joel/Jennifer Spalding R25.8870020 $8,000. increase in one year 8018 Erie Avenue compared to $1,000. in previous 934-3264 or 474-2540 X 4000 4 years. ' County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $81,800. by $4,400. to $77,400. • 1 195. Dean/Susan Stanton R25.7930110 Should be assessed at $50,500. 13135-A 58th Avenue not $105,000. Was purchased for I/Plymouth, MN 55442 $105,000. in 1989 but was found to be buildable only with pilings and are currently in lawsuit with developer who is in foreclosure and close to bankruptcy. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $105,000. by $54,500. to $50,500. 196. Robert/Judy Steffes R25.3300020 $100,000. increase from 1990 to 1350 Hesse Farm Road 1991. Asssessment should be $160,000. . County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $232,300. by $11,600. to $220,700. 197. David Stockdale R25.0101540 Increased 22.6% from $173,600. to 7210 Galpin Blvd. $212,800 in one year with no city 474-7626 or 368-3511 utilities or improvements to home. County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $212,800._ 59 I Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 IIRef. Name, Address No. and Phone No. PIN Comments I 198. David Stockdale R25.0140900 County obtained right-of-way for • ' 7210 Galpin Blvd. 474-7626 upgrading of Audubon Road so valuation should be based oft 7.28 acres, not 7.47. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $162,600. by $3,300. to $159,300. I 199. William L. Stokke R25.4080070 Would like re-assessment . 241 Eastwood Court Valued at $275,000? 496-3764 or 333-7111 IICounty Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $275,000. by $25,200. to $249,800. II 200. Rebecca Strand R25.1860330 Purchased lot in October, 1990 Jeffrey M. Wold for $41,500. Assessed at $55,000. 1031 Barbara Court ' 949-3876 or 831-2300 944-3317 X 413 ' County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $55,000. by $5,000. to $50,000. 201. Deanna K. Stromley R25.2020980 Assessment is wrong when compared 940 Pontiac Lane to neighboring properties. 474-8529 or 448-4848 ICounty Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $67,700. 202. Dale/Cheryl Suiter R25.7900150 Would like reassessment. 7613 Kiowa Avenue 937-0515 or 536-4458 County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $99,000. by $6,700. ' to $92,300. 203. Dan/Val Tester R25.0362900 Would be hard to sell house for 230 Flying Cloud Drive $70,100. 445-1931 ' County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $70,100. 204. Ellis Thomas R25.3500040 Would like re-assessment . 406 West 76th Street ' 934-6459 or 944-2222 County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $117,900. by $14,800. to $103,100. ' 60 Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 Ref. Name, Address II No. and Phone No. PIN Comments . II 205. Tuoi Van Tran R25.2500020 $22,200. increase from 123,700. to Ven Thi To $145,900. II 8900 Sunset Trail County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $145,900. 1 206. Kevin M. Velgersdyk R25.7900120 Increased from $83,000. to 7610 Iroquois Avenue $102,100. Purchased in 1989 for II 949-9166 or 831-8272 $97.000. County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $102,100. 207. Scott Waldack ' R25.6100020 23.5% increase from $113,900. to II 9701 Flintlock Trail $140,700. Market value from 496-2820 realtor is less. II County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $140,700. by $8,700. to $132,000. II 3208. Michael L. Walsh R25.7900010 Too high when compared to 512 West 76th Street neighbors. 934-7841 or 340-8085 I County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $97,100. 209. Mark Walton R25.8810310 30% increase to $116,700. Home II 413 Cimarron Circle is currently for sale at 934-2287 or 475-1079 $107,000. but no buyers. The II realtor has given guarantee of $95,000. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $116,700. by II $10,500. to $106,200. 210. Dale/Marcia Wanninger R25.0151400 $45,600. increase to $116,800. II 8170 Galpin Blvd. with no city services. • County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $116,800. by $13,200. to $103,600. II 211. William/Patricia Ward R25.3000180 Would like a visit from the 6960 Utica Lane Assessor. II 474-4850 County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $165,800. by w II$9,500. to $156,300. II 61 II II Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 I ' Ref. Name, Address No. and Phone No. PIN Comments . II 212. Virginia R. Warren R25.O2431OO $21,000. increase on 5 acres, of I 610 West 96th Street which only 2 are buildable. The rest is wetland. II County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $104,400. 213. Craig/Kristi Weinstock R25.1620130 Should be assessed at $128,000. 1101 Lake Lucy Road when compared to neighboring I470-1065 or 828-0550 properties. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $163,100. by $4,500. II to $158,600. 214 . Wayne 0. Wenzlaff R25.61OO19O 50% increase in one year to 1181 Homestead Lane $165,400. IICounty Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $165,400. by $28,400. to $137,000. I215. Ron/Mary Anne Whipperman R25.881O5OO 43% increase from $76,200. to 403 Del Rio Drive $109,100. for an older home is II934-8398 unrealistic. Count Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $109,100. by $900. to $108,200. I216. Donald/Marsha White R25.8O8OO20 Increased from $203,400. in 1989 8850 Audubon Road to $207,000. in 1990 and to II 448-2486 or 937-6600 $242,800. in 1991. Addition of a deck was in place in 1990. IICounty Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $242,800. 217. Stephen L. Whitehill R25.2300160 Assessment of $149,300. is in c/o C.L. Whitehall excess of current market value I7001 Dakota Avenue and in excess of purchase price. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $149,300. by I $10,500. to $138,800. 218. Steve Wilker R25.O251700 45% increase from $73,800. to 621 West 96th Street $104,800. with only some improve- ' 496-1976 or 448-2851 ments. County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $104,800. 1 . II 62 II II Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 Ref. Name, Address I No. and Phone No. PIN Comments . II 219. David A. Williams Realty R25.2670060 Property was recently sold for 1535 Bavarian Shores Drive . $156,000. which included about I Chaska, MN 55318 $2,500. in personal property. Assessed at $163,300. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $163,300. by $10,000. I to $153,300. 220. Loretta R. Williams R25.0800250 Increased from $63,700. to I 7554 Great Plains Blvd. $97.400. on a 40 year old house. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $97,400. by $7,700. II to $89,700. 221. Jon/Deborah Wilson R25.1800450 30% increase. Feel amount above II 8019 Cheyenne Spur $116,800. is replacement cost, not 934-3976 or 830-2679 what it could be sold for. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $116,800. by I $10,300. to $106,500. 222. John/Janet Wingert R25.1820430 Purchased property in February, II 8048 Erie Spur 1990 for $100,000. Assessments 934-3504 or 553-9161 increased from $87,500. to $115,500. House is in need of II repairs. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $115,500. by $9,300. to $106,200. I 223. Conard/Odelia Winkel R25.8810060 Increased from $95,100. to 505 Highland Drive $117,300. II County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $117,300. 224. Donald R. Winspfening R25.8820080 For 13 years the house has been I 7460 Longview Circle assessed at $92,100. and now it's 934-5477 or 884-6012 $16,000. more. County Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $108,200. II 225. Scott A. Wirth R25.8100080 $165,000. assessment is unfair I 361 Deerfoot Trail when compared to homes sold in the 445-7811 or 930-2255 area. Feel market value is more around $140,000. II County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $165,000. by $29,000. to $136,000. II 63 II Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 IIRef. Name, Address No. and Phone No. PIN Comments _ 1 226. Robert E. Wold 825.0253700 33% increase in one year for a I 730 Pioneer Trail home with no city services or 445-7397 or 726-2809 improvements in last 5 years. II County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $102,800. by $12,000. to $90,800. I 227. Kenneth Wolter R25.8100090 $23,300. increase. Property has 340 Deerfoot Trail a number of items that should be 496-1337 taken into consideration when assessing it 's value. ICounty Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $146,600. by $4,900. to $141,700. II228. John R. Wright R25.8230010 Increased from 127,900 to 147,700 7361 Longview Circle 934-8487 or 241-2280 IICounty Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $147,700. I 229. Ronald Ytzen R25.7950170 Realtor appraisals were all 9227 Lake Riley Blvd. $10,000. to $15,000. less than 445-5418 or 926-6541 assessment. IICounty Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV of $120,300. by $15,600. to $104,700. I 230. David/Diane Zamjahn R25.8610040 $21,300. increase with no improve- 7506 77th Street meats and is higher than Chaska, MN 55318 comparable properties. IICounty Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $151,800. IBoard of Equalization and Review Action: See Page 12. 231. James/Arlene Zimmerman R25.0123900 $129,000. assessment is too high. 7602 Frontier Terrace Basement floods, terrible floor IIplan and bad kitchen set up. County Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce EMV $129,100. by $24,100. Ito $105,000. 232. Kim Jerome R25.2021150 How is value established? 7050 Redwing Lane IICounty Assessor's Recommendation: No adjustment to EMV $113,700. I II 64 II Board of Equalization and Review - May 20, 1991 Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilman Workman seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting of the Board of Adjustment and Review was adjourned at 8:30 p.m. . Submitted by Don Ashworth City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim 1 1 65 , • # A 11 CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MAY 20, 1991 ' Mayor Chmiel called the meeting back to order at 8:40 p.m. . COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Chmiel, Councilman Mason, Councilman Workman, ' Councilman Wing and Councilwoman Dimler STAFF PRESENT: Don Ashworth, Elliott Knetsch, Scott Harr, Todd Hoffman, Jo Ann ' Olsen, Dave Hempel and Scott Harri and Mark Koegler from Van Doren-Hazard- Stallings. ' APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Workman seconded to approve the agenda with the following additions under Council Presentations: Mayor Chmiel wanted to discuss the Metropolitan Council and bring up an item from Willy Molnau; Councilman Workman wanted to discuss West 78th Street ' Detachment, RTB and a recent editorial in the Villager; and Councilwoman Dimler wanted to discuss the possibility of regulating billboards in the city. All voted in favor of the agenda as amended and the motion carried. ' PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None. CONSENT AGENDA: Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Workman seconded to approve the following Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations: ' b. Resolution *91-44: Southwest Corridor Transportation Coalition, Resolution Supporting Continued Federal Funding for New U.S. Highway 212 Project . ' e. Resolution #91-45: Award of Bids for Construction of Auxiliary Turn Lanes on Trunk Highway 101 at Sandy Hook Road and Choctaw Circle; Project 89-26. h. Resolution #91-46: Resolution Approving Gambling Permit Application for Chanhassen American Legion Club Post 580, 7995 Great Plains Blvd. i. Approval of Accounts. II , 1. City Code Amendment to Section 19-142, Surface Water Management Fees, Second and Final Reading. m. Resolution *91-47: Herman Field Park Grading and Surfacing, Award of Bids, Improvement Project 87-07. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. C. APPROVE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO WEST 79TH STREET, EAST ' OF TRUNK HIGHWAY 101; AUTHORIZE ADVERTISING FOR BIDS; PROJECT 91-8. Mayor Chmiel: This is where we're approvings plans and specs for improvements ' to West 79th Street east of TH 101, authorizing bids for the project . I'd like an explanation as to the amount of total dollars on this. Would you like to address that? 1 I ,City Council Meeting -- May 20, 1991 I Dave Hempel : Thank you Mr . Mayor. I will defer that question to our consultant 11 engineer , Mr . Scott Harri. Scott Harri: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. It just seems like I was up here explaining some costs to you just a few weeks ago. On this particular ' project , and which is the normal course, following the preparation of a feasibility study then you ordering the improvements, the preparation of the final plans normally includes a more detailed look at all the work activities that would be assoc =ted with the public improvement . And during the feasibility study there's a line item that gets lumped in to miscellaneous engineering and administrative and legal which is part of the contingency of unknowns for the project . The unknowns for the project are normally those that shake out as far as the small minute details. In this case a separate factor was added to this and we've seen recent bids come in on other projects in the • southwest area right here. Recent bids that show that the unit prices for work activities similar to what we're experiencing here on West 79th are higher than what we had anticipated based on historical costs coming into this. So the combination of those two factors, we recommended a little higher budget than ' what was in the feasibility study. Mayor Chmiel: That was my question Scott . Why $4,000.00 higher than what was ' in the. Scott Harri : Well , the contingency that was in the feasibility study however will cover this new construction cost that we have in front of you so that the ' total project cost of $75,000.00 some odd dollars that was in that feasibility study, that still is a realistic number. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Scott Harri : And that we're seeing just a shifting of some of the costs here. ' Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. I guess I just have some concerns about throwing our estimates out and having the bidders get an opportunity to take a look at it and telling us and trying to get a lower bid and I don't know how we go about those kinds of things. Hopefully the bidders coming in will have sufficient numbers to have maybe a lower bid than basically what we're going in at . ' Scott Harri : We keep the engineer's estimate quite confidential on all these projects. If they took the time they could come and research the public record on what these estimates were but we, at this point in the project , keep that number confident until after the bid opening. Mayor Chmiel: Right . We don't know if there's someone sitting here in our Council chambers or depending upon when you're going to have the bids come in, ' if they sit at one of their friend's home and watches our monitors and TV. I get a little concerned with that. I think we somehow have to be very cautious in allowing our bids going out . That they're going to be a good firm bid of something that 's not overly estimated. 11 Scott Harri : Okay. Very good. And anybody got a question? 1 1 2 1 City Council Meeting - May 20, 1991 Mayor Chmiel : Any other questions? If not , I'll move item 1(c). Is there a second? I Councilwoman Dimler: Second. Resolution #91-48: Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to approve , the Plans and Specifications for Improvements to West 79th Street East of Trunk Highway 101 and Authorize Advertising for Bids; Project 91-8. All voted in 11 favor and the mr4ion carried unanimously. Mayor Chmiel: By the way, don't throw these out . They need them back and you can save another tree somewhere along the way. ' Councilman Mason: I do have a question. How come things are never printed back to back with you guys? With a lot of your stuff. Scott Harri : The back to back printing is all of the boiler plate material that never changes. The stuff that we print that 's newly created for each specific project when we print it , it 's more time efficient for us just to print one side. Councilman Mason: At what point is time efficient as opposed to environmentally conservative? I'm just throwing it out Scott . I mean you know. I think of the thousands of sheets of paper that are wasted. Scott Harri: True and when we do, when we are presented with a thicker volume, ' we just simply don't have the practical binders large enough to do that and that 's why we use the double sided copy but I'll keep that in mind. Thanks for your comment . , D. AWARD OF BIDS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF WELL NO. 6; PROJECT NO. 91-1. Mayor Chmiel: As I looked at this, proposal for the project has been scheduled , to take place Friday, May 17th and at the time I was not in the position to even move this. I would have tabled it because I wanted to see what the bids are. But we were furnished the bids just this evening in the Council chamber and we about know where we're coming from with the total cost . The estimate that was proposed and it 's proposed to the bidders coming in, I will let David. Dave Hempel: Thank you Mr. Mayor. The bids were received and opened up Friday morning for construction of Well and Pumphouse No. 6. The City received a total of 5 bids. The range of bids ranged from $147,000.00 to a high bid of $178,411.00. The engineer's estimate for this project was $158,000.00. It 's recommended that the low bid be awarded in the amount of $147,482.00 to Gilbert Mechanical Contractors contingent upon executing contract agreements and performance bonds and certificate of insurance. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, it 's $10,000.00 lower than the engineer's estimate. He came in at about $158,000.00? Dave Hempel : That's correct . II 3 I City Council Meetinc - May 20, 1991 I Mayor Chmiel : We're right in the ballpark. Okay, any discussions on this? Hearing none, I'll make the motion to accept the bid for Well No. 6, Pumphouse M Control , City of Chanhassen to be awarded to Gilbert Mechanical Contractors Incorporates, 3012 Clinton Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN in the amount of $147,4E2.00. Is there a second? IICouncilman Workman: Second. Resolution #91-49: mayor Chmiel moved, Councilman Workman seconded to award the contract for construction of Well No. 6, Project 91-1 to Gilbert Mechanical Contractors Incorporated in the amount of $147,482.00. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. IIF. LAKE SUSAN HILLS WEST 7TH ADDITION. II Councilman Workman: This is very, very trivial. I won't take up any more time than we need to. Do we already have a Flamingo Drive attached to this? Dave Hempel : That 's correct . The Flamingo Drive is an extension of the Iexisting Flamingo Drive for the 3rd Phase. Councilman Workman: Are there any residents. . . IIDave Hempel : There are existing homes on Flamingo Drive already. II Councilman Workman: Is it too late to get it changed? My point being Flamingo, I don't know what it evokes in you but . Mayor Chmiel: A very graceful bird. ICouncilman Workman: I think we've got Thrush Court near by, King Fisher Court . We've go? that Flamingo doesn't seem is indiguous to the Chanhassen street scape IIthat . A flamingo just doesn't , this isn't Florida. Mayor Chmiel: It just doesn't grab you. IICouncilman Workman: And I'm hoping the rest of the Council kind of sees that it 's kind of, I may not live on a street named Flamingo just for that reason. I mean is that? IICouncilman Wing: No, I feel the same way about Dogwood. That's too late. IICouncilman Workman: It 's a tree. Councilwoman Dimler: Is there an alternate that you'd like to recommend? I Councilman Workman: Well no I don't but just about anything. Flamingo just doesn't seem like it belongs in what we have here in Midwest Chanhassen. I'd like to make a motion if possible to ask the developer, and I'd apologize to the 11 developer for whatever reason he named it that , if in fact there couldn't be an alternate. IIMayor Chmiel: That would be strictly up to the developer I think Tom. 4 II II City Cour:ii Meeting - May 20, 1991 II Dave Hempel : Excuse me Mr. Mayor. We do have the 5th Addition with approximately 9 or 10 lots already fronting Flamingo Drive with a few new home construction under way. It may be possible to work with potential new home owners here to see if we could change that or work with the developer in changing that name. ' Mayor Chmiel : That would entail each of those people making changes in everyt hing they have. Councilman Workman: But are they living there? Have we given Certificate of Occupancies on these homes? Dave Hempel: We may have on a couple of them. There's a few more under ' construction at this time. Councilman Workman: Well maybe we leave it up to them. 1 Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, because it would be. Councilman Workman: Woodchuck Drive or something. I don't know. I guess we maybe can't at this point enforce it but maybe contact them and say if you'd like to, it can't be that big of a deal. I'll make a motion to that regard. ' Councilman Wing: It may be the only bird that starts with the letter F so we may have no alternative. Councilman Workman: No, let 's leave it up to the neighbors. I don't know. Councilman Wing: Mr. Mayor I'll be happy to second it because I think it 's a point well taken but I look to you for advice here prior to doing that . Mayor Chmiel: Well, have we had a platting on that already and signed off on that plat? Dave Hempel : Yes. Mr. Mayor we have. Mayor Chmiel: Meaning it would have to go back through the County and get that all redone at an expense to that individual and I don't think we should incur those costs or have those people incur those costs. If some of them have already have their residences in, they may have that address on there which would have to go through a change again with their banks and so on. If they've already changed their credit cards. Councilman Workman: And that 's what we don't know. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. Well that 's something that we don't know. ' Councilman Workman: If we can check that out and then. Mayor Chmiel: But I would say then that we should have. Councilman Workman: I mean 50 new residents are going to have that for a long time too. 5 1 City Council Meeting - May 20, 1991 Mayor Chmiel . We'll leave that up to the developer himself to see if he so chooses to change it . Is that what you're saying? Councilor_r, Workman: Well yeah. My desire would be to approach the developer in the possible residents there currently and say we would help to expedite that change if possible. Mayor Chmiel : Expedite without cost to the City. Councilwbosn Cimler : And without cost to the residents. Councilmar Workman: If they so choose. ' Mayor Chmiel : Any other discussion? If - hearing none. Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Wing seconded to approve the final plat, construction plans and specifications and development contract, Project 91-9 for Lake Susan Hills 7th Addition with the addition of approaching the developer and residents currently living on Flamingo Drive to see if they're interested in changing the name of the street. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. G. AUTHORIZE PREPARATION OF FESAIBILITY STUDY FOR DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS ON LONE - CEDAR LANE AT TRUNK HIGHWAY 5, PROJECT NO. 90-9. Mayor Chmiel : I had calls from two of the adjacent property owners and before I asked them to come forward I would like, I had some discussions with Dave this afternoon with some other considerations that I looked at . My suggestion is that in looking at what we had seen on the drawings, it appears as though 90: of the runcff is really attributable to the Highway Department . Rather than having the Highway Department fund 2/3 of that as they proposed, I think they should pick up PO% of that cost because they're causing the water runoff onto it which would lower the total cost of the project in itself. I've asked Dave to contact MnDot and discuss this with them and see whether or not they would be amendable to accepting our position which would mean less dollars spent . Do you have anything more to add to that Dave? Dave Hempel : No, Mr. Mayor. That 's basically it . Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. I'd open the floor for either Joe or Scott to come up and present your portions. And if we could limit it to. Joe Mitlyng: 5 minutes? Mayor Chmiel : That 's great . Joe Mitlyng: Mr. Mayor and members of the City Council, good evening. I'm Joe Mitlyng. My family and I live at 3800 Arboretum Blvd. . I've been here before talking about the problems we have with our property with the access directly onto TH 5. You have a copy of the letter that I sent to the Mayor dated May 6th in the packet and if you have any questions about the letter, I'd be happy to do - what I can to try to address those. Since sending that letter, I've had time to give some additional thought to this project . And as I have, it 's occurred to 1 6 Cif/ Council Meeting - May 20, 1991 me that as you think about the problems of the assessments, perhaps one way of addressing this project , if you look at those who benefit by the project . The Mayor is correct and David Hempel and others are able to work out with the State so that a significant portion of the assessments are covered, then I think that 's just fine. But failing that , thinking about who benefits from this project may give us a way to get around the assessment issue. That 's really the on3y issue that 's left . People have raised questions from a year ago when this project was brought before the City Council and it was brought at a meeting of the community, people raised questions. You may remember at that time the idea was to close off Lone Cedar and it would have required the citizens of Lone Cedar to pay a portion of that cost because of the drainage issue. Their drainage was going to come into this project . And as you think about this project , what we've done now is create a plan that addresses the concern that the neighbors raised at that meeting. As far as a right turn lane off of TH 5 and it provides a frontage road for my property keeping Lone Cedar open. Let me give you a handout because there's three points I'd like to make. First , what are the elements of the project in total? Secondly, what are the assessments for? Thirdly, who benefits? In terms of what the project entails, there's actually three parts to the project . One is, did you all get a copy? Mayor Chmiel : Coming slowly but surely. Councilman Mason is having a problem with his coughing and I happen to have a cough drop in my pocket and I was going to assist him but he had a handful there. Joe Mitlyng: There's actually three parts to the project . One is the frontage road that picks up from our driveway and goes up the hill here to Lone Cedar. The second part of the project then is closing our access to TH 5. The third part of the project then is, with that closed, to build a right turn lane that comes up to hook into Lone Cedar. As I thought about it , there are really two questions. One is what are the assessments for? Well, they're' not for either of these roads. The State is going to pay for the entire cost of the frontage road and the right turn lane. The assessment costs are for the storm system that has to be built in the bottom of the ditch because they're filling in the ditch to build these two new roads. Eventually narrowing the size of the ditch to fill in so the storm drainage system that comes through here and there's a short dogleg that comes up into the bottom part of this property if that 's where the drainage comes. That's the only part of the project that ties the drainage off of these lots. The rest of this is just replacing the ditch drainage and the highway. . . Here's for the assessments are for. The assessments are for a drainage system which is really incidental to the total project. The question is who benefits from the project. The last line. Well clearly I do. My family does. Instead of having the access directly onto TH 5, we would access through this frontage road to Lone Cedar and through that, Minnewashta Parkway and they're going to put a light I understand. Minnewashta and TH 5. . . We can get away from the direct access onto TH 5. The residents of Lone Cedar have asked the State for a number of years now to develop the right turn lane. For a variety of reasons. . .up until now been unwilling to put the right turn lane. . . Even the Gauer's benefit . If their wish is to eventually subdivide this property, they need to have a separate road access as part of the city requirements for subdivision. So this road would provide the separate road access to the subdivision of this property. So in summary, what are the costs for? They're for the drainage system. I think the Mayor is accurate. Right on the mark when talking about the highway drainage system. Most of that . . . Who I 7 I/ Cif • Cc,,ncil Meeting - May 20, 1991 benefits? I do. My family y does. The neighbors and residents who use Lone Cedar do so do the Gauers. So are there any questions about the letter or II * he_.e comments? Mayor Ch:in_' = Any questions by Council? If not , thank you Joe. rJoe Mitlyny Thank you. Scott Gauer : My name is Scott Gauer . I live right here. We bought the house 1 about 2 years ago ar_ this is, I don't know how familiar you are with this but this is all city land right here. Our concern is that when we bought our lot we intended' on subdividing here but we need some more land to do that . We need II 20,000 square feet for a lot . That had been approved I think in September. . . What we're looking at is if they build this road, then the City and the State propose to vacate this area in favor of us and that would give us enough square II footage t� subdivide. And if that happens, that 's great . I guess the reason I'm H-c to just make sure that that goes through and if there's any debate or any problem with that , I'd like to have that said up front . . . With the road going through, we're losing a lot because this is TH 5 right here. This is our II house. Our kids play right in here. They have a swingset and sandbox and things like that . What we have now here is a big berm that protects our house from a lot of the sounds from the highway. When that road was going through, II the State said we can take ttiat berm out . . . And through here there's a row of Russian olive trees and. . .that they're going to have to take out to put the road in no we want to restore some of that . Maybe put a berm here to block our circular drive. Put a berm here and plant some more, some kind of barrier. Put IIa fence up. Whatever we can do to try and restore. . . Basically about the assessmen' s, I think. whoever benefits should pay for them. I agree everybody benefits from the turn lane. It 's going to be. . . As for the road here, 1 clearly. . .and it basically detracts from us. . . Mayor Chriel : Are there any questions? Dave, do you have any comments on that? IIDave Heme:i : Yce Mr . Mayor . As indicated in the staff report , MnDot is in favor of the right turn lane. In favor of the frontage road and in an effort to eliminate even one driveway access, will provide the funding to do this. The II original intent was to close off Lone Cedar. However, due to the opposition voiced from the neighborhood meeting that we held back in September, the deciciar was to leave it open for future and construct a right turn lane. MnDot IIhas also indicated though, without that frontage road or alternative access to Mr. Mitlyng's residence, they will not be able to close off his access to TH 5. Therefore, not put in that right turn lane so they are, the two projects are IIessentially tied into one. The frontage road and right turn lane. You can't have one without the other essentially. Mayor Choiel : Okay. Why, .we stopped at the Mitlyng's. Why not continue, if IIwe're worried about TH 5 and access, why aren't we talking about continuing down and Picking up the remaining house? Getting rid of that driveway which is probably one of the blindest ones there. Picking that up onto the service road 1 also? . Dave Hempel : That 's correct . MnDot and staff also reviewed that . However, IIlimited right -of-way to construct a frontage road along with the ditch section 8 II City Coyr.c: ; Meeting - May 20, 1991 I/ that 's currently there and also the placement of Mr. , I can't recall the gentleman's name there. East of Mr. Mitlyng would use up too much of the r-esjdcnt 'e front yard. Therefore, the frontage road was not feasible to extend j.' . Sight distance from that resident's driveway is considerably better than Mr . Mitlyng'c . Councilman Wing: What will the State do then wthey come out TH 5 on the improvements? They're not going to allow that driveway to exist are they? If we're talking about whenever this project would hit this portion of TH 5. , Dave Hempel : Yes, the right turn lane project actually starts after the driveway of Abe . I can't recall his last name. Councilman Wing: That 's not my point . When they finally come westbound on TH 5 wit; the improvements such as they're working on now, and they do the portion from TH 41 westbound, they're not going to tolerate that access at that point are they of that driveway? Won't they have to address it at that time and then won't we have done all this other project in the meanwhile? Dave Hempel : That 's correct but the timeframe for the extension or expansion of TH 5 west of TH 41 is not really even conceived yet . Mayor Chmiel : Okay. Any other discussions? If hearing none, I'll move, make 1 the motion to authorize preparation of feasibility report for the frontage road improvement cf TH 5 and Lone Cedar Lane, Project 90-9. Is there a second? Councilman Wing: Second. Resolution #91-50: Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilman Wing seconded to authorize the preparation of the feasibility study for Drainage Improvements on Lone Cedar Lane at Trunk Highway 5, Project 90-9. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. J. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Councilwoman Dimler: Real quick. Just in the Minutes on page 19. It was the Council Minutes. Page 19. I have a quote there. 10 lines up from the bottom, or 9 lines up from the bottom. We're talking about the safety concerns in the new development there by Kurvers Point and it says, I'm told that our emergency vehicles are 4 wheel drives and that they can go over rough land or lawns. Not logs. I just didn't want anyone to read that in the future and. Mayor Chmiel : It 's really nice to see that you did read this. I went right 1 over it . Councilwoman Dimler: Did you? You didn't catch that? Mayor Chmiel: No, I was just checking out to see what I said. Councilwoman Dimler: Just for the record please. I think 4 wheel drives would , have a tough time going over logs. Mayor Chmiel: Would you like to make that motion? I 9 I/ Olt • Ccurr : : Meeting -- May 20, 1991 Councilwoman Dimler : Yes. Please amend the Minutes as stated and I move the Minutes rr thL Council meeting of May 6th. Counc,lmL i, Wcrkma n: Second. ' Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Workman seconded to approve the following Minutes: City Council Minutes dated May 6, 1991 as amended on page 19; Planning Commission Minutes dated May 1, 1991; and Park and Recreation Commission Minutes dated April 23, 1991. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. K. APPROVE RESOLUTION REGARDING DNR SHORELAND ORDINANCE GRANT. Councilman Workman: I saw Jo Ann face to face today and I didn't talk to her about this . I apologize. I don't know really what we're doing here now and I alwa' s get nervous when somebody's going to match money for us and we're going to pay Soo;E mere. I thought , two things. I thought we had a very good shcreland ordinance and then, secondly I thought we were going to be doing an awful lot of things with the storm water utility so I'm wondering what are we going to be doing to justify the other half of this? ' Jo Ann Olsen: There's a revised Shoreland Ordinance of rules. Councilman Workman: But we don't have a copy of that? _ Jc Ann Olsen: I 've got a copy of that upstairs if you want me to go get it . The Shoreland rules that we now have adopted are old so we have 2 years to adopt the ne regulations. If you see the letter that 's in the attachment , we are ordered to do this. Councilman Workman: Okay, but if we've got a copy of that and what we have to do and we 're being told to do it , it 's going to cost us $10,000.00? Jo ;nn Olsen: Not necessarily. That 's if we hire the consultant to do all the work but there's a lot of comparing what they are giving to us versus what we wart to adopt or do we want to make more stringent rules? So we have to go through it pretty thoroughly. There's going to be public hearings in front of ' the Planning Commission. We have to go back through all of our designations of the lakes. Councilman Workman: Can you give me an idea maybe what they're getting at? I mean further setback requirements or .what are they getting at? Jo Ann Olsen: There's not that many changes but the PUD section is all new. Where if there's a PUD within the shoreland district , now there's some really definite regulations that we would have to enforce. Most of the typical ones that you're involved with like the lot area within the shoreland district and ' setbacks, those haven't changed. Nor do we really have any intention of it changing. But we do have to bring it for public hearing to see if there are things that we want to change. We'll be going in front of the Planning ' Commission. There's going to be a lot of staff time involved. Councilman Workman: So this is pretty much a State government mandate? 10 City Courcii Meeting - May 20, 1991 I/ Jo Ann Olsen: Exactly. And it 's money that we will be spending but half of it will be paid by the ONR. Mayor Chmiel : Can I piggyback on yours? Do we have. the expertise in house to review the proposed ordinance? , Jo Ann Olsen: I believe so. Ma/or Chmiel : Okay. I don't see us, I can see us getting $5,000.00 from the ' DNR but I don't like to take $5,000.00 out of the City's coffers. I think we could offset . Is it absolutely necessary that we go out and hire a consultant again to do this? ' Jo Ann Olsen: No. It 's up to $5,000.00 so if we only spend $200.00 of staff time on the public hearing notices, that 's what we would pay and that 's how much we would get . Or we'd pay $100.00 and we'd get $100.00 back from the DNR. It's up to $5,000.00. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. To me free money is not free money. Somebody's putting it , out there and we're doing this all the way through the legislature and every other place we look because it's something we want and it 's something we must ha,..e. Or it 's good for us. And they spend those dollars and I guess I want to watch those kinds of dollars from the City aspect . Just as I know the balance of the Council does as well so I guess that 's the reason why I asked the question. I 'd like to see that kind of direction be given. If we have the time to do it . Richard. Councilman Wing: I'm glad Tom brought this up. I just made an assumption that this was going to do with shoreland setbacks and one of the variances that was granted down on Lake Riley recently allowed a house I think closer than 75 feet but Paul 's rationale was that the setback was going to be changed. Altered. The State was going to change setbacks on some circumstances and most likely this wouldn't be a requirement in another 6 months. Now is this? Jc Ann Olsen: That would be what it is now. Whether or not , I haven't gone through those. . . Councilman Wing: But this is the document? Jo Ann Olsen: But that 's what affects that. And the City has the ability to put that into the regulations. If the DNR accepts this. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Any other questions? Councilman Workman: So how will the Council be watching whether or not we spend $5.00 or $200.00? Jo Ann Olsen: Really all I see us spending again is the staff time and the public hearing notices so we'll just try to keep track of the hours. We will keep track of the hours. Councilman Workman: Can you just as an amendment to approval, can you maybe give a rough idea of what this might cost us in dollars? I'd move approval for 11 , Ci' Co ._ _ : 1 Meeting - May 20, 1991 II free acne,. . 11 Ccurcileo '•`�sor: I'll second that . Resolution #91-51: Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Mason seconded to ' approve a Resolution regarding the DNR Shoreland Ordinance Grant. All voted in favor and the motion carried. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: None. PUBLIC HEARING: REALLOCATE YEAR XVI COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS TO ' UNDERTAKE SENIOR HOUSING/SENIOR CENTER FEASIBILITY STUDY.. c Chmirl _ ailed the public hearing to order. 1 Jo A'n Olsen: Essentially what 's happening is Paul's been working with Larry Elackcta.d a; d he 's requested us to take some of the funds from one year and put it into another rear so that he meets his allocation. Essentially we're getting all the sane mone . It 's still going to the same things you voted on before. ' Nothing's changed. It 's just different years. Mayor Chr, el : I was with Paul the day that we had this discussion and yeah, I know what he's saying. Although I do have some just a couple concerns here. A:ain well to looking for requests for proposals and having someone do the research for this to go through some of the proposals that we're looking at in ' ccoo of those discussions. I'm wondering if we are checking with other cities to find out what they have done. What some of the thoughts are. Acquire some of their information and take it from there rather than getting another consultant come on board starting to look at it and coming up with some of our ewe, ideas before we hire that particular consultant . Or if we do hire. I guess I just don't want us to run too fast with this. I want to really stand there and knew.' exactly what we're looking for those senior housing needs and to come up with a feasibility study for this. But I want us to be a little cautioee in doing this. Walk but don't run. This is what I'm saying. Ursula? ' Councilwoman Dimler : I guess I have some of the same concerns and I just wanted to make sure, and I think you've already said it but I want to make sure that whet we 're dcing here is we're not taking any money away from Sojourn or from t _ c' '-_ - projects or programs that we already allocated money to. Jo Ann Olsen: Everything remains the same. ' Councilwoman Dimler: Everything remains the same? But we're talking about $2. ,000 CO plus dollars that are being allocated to a study. Is that correct? Jc Ar,n Olsen: Right . That 's correct . ' Councilwoman Dicier: Is this coming out of Y ear- XVI or XVII? ' Jo Ann Olsen: I think it 's coming out of both. The $23,000.00 is coming from- one of the years and then $3,000.00 is coming from. I 12 I Ci , Ccu cil Me- ing - May 20, 1991 • I/ Mayor Chmiel : Yeah, as you're looking here on page 2 Jo Ann, it says that senior housing feasibility study would be funding $23,112.00 of the Year XVI plus an additional $3,000.00 out of the year XVII. Jo ^.rr Olsen: So it 's kind of split now with the two. , Councilwoman Dimler: Out of XVII though, I don't understand how we're not taking ary away from what we've already allocated then. Jo r.nr' :JEen: Actually what 's happening is that we're being able to use some of the moms' sooner . It will be available this June. The XVI money rather than waiting for the year XVII . So what you're doing is taking some from the Year ano giving it to Year XVI. Councilwoman Dimler : I guess I would also like to express my concern about 11 allocating $26,00:;.00 plus dollars for a study when the Met Council has already done a study that is available to us and a lot of the information is in there. Also, again I have this concern about paying consultants Usually if we allocate $26,000.00, they will use up $26,000.00. So if we need a consultant , I would like to put a lid on that, say maybe, $10,000.00 or put out bids for a study. I ?uat can't see arbitrarily saying $26,000.00 for a study. Because I'd like to sec SOM. of that money go to programs and I understand that it can be used for that purpose. Is that correct? Jo Ann Olsen: I think what 's happening here is that we have said that it will go to the feasibility study. Now whether or not we can use $10,000.00 towards th_ fea-i_ ility study and $13,000.00 towards something else, I don't know if that is possible. Councilwoman Dimler: Would you check into that? Councilman Wing: I guess I was just questioning where did this dollar amount come from for the feasibility study? Why was that amount chosen? Councilwoman Dimler: That 's what I wanted to know. Councilman Wing: I agree with Ursula. If that 's the amount available, that could easily be spent . On the other hand, it might be $6,000.00, $14,000.00. It 's an arbitrary number. Why have we put that number out as an amount that will be spent , could be spent or won't be spent? Jo Ann Olsen: I believe that was the money that was available to us. Councilman Wing: Total? Jo Ann_Olsen: Yes. And there's only a certain amount that we can put towards , capital expenditures so we had like the $26,000.00 left over that we had to put towards something else and that 's what we chose to spend it on that . I think it's kind of meets the requirements. Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah, and that 's the kind of public spending that I absolutely abhor when we say we have to spend it on this. I mean we're talking 11 about trying to save tax dollars and stuff and then we have to spend it on a 13 , 1 co,,- - L M: _r , - Ma/ 20, 1991 il fea_i` f stud . It just doesn't make any sense when the feasibility stud'. `w feasibility r cool,' - rell only cost you $10,000.00 or less. Co;,nrilr_r v' Es.-ecially when this Council supports the Seniors, the Senior Cent cr . the Se.nic'- Housing. What do we want to accomplish and how did we do it? M.": t E feasibility study. I can't put a dollar on that . IICo'un-,ei_uoma - Dimlo'- ' Well I certainly support the study but I think, like I said t'-` Met Council study can certainly be used for a lot of your data. And IIPaul ales mentioned mething in the Minutes that I saw that he thought that ' HOC would yet involved with their funds. I'm not sure as a Council that we can make that recommendation. For more for the study. You know I mean we 'rr aeking for more for the study. I thought that was kind of unusual. ' Councilman Wing: Ursula, this is grant money. If we don't spend it , someone else w i l l . IICouncilwoman Dimler: That 's the kind of reasoning that got us into trouble. ICouncilman ',:inc: Thank you. I wanted that clarified. Ma>cr Choiel : Continuation of dollars that are provided to the City and that 's ' true. If we don't use it , - 'meone else will. But I just don't feel taking grant dollars just because you can get it and do something, whether you do somcthing wfth it or not . II Councilwoman Dimler: That 's why I said I 'd love to see the rest go towards eypand:ng the programs for the seniors. IIZio Prim Cleer : _ don't know if that 's possible. I'll have Paul check. Councilwomen Bimler : Or maybe we could put some money down for purchasing the Iland where we're going to put the building you know instead of just wasting it or a study. Mayer CFmiel : Before I continue on down the road, I apologize. I should have asked if there's anyone within the audience who'd like to possibly address this as . Seeing none, I'll move back to Tom. IICouncilman Workman: We're all kind of in a cranky mood and boy there's a lot of planners and consultants in the audience that are saying, man it 's open season on us. We're trying to undermine their livelihood. We talked about this, or I II talked about it a little bit at our goal setting session about let 's go. Let's fire out about this and certainly maybe this kind of a thing takes a study and spending some money but when it starts to get bigger like that , $26,000.00 in that traffic study we did downtown went just like that . What I fear is that II we're not , and that 's what I want to find out . It 's a nuance. Are we, and maybe we can't find this out without a study. Are we anywhere near ready capital wise to build something like this? And if we're not and we can figure I out rather inexpensively whether or not we're really going to go or should go ahead with this, then I see this $26,000.00 study getting old and then in 3 years a new Council or whoever will have to do it again based on new II 14 II City Cow-oil Met ing May 20, 1991 • ' I/ democranhics and everything else. I don't know if the Met Council, I think I have a copy of that . Maybe that 's old but who knows? I Cojncilvo,an Dimler : No, it was September, 1990 study. So it 's not that old. Less than a year . Councilman Workman: So my biggest fear is that y gg i t the report will get old and then we still won't know if we want to build it or not but do we not spend free money? Courci2 Oman Dimler: It 's not free. Councilman Workman: But then I'm not being helpful by not having a suggestion , except other than watering it down a bit . Mayor Chmiel: Well yeah. I think Ursula's right in saying what 's there. We can charge a lot of time to this. Basically there's a lot of things that we have to take into consideration. Number one, location. Where should it be? Number two, how many residents within our community are willing to, if we go into housing, willing to move into this kind of facility? Does it even warrant it? Do they want to move out of their own homes? There's a whole bunch of ki^d_ of questions that have to be asked. Councilman Workman: Make it big. Make is accessible. Make it low cost with a -lot of amenities and people will come to it like flies to honey. Bees to honey. I mean we know that . We know put it in a central location. There, give me 10 grand. Councilman Wing: Does that include operating in the black? , Councilman Workman: Well I don't know if a study can do that either . Councilwoman Dimler: A study can check with other existing facilities I suppose. , Councilman Workman: I don't know. I suspect we're going to approve this anyway. Mayor Chmiel: Can I get a motion to close the public hearing? Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. Mayor Chmiel : Any other discussion? If hearing none, I'll entertain a motion. ' Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, let me try it. I would move approval of the reallocation of the funds from the years, whatever way you want to work that out . XVI and XVII but if possible, and if this is allowed, I would allocate e10,000.00 to the study and the remainder to the expansion of programs for the seniors or whichever way it would most benefit them. Councilman Workman: Could we, because I'm not sure Ursula where the $10,000.00 is. 15 , I/ Cit . Cc.ur:i1 Mec+ irs, - May 20, 1991 I/ ' Councilwoman Dimler : It 's a number I picked out of the air. Ccuncilm:n Workman: Why don't I second your motion so we can talk about it . T� I 'm red about . 26 was picked out of the air too . Councilman Workman: Can't we approve the $26,000.00 and say. ' Councilwoman Dimler : Have it? Counrilna- >.'c.r'rr:ur : Eacause we don't know or how or what and we don't have enc_ = c ` ..__ ti. Maybe we need to table until we know. Council..:ncn Dimler : Well I would prefer to get bids on the study and then make ' our decision from that but that 's assuming that we can use the remainder on com_thi r se, and we don't know that at this point do we? io Ann 01ssr: We don't . I would think the answer's no because I think we've gone throuch this before. I think the answer's been found out to be no but we can check into that . I don't know that there's a deadline on this that has to be approved tonight . Do yo'! remember Don? Don Ash;..orth: I'm not sure. ' Mayo- Chmiel : I would think that there isn't any real hurry presently if we can get cJr. cf the clarifications that have been brought up right now. And I think that 's true and we should before we even decide to move on it . If you would >o"r motion. ' Coun,-i] v: pan Disler: I will withdraw my motion. Mayor Chmiel : Will the second remove that motion? Councilman Workman: Yes. ' Councilwoman Dicier: Then I will move to table. Ccur,c i-a. Workman: Second. Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Workman seconded to table the h reallocation of Year XVI Community Development Block Grant Funds for more clarification. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. PRELIMINARY PLAT TO SUBDIVIDE A 39,885 SQ. FT. PARCEL INTO 2 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS WHICH WILL REQUIRE A LOT AREA AND LOT WIDTH VARIANCE (LAKESHORE WIDTH), 6541 MINNEWASHTA PARKWAY, KEN LUND AND DANA JOHNSON, WASHTA BAY COURT ADDITION. I Jo Ann Olsen: The applicants are proposing to subdivide one existing single . family lot into two single family lots. It is a shoreland lot so it gets into the Shoreland regulations. You have to have 20,000 square foot for each lot and 75 foc+ width at the lake. The ordinary high water mark. The Planning 16 I City Council Meeting - May 20, 1991 • Commission did review this. There are variances involved and staff had to go through whether or not a hardship exists. We found that a hardship didn't exist I because it was a self created hardship and we had to recommend denial. It was pointed out that the variances are very small. The lots are just under the 20,000 square feet and just below the 75 foot width requirement . The Planning Commission recommended denial with a 4 to 2 vote against the subdivision because it did create two non-conforming lots. The applicant is here with plans showing that the homes can meet the setbacks. We are still recommending denial because 11 it does create two non-conforming lots. Mayor Chmiel: Please state your name and your address. Ken Lund: Ken Lund, 395 Highway 7. Dana Johnson: Dana Johnson, 6301 Greenbriar, Chanhassen. Mr. Mayor, City Council . We come here tonight to ask for two small variances. And they are small . We know that we're short approximately 12 inches and we don't meet the City ordinance per lot of the 150 square feet. Plus we're short about the size of a walk-in closet for each lot also. That needs to be 20,000 square feet so they are very, very small. What we wanted to do here is pass out , what we've done here is we plotted out our house on the lot . Where it would be sitting and the setbacks from where the city ordinance wants us to be at . Now like I said, we know that we don't meet the city ordinance on the lot size but we do fall way within the restrictions of the city ordinance with the setbacks of the lot . Toward the creek. Toward the lakeshore. Toward the road.. Toward everything and we wanted to give you an idea of where our houses would sit . And 'we also on the back put the type of homes we would be building also on that . Where they would be sitting right in the lot also. Some of the things that were brought up and some of the concerns of us too that I'd like to address or concerns to the DNR and I'm sure you people too. On Lot 1 there you see a creek. That would be on my side and first of all, I'm concerned about the creek too because I'm a very environmentally conscience person also. Where our 50 foot setback, we're very far from that . Or I should say we're set back to the City ordinance and I have no whatsoever are going to ask for a variance for that because I've got plenty of room with my house on my buildable area right now. So I'll always be 50 feet back from the creek. Another thing that was brought up at our last meeting was the dockage. We're definitely only going to have one dock. We've always planned to have one dock to share between Lot 1 and Lot 2. So that will eliminate some dockage and so forth out there also. The next dock to us is about 14,000 literally square feet down the shoreline so. Yeah, 14,000 square feet of shoreline so there isn't anything to the left of us whatsoever. You know Ken Lund and I have been out , Ken have you lived here about 25 years? Ken Lund: I've lived in Chanhassen for 24 years. Dana Johnson: And I've lived here about 15 years. I take a lot of pride in our lake and I'm sure each and every one of you have had a dream before and that 's living on the lake. That's one of my dreams. I mean this has been the goal of, one of my goals in my lifetime to live on the lake. This was the first affordable lot that we could afford to be able to build on. I know the variances, I know we don't meet the city ordinance but the variance, the square footage is so short . The 12 inches and the size of a walk-in closet . Do you have anything else to add Ken? 17 , I II , City. Councii Meeting - May 20, 1991 Ken Lund: Well one of the concerns at the last meeting by one of the residents, 11 Mr. Anding, which I've talked to several times afterwards, was how close we would be, or I would be to the private beach there. I've laid the house out where I 'll be well over 40 feet away from the private beach so there will be I quite a distance between my house and the private beach. Mr. Anding's house is a little lees than 12 feet from the beach so I'll have a fairly good setback. That was one of his concerns for that and he did have some concern about that and if he weren't on a business meeting right now, he'd be here tonight in IIsupport of our development . Dana Johnson: And as you can note there, we'll be 45 feet from the road I literally. Well within the lot lines. The City ordinance plus the footage from the lake and the creek and all the city setbacks. One other thing I'd like to show you too. I don't know if you've been out there. I just wanted to show you I some pictures of the house that 's existing that we would be tearing down and be building on there. You know somebody else could come in too also and live there too. I guess we're trying to improve the area also you know by building two single family homes. Also when there are pictures of some homes surrounding it II also. Mayor Chmiel : Okay, is there anything else that you'd like to say? IIDana Johnson: No, not at this time. I Mayor Chmiel : I'll give you these pictures back. Okay, we'll move this along. I guess does an;-one have any questions? Tom? Councilman Workman: Why is this not in front of the Board? IJo Ann Olsen: When variances are part of a subdivision, now it goes in front of Planning Commission and Council. IICouncilman Workman: I guess I knew that . Mayor Chmiel : Okay, Richard? IICouncilman Wing: I don't have a comment on it . I _Mayor Chmiel: Tom, do you have any? Councilman Workman: I guess I don't have a whole lot of problem. Okay, Mike? 1 Councilman Mason: I read this over a number of times. I've talked to a number of people. I've gone back and forth a number of times on it . It 's so close to what 's acceptable and I know now someone's going to say, well how about 38,000 1 feet? Well, I guess you'd have to deal with that one on a separate issue. It looks like it 's very well thought out . It looks like these guys know what they're talking about . IIMayor Chmiel: Okay, Ursula. . ICouncilwoman Dimler: I just have a question. I want to make sure that this subdivision will require no further variances in the future? Is that correct? I 18 II City Council Meeting - May 20, 1991 • I/ Dana Johnson: That 's fine. That 's correct . Councilwoman Dimler: And also the one dock you already said you both agree to that . I guess those were my two concerns. I feel that the homes that are proposed would definitely leave the area better looking. The only problem that I still haven't resolved in my own -mind is that I can find no hardship so can you explain to me what the hardship is. Dana Johnson: Well I guess there isn't , you know just financially. I don't ' know if you can consider that . Councilwoman Dicier : No. Dana Johnson: No, you can't . Then no I guess. Mayor Chmiel: I guess I sat at the Planning Commission meeting and listened to the pros and cons of the issue. More specifically I looked to the Chairman of the Planning Commission who reviewed rather closely and indicated that he did not have many concerns regarding that one foot setback. I think I sort of agree with that particular position. The small amount here and of course where do we stop and where do we go. Oftentimes the problem exists where people come in and say well I'm only 2 foot and it 's only a foot more from what it was before. But I think we have to address each one of those specific problems as they come to us and reach a conclusion. I guess I don't really have that much of a problem with this. So I'm going to suggest and make a recommendation that we approve the proposal as indicated. As we've discussed and that the two additional conditions that Ursula was concerned about . One being no additional variances and the other utilization of the one dock proposed on either side would be included with that . I Councilman Wing: Mr . Mayor, does that condition continue onto new ownership then? I • Councilwoman Dimler: Yes. Mayor Chmiel : I would think that we could include that as a permanent part of ' that . Councilwoman Dimler: That would be my intention yes. , Mayor Chmiel : And all the other conditions that we have recommended conditions with the acceptance of this proposal. Councilwoman Dimler: Right . I'll second that . Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to approve Preliminary Plat , #91-3 as shown on plans dated April 1, 1991 with the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall supply the City with a development plan indicating the proposed house pad elevations, including the lowest floor and garage floor elevations. I 19 , I ,Ci' , Cc ' _._ Men' ing -- May 20, 1991 2. The applicant shall supply the City with a finished grading plan showing e.i_' ir; and proposed finished 2 foot contour elevations for review and arc 1. 2. The final plat shall reflect a 10 foot wide drainage and utility easement ' over th= northeasterly 10 feet of Lot 1, Block 1, to protect the stream bank from further alteration. ' 4. The Ci' y shall aloe the requirement for a development contract due to the fact that no public improvements are required for the subdivision. ' 5. Each lot should be restricted to one driveway access point , in an effort to limit the access points out onto Minnewashta Parkway. 6. The applicant shall obtain and comply with all conditions of the Watershed District and Department of Natural Resources permits, if any. 7. The existing home must be vacated and utilities permanently disconnected ' before approval of the lot split . 0. A demolition permit is required before demolition begins on the dwelling. 11 9. No additional variances will be granted in the future. 10: Only one dock shall be permitted for both Lot 1 and Lot 2 to share. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. ' RELEASE OF TEMPORARY UTILITY EASEMENT OVER LOT 12, BLOCK 1, SUNSET VIEW; PWO52E. Dave Hempel : I've recently been contacted by a resident , Mr. Richard Powers at 20 Hill Strr=�nt . This request is similiar to the request the City Council 11 addressee' I believe 2 weeks ago regarding the adjacent property next door. Mr. Po<<=_ rs is in the process of refinancing and his title company discovered a temporary easement , blanket easement over the parcel. Thus had some problem financing. The City was previously granted this easement back in April of 1987 along with the storm sewer project that was constructed. The City was to release this temporary easement contingent upon a permanent easement being conveyed to the City by the property owners. However, through the paper shuffles or whatever, the permanent easements were never obtained. Therefore the current owner , Mr. Powers is requesting the City release the temporary drainage easement over his property and he is willing to convey to the City the permanent easement at this time. Staff would be preparing the legal description for the permanent easement to be conveyed. Mayor Chmiel : Thank you. Any discussion? It_ looks like a normal kind of thing. Resolution #91-52: Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Mason seconded to grant a release of the temporary drainage easement conditioned upon the applicant , Mr. Powers executing a permanent drainage and utility easement with the City over the appropriate utility and lot lines in Lot 12, Block 1, Sunset View Addition. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. 1 20 I Ciiy Council Meeting - May 20, 1991 I/ LAKE ANN PARK PICNIC/RECREATION SHELTER, CONSIDER 1991 BUDGET AMENDMENT. I Todd Hoffman: Mr . Mayor and Council members. As noted in my report , the intent of the action to table on April 22nd was to allow for public comment on this item. A variety of conclusions can be made based on the response to the recent publicity on this project . Among them really indifference. I have received no calls to date voicing any negative reactions to. the publicity on this item. Council members will have made their own conclusions. However, I believe this represents basically a stamp of approval by the public for this project . We should also remind ourselves that the City has the obligation to invest the money which has been collected through the Park and Trail dedication fees in public facilities which benefit the general public. These investments include a variety of activities. Among them the acquisition, planning and development of both neighborhood and community park sites. Again, the construction of a park shelter building at Lake Ann Park is one more step in the City's desire to develop a quality, pleasant and fun park system within the city. In conclusion, after 8 months of planning, investigation and refinement by the Park and Recreation Commission and the staff members, we have the opportunity to move forward with this public improvement project . The efforts put further in this regard have been substantial. Well planned and the recommendation to approve construction of this facility and associated utilities is based on the conclusions reached during that planning process. You're well aware that Mark and Scott are here if you would have any desire for further comments on the details of the particular information which you have before you tonight . We'll welcome any questions from Council members at this time. Mayor Chmiel : Thank you. I was just trying to remember exactly the location of the interceptor. I guess that 's probably out but I was thinking rather than I trying to go to the lift station at Greenwood Shores, we could tap into that source but . . . Todd Hoffman: We had taken a look at that but the tree cover in that area and 1 then the adjacent property, it would be a difficult task. Mayor Chmiel : Okay. I guess I have a couple of comments that I'd like to just hit on. One of the things that we're just mentioning here would make water available in the future if the City decided to install irrigation in the ballfields. I don't think we'd ever want to do that . Not only from a standpoint of watering but also from a safety aspect in running around out there and some of those things normally will pop up and stay up and if no one takes it down, there could be some problems with it. But I'm just looking at it from that standpoint . One of the things I can address is the electrical capacity. And in here I think you put an estimate of about $10,000.00? To run additional capacities from the existing facilities that you have there presently would not be the way to really go. I don't think you're going to have low capacity down I/ to that park, or to this particular building. I say that because once the load capacity is used, you're going to have a separate feeder line to be fed back in through that particular area in order to feed this particular building. So the $10,000.00 I think is going to be a little low. Todd Hoffman: Okay. I believe they may wish to address that because I specifically talked about your interest and knowledge in this area and had Mark I/ 21 1 I test in.7 - May 20, 1991 or Cccct ' double check those figures. So we might want to. Ma -- Ck ie? : If you have any questions, you can probably get a hold of Merle Pet , :o - an-' discuss that with him to see what additional capacities would have to v.- - _ : . Pnd that means you'd probably have to have another transformer down flat location depending on what capacity you have and I haven't looked at it that closely but it 's just reviewing what was here. Sanitary sewer which we're looking at roughly anywhere from $14,000.00 to $50,000.00 is rather hefty. As we- re looking connection to Greenwood Shores, estimated cost of another Does that particular sewage lift pump have enough capacity to ace^ ' the additionai discharge? Have we checked that out? Todd `': r: ,. At Greenwood Shores? Yes. Ma'-'cr Cihmi,el : It will? ' Todd Hoffman: YF':: . Marc: Chmici : I guess that 's about all I had right now. Ursula? Councilwoman Dimler: Thank you Mr. Mayor. Todd, I want to know you sent out sc' - letters to businesses to get some financial help. Did you have any results from those letters? Todd Fcffman: No response personally back to my office. Ceurc:ilwcR.an Dimler : That 's a shame. Because one of our big concerns here was the cost of the project . Too bad we can't get any help from private businesses ar - it was my understanding Dick that , did you call for a public hearing on t hie seas t hat your intent? Councilm:.', No, I just wanted. Counciloor ;n Dicier: Public input? ' Councilman Wing: Media coverage to alert the public. Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, so you're satisfied with the coverage? Mayor Chmiel: And it was advertised, or excuse me. It wasn't advertised was it? It was an article on it . Free advertisement , let 's put it that way. Councilman Mason: I'd just like to comment . I didn't receive any negative feedback either. In fact I did receive some favorable. Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. The only comments that I heard was on the, they liked the building but they're concerned about the amount of money being spent on the sewer and water. And I having sat on the Community Center Task Force, one of the reasons, we wanted to put it out by Lake Ann but we were constantly being told that it was prohibitive to put it out there because of the sewer and water costs. And now I find that I'm being asked to approve it for a mere park shelter. Excuse me but it is, I mean the community center would have had more use. Now a park shelter is a seasonal, maybe 5 months out of the year and so 22 I City Co:.nci1 Meeting - May 20, 1991 • II trouble adjusting my thinking that if it was prohibitive for a community center, why it isn't prohibitive for this park shelter. I also went th-ough the numbers here of after, if we took the lowest possible price on ew,r; thing and the building was at $173,063.00 and the- utilities, water is 1. ,00o. C.0 to the holding tanks at $14,300.00. The electric at $10,400.00 which you 're saying might go up now, but that 's basically a total of $203,700.00 instead of 1258,963.00 basically saving ourselves about $55,000.00. And I'm - thin4ing that we can clean those holding tanks out a whole lot for that money plus that money can be in a savings account drawing interest which would take care of cleaning the holding tanks forever. And it is seasonal. I don't see it being heavily used. Unless we're going to put another facility out there in the future, we'll never have another thing hooked up to it . It 's a huge expense. , Mayor Chmiel : Yeah. We can't put in a septic system because there's really not • ar. area. But with that holding tank, I'm not sure, bring in a honey bucket to do the pumping, I'm not sure as to what it is and what those costs are. Councilwoman Dicier: Well that was one of the options they had down here. Option 1 . Todd Hoffman: Estimated cost at $200.00 per pumping. Total cost over the summer of just over $5,000.00. Mayor Chmiel : Yeah, that was in there. Cour,:ilm=n Wing: Except we have a honey bucket . We have a, and I don't know , why that couldn't be used for holding tanks but we use it for sucking the sanitary sewers now. The Fire station holding tanks. They've got that enormous suction truck, that 's got to be adequate, I'm assuming. I thought the City could in fact do the suction. Councilwoman Di.mler: Oh, there's another savings. , Councilman Mason: Well, but what happens when the holding tank goes bad that close to Lake Ann? Councilman Wing: But you can't put it in if it would go bad. Mayor Chmiel: It stands for a considerable period of time. Maybe somebody can address that . Scott? Holding tanks. What do they consist of and what 's the reliability of a holding tank on site and how long can they be used without deterioration or having a problem. Scott Harri : Well typically a holding tanks are made from precast concrete and the walls are approximately 5 to 6 inches thick. The estimated life on concrete holding tanks. . .maybe 50 years. 75 years. I mean it's long. Long life. And I/ if installed properly with care taken on the foundation so it sits and without it settling and stuff like this, one would expect it to last fairly long. Don Ashworth: What about the concern that it would, what happens is somebody _ goes in and somehow has a toilet continuously dinning? Can you assure that this thing is not going to put 50,000 gallons of sewage into Lake Ann? 23 , I r _ _. May 20, 1991 Scott k;.-ri. : One of the properties of a holding tank is they're not meant to b- , ea, under pressure. They're meant to only liquid will come up to a certain ie .e1 ' ,e , flow out or have to be pumped out . And the higher it gets , there = ..r; alorc the top where the cover sits down. and that 's where the ^:t =rtial , you get into an overflow situation where the effluent would leak out ' rf tr ` ar -' flow into the upper ground water level. That 's where the All the rest of the basin below the cover is all an integrally re.n-tructed sort, of thing but if it does get up and overflow, well tf _. _ ..c4 __ be the problem. Cour,o1l_won;a- Dimler : Okay, but we're proposing to clean it twice a week. Is that ade?uate? We've got two tanks, 1,500 gallons each. Scott H_. -r, : That should take care of it . And again, one of the risks is if ye ha' s some sort of a water leak, whether you have a well or a watermain system there, if the water runs continuously from a lay or a sink or from a hose ';b or something, it gets into a floor drain and continuously goes as it catches the peo:le by c;:rprise and that 's when you would have the risk of a spill if you Hoffman: - Mr . Mayor? 11 Mar`_ Ohmic] : Yes Todd. Todd Hoffman: I believe we're somewhat off on a tangent that has some problems, prsentia' problems associated with it as well as it deals with State Building Codes. Minnewashta Regional park looked to this same issue. They were forced either to hook up to sanitary sewer or put in a drainfield. Septic system. E-'oldinc tanks were not acceptable at Minnewashta Regional Park. For the cost ' savings to take that alternative may end up to be not possible in the long run. Councilwoman Cimle'- : But you 're saying a drainfield, Option 2 with $19,000.00 ' approximate is okay? Todd Hoffman: It has better potential than the holding tank but again, having grown UP with a drainfield, potential problems in drainfields are a dime a dc:en. And to look , we really need to look to the future, the long range, the next 50 years at Lake Ann Park. What are potential, the expansion of the building that is currently at the ballfield to facilitate bathrooms at the ballfield location. The potential for the expansion of building of an open park shelter- building with water running to it for picnicing and for other utilities within the park site. Mayor Chniel : I think I see less of a problem with the holding tank than I do with the drainfield. Because the drainfield could cause some problems and we'd I have to implement some kind of maintenance program with that as well. But I think that some of the things that I understand with it is that you could have that effluent going right back into Lake Ann too from those drainfields and I don't feel comfortable with that . Todd Hoffman: A drainfield would take up a considerable amount of land area. You really have to have a dedicated use. The seepage and that type of thing. 1 ' 24 I Ci' Council. Mooting - May 20, 1991 • I/ Lake Ann is large but not that land rich that we want to be taking up a large area with th_ drainfield. Cc. -,:ilman Mason: I hope we don't become penny wise and a pound foolish over this issue . I see Lake Ann as a marvelous opportunity for this city and we're tall - , about monthly or yearly fee-s. Certainly with the holding tank, as our re:per' states Metro Waste fees are going to go up and up and more people are gcin; to use Lake Ann as the years go on. It seems to me, yeah the Greenwood Sho'-es connection is more expensive up front . I suspect in the long run over, ao 1odd said, over 25-30 years, my guess is it will end up being cheaper. Councilwoman Dimler: That 's assuming you don't have any problems in those years with ',our pump lift . I mean that 's expensive repairs too. Councilman Mason: It 's also assuming you don't have problems with the holding tank or the drainfield too you know. Councilwoman Dimler : Just maintenance on those two. Mayor Chmiel : I guess I look at those two particular issues and you're right . With the holding tanks, it probably wouldn't be bad but when you do your discharge, once you get the honey bucket there and put it back into the metro _ system, you 're going to be charged for that one more time so those costs are going to be double. I don't know how we can calculate what the cost is for the MWCC but there is some. That would also be there so you're going to be duplicating costs again. Maybe that might be the best way to really go with it . To the Greenwood Shores connection. Councilman Mason: I certainly see some places that , as I look through this, ' that I wonder if we couldn't cut back on. I wonder if I could ask, deleting the landscape lighting? What landscape lighting is that? Mark Kocg'er : I can respond to that Councilman Mason. The landscape lighting 1 that 's shown there is simply bollard type lighting that would go along the sidewalk down to the parking lot . It 's not integral to the building itself so it 's sort of a site amenity if you will. That 's something that could always be added at a later date. So the lighting that is part of the building itself for security and safety, those are still in there. Mayor Chmiel: As much as I liked the lighting aspect, I think it 's just another 11 thing that can become a problem within the park. Like replacing the standards on a continuous basis with kids. Mark Koegle' : Kids and baseball bats and things. Councilman Mason: Also this addition 6 for the substitute framing. It 's my I understanding that if we deleted that $6,000.00 we'd get a fake beam right? Mark Koegler: Right , which we could mask and virtually make look like real ' timber. Heavy timber. Councilman Mason: Well, there's $8,500.00 right there. 25 , City• Ceu':__ ; n - May 20, 1991 I M _ Chrr_el How sturdy is that? rhark Equally as strong. Certainly . The steel beam would be fine . It - ..rr: l Le hrved is for comestic reasons. CounLi.rr.a- 6!ing The other . . .number 7 was the substitution of the heavy shir:' e: . With all due respect to the cedar shakes . I've got them on my house and they're , depending on what the shade is, what the runoff is, even if they're ' the heav shake , t -y're a nuisance and they're a high maintenance item and they' re r" t as vandal proof. I guess I don't think we can lose that much aesthetics but we gain a lot of practicability by going with the heavy shingles. • 11 That 's on7 recomr<endation I wanted to make. I like the look of the cedar shake. I've get it and it will never happen again. Councilerr Mason: Don't the other park buildings have cedar shakes on them? ' Tod'.ddHeitman: Correct . Both the Lake Susan shelter and the concession building at the hs hr.ildinct. In the 8 years that , or 10 years that the building at Lae Susan has been there, I'm not aware of any maintenance replacement . Ma; . Chmiel : It has a little higher fire rating. Oar F_ `.,:rth: Mr . Mayor? I was just talking with Scott because I wanted to vs -if - 0•2: I. thought might be some numbers but you take an average stool and if a -kid cams in therE with cherry bomb. Dropped it in. Blew it up. You're talkir: about 3 to 5 gallons per minute which means on one stool alone, within ar `'c_ r soul :' be up to 300 gallons. If they hit 5 stools, that 's 1,500 g.=i.lcrs: per hour . If that occurred at 8:00, 9:00, 10:00 at night and that was t n:' discovered until 10:00-11:00 the following day, you could be putting 20,000 gallon: of seuege into Lake Ann. I'm going through this because we've gone t `e-c e` enough horror stories with so many of our lift stations that it just really scares me . Any type of thoughts that might lead to some type of ' pollution to the lake. The other side of that is we've put in a very expensive telemetry system for all of our existing facilities. The ability to add one resc' s site to say is there any problem occurring with that pump is very minor. But I don't know of anything you can put on to, I suppose you could. P"t some type of an alert onto that type of tank. That potentially would be possible but again realize that it 's going in there up to 1,500 gallons per hour . We've got 1 hour to get there. Mayor Chmiel: What 's the cost differences between a stool within that facility from a china as opposed to a steel as they have in institutional buildings which would probably withstand a lot more abuse? Is there a considerable difference in cost? Do You have any idea? hark Keeler : To be honest with you, we don't . We could certainly compare that . I'm not aware of any comparable facility that anybody has used anything other than china . . . but we can certainly look at that . Mayor Ch;: isl : I'm thinking about the Justice Center that we're looking at at the County. Mark Koegler : Yeah. That 's a little different clientele. ' 26 I City Council h- ' in; - May 20, 1991 I/ Mayor Chmiel : So arc the kidc that we have hanging around here. Not all kids are bad. They just like to have fun. But I'm thinking from the standpoint of ca =_ty, the same thing I was thinking about with the beam. Encasing that beam, how much of a problem would that be as far as weight or withstanding weight . I was more concerned with what abuse it could take with long hockey sticks and whatever else. Mark Koegler : The beam I can assure you is not a problem at all. . . Mayor Chmiel : It 's just a thought that I've had. How can we eliminate the m_,interence and upkeep of it over the long run. But you're right . Every one of those facilities normally have porcelain. ' Todd Hoffman: Mr . Mayor if I may, a point on security. Per se the building has been designed so all door frontages can be locked and secured. Now if somebody would break into one of those doors they could gain access to the facilities at that time but during the day the building will be staffed by a person at the concec_icn rental area and we'll have some indirect type of supervision for the bathroom areas. Mayer Chmiel : Do we have an ordinance in the city whereby we could post and indicate that in the eve'- ' something were to happen, a fine can be imposed up to v numh.e>. of dollars? Just to make them stop and think a little bit about it . Elliott Knetsch: You wouldn't even need an ordinance. Damage to property is alreEd;' a crime. It 's a misdemeanor and punishable by up to $700.00 fine. You could also tailor make an ordinance. Mayor Chmiel : That 's what I'm thinking. Put it up high enough to make them ' think before they start doing something and having it posted on that particular facility. Whether it works or not , that 's another question. But it 's just eor°ot.ihing that I was thinking about as well. , Todd Ho{fman: We have in the past , in the case of vandalism at Lake Susan shclter pursued restoration. M4ycr Chmiel : Yes, and all the broken bottles and broken lights and fixtures things of that nature. Councilman workman: So have we found a solution to the sanitary sewer? Mayor Chmiel : Well I think we're looking right now at the potential of taking it to the sewage lift pump at that $33,000.00 cost. Councilman Wing: I would just like to get a, are we just at a discussion point Mr. Mayor? Mayor Chmiel : Yes. We're still in discussion. Councilman Wing: I acted impulsively at one of the prior meetings and looked at that $300,000.00 and I felt it was wrong. It 's gotten good media coverage thanks to the Villager. I've had no one. I mean Minnewashta Parkway I can hardly get to my phone fast enough but this issue which is a big dollar issue 27 ' Sit;' 2-:A he - May 20, 1991 arc tD cr - ad ' eeced it . I've met with Todd at length and I'm convinced that if I had been in to buy a car, I would have walked out with air cc—'li o' , n: to hoot . I found that Todd had. . . he had done his homework. He had a lot cr evplanations. He was able to counter every question I had. I .'-' r`_l ccrrtortable that Todd has done his homework and done a good job and thc- rr real fallout is if I really feel panic striken, I call the City M:-age- 's c{{ice and I say yes or no. Should this be done? And if starts out b;' sa\ in; well , ther we've got troubles. But if he says yes or no, that 's it . Sc. I just think sta; " hod really looked at this. I would not support any overages. That would bother me because I remember my building a truck in this city and I went over a lot and got away with it and this type of expenditure I would like to see the line held. But I would move approval of this 1991 budget amemdeect Ling Option 1 , which is watermain extension. Option on the electrical , Dc:, yew had a comment on that but I think that 's something that 's • .eing tc be we have to see what happens. On the sanitary sewer, I would support O:tier 3 which is the Greenwood Shores connection. And now I get a lcct a_ we got intc the item. The only one I picked up on was that we substitut _ the steel beam in lieu of the framing which I would offer as part ' of this motior and then I would ask, did I miss any specifics? Councilman Maser : Landscape lighting? Delete that . 11 Coun. flman line: Oh, landscape lighting was deleted also. And with those, I would move acceptance of this 1991 budget amendment . Councile .n Manor : I'll second that . Ma•'or Cheiel : Any further discussion? ' Councilnccar Dimler: Yes Mr. Mayor. I just have one question I'm going to ask Don Ashworth, in good humor. He had me so convinced when we did the community ce-te _.- = f--cr ' hat we couldn't put the community center out there because of tL: prchihitit,'e coats for sewer and water. What has changed? C,o. P:k,w-,,-= `,- Pc l'_ , I don't think it was solely sewer and water. I think it ' woo tic road connection, if you recall. Councilwoman Dimler: It was mostly sewer and water. Don Ashworth: Well , sewer and water maybe. The other difference is that this location for this facility, I mean we looked at the option of going out to TH 5 for that sanitary sewer. The community center would have been out on that TH 5 location and so we would have carried the sewer and water over the other direction so yeah, there would have been a higher cost being, what are you? Maybe 600 fret back towards Greenwood Shores. Run from there over to Greenwood Shores is what , 1,000 feet? 1,300 feet : Councilwoman Dimler: I was jesting but I'm just saying that , you know that was always the big thing. We could have found a good location for the community center but the sewer and water would have run about the same. . . - Don Ashworth: If you look back at some of those notes, the cost of that frontage road connection was a big factor. If I remember right , it was ' 28 C . fr ur,c. l Meeting - May 20, 1991 1 eetirrtc' like $500,000.00. But I think $300,000.00 was associated with that road. CcLrlcilwomar; Dimler: I'm just saying that I would like that point clarified tecauc , ycu did have me convinced. 1 Mayor Chmiel : There's another used car salesman. Councilwoman Dimler : I guess he's good. ' Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any other discussion? CoLnciln:ann Wing: Ore clarification? Does this now, sewer and water for this building expedite water and sewer to other parts of the park in a much less costly manner? In other words, can we get the sewer and water to the ballfields in the very near future? Tcc Hoffman: Correct . This is the grandfather project . The other ones fall into a more streamline type of cost . Councilman Wing: There is actually probably heavier use and a greater need up cn that hill for sewer and water where the ballfields are than there is maybe jc'r this building right now. Todd Hoffman: Or yeah, at least equal. Correct . _ I Councilman Wing: What 's the timeframe on that? Tod Hoffman: It 's in my mind at this point . We'll take a look at the capital , improvement budget but to expand that building which is currently there to iicluce bathroom= in the back of it is there. Councilman Workman: If I could quickly. Maybe as Richard eluded to, there has not been a lot of commentary on this thing. Mayor Chmiel: I agree. I've not received one call. Councilman Workman: And so therefore there must not be a lot of screaming needs out there and this is the biggest bang for the buck and it 's just like free money again. It 's like free money all over the place. No, so I mean why not . Mayor Chmiel: We have a motion on the floor and I'd like a reclarification of that motion to make sure we're going to get what we're proposing to get . Councilman Wing: It included the 1991 budget amendment but then under the specifics from discussion was watermain extension. We went with watermain extension versus wells. Under electrical, I did not follow your comments but you left that as ongoing at this point . IIMayor Chmiel: Yeah, that might be a low estimate. Councilman Wing: Right . Sanitary sewer was Option 3. The Greenwood Shores connection. And we deleted the landscape lighting and substitute framing for 29 ' . C3t; .Cc _ ci l - May 20, 1991 II the steel beam. The steel beam versus the heavy timber beam. Did I get that right ') 1; 1 ,_=rmsrl: Yes. Ma, or Chmiel : Was there a second? Councilman Mason: Yes. ' Resolution #91-53: Councilman Wing moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the 1991 budget amendment for the Lake Ann Picnic/Recreation Shelter with the 1 following specifics: watermain extension versus wells, Option 3 for sanitary sewer connection to Greenwood Shores, a steel beam in lieu of the timber beam, delete the landscape lighting and the electrical portion will be looked into further for clarification. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS: Mayor Chmiel : I just wanted to bring up that the Comprehensive Plan was propose' to the committee. They recommended everything we asked for, which was really sort of neat . It goes to the Metropolitan Council this Thursday afternoon at 4 :00 and I plan on being there and some of the staff plans on being there . ThF didn't think it was absolutely necessary that we have a large entourage of people but nonetheless we want to make sure that we're going to ' have that opportunity to at least make sure that what we requested that we get support for that . I must say that Bonnie Featherstone representing the City of Chanhassen on the Metropolitan Council who resides in the city of Burnsville, did an excertional yeoman's job for us on this as well. That 's what I wanted to talk about on that . The other one was Arboretum Blvd. . I had a call from Willy Molnau having some concerns. He was here the last time but he missed the Visitor Presentation. It appears as though a lot of the road is, the ditches ' are still not taken care of. I'd like someone to check that out . He brought up another thing about sidewalks of which I think we've already put in what we planned on putting in but he was saying that a connection could be made with ' some adZitional carved in sidewalks so we have a ring through there. There's a lot of people utilizing that area. But I would like to have it checked out and if there are some additional discussions, someone contact Willy and make sure ' that everything is done according to the contract . That 's all I had. Tom? Councilman Workman: . . . kind of suspended in space and it 's having a rather major impact on those properties down there. They'd like to get the stuff going. They cannot even begin to sell their property or develop or other because nobody wants to buy a property that 's got highways on three sides under construction and so they'd like to get this stuff moving along and hopefully we ' can maybe ask engineering to do so, or at least give us the details on what 's going on there. We haven't heard about it. Construction season's flying by and some people would like to go. ' Mayor Chmiel : Maybe we can get a report back by administrative presentation by next Council meeting? Tom, RTB. ' 30 Cit'v Council Meeting - May 20, 1991 II Councilman Workman: I also was before the RTB people. I guess what I wanted to say was thanks to everybody. Ursula and Don and everybody who supported my nomination on this. It looks like we might find out on Thursday. It went very well. Rather than 6 applicants, I found out there was 12 of which apparently it has come down to two of us. And with that it looks very favorable. Bonnie Featherstone again doing, Dirk DeVries and I think Mary Anderson even had something to do with it but it felt real good to know that a lot of people had a lot of support and Diane Harverts and Southwest Metro and everybody else. That doesn't mean it 's, I mean politics being politics anything can happen but we'll know probably shortly. It looks good so in advance of any decision, thanks for the help. That 's all. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Ursula? ' Councilman Workman: Mr. Mayor, I did want to mention something on the editorial quickly. I was a bit stunned at the editorial that Tom Lapka did write. I do ' perhaps have an intention to write a written rebuttal I guess to it . It 's not the perception that I had. I guess the title is, the Council should wear one hat . Well , I had three meetings tonight . This one, Board of Equalization, Board of Adjustments and talking about giving up who knows how many hours for the RTB. I'm a businessman in town and proud of it . I go to church in town. I raise my family. I've got about a million hats. But what this editorial does is not only for me but I think for the Council and why I'm responding to it in this way for you guys is I think it challenges my integrity and the integrity of the Council. Because without integrity, I might as well pack it up now and not go to any of these meetings and once I compromise that integrity, then I may as well give it all up because I'm worthless after that . I not only think I showed integrity in the way I handled the situation. My personal situation but I think the Council did and I don't think that this editorial makes that clear. It makes it look like I in some way duped the Council. Had special privilege with the Council . I did not contact any Council member on this issue prior to it 's coming and somebody can tell me. I had a conversation with Mike at the Planning Commission meeting about a couple things for about a minute. I did not call anybody and say hey, how are you going to vote on this? What are you going to do? You've got to help me or anything else. And that 's the way I left it but when it comes to my personal business in town, there's nobody that 's going to defend my business the way I'm going to. Bob Copeland is neither my employer or a co-worker of mine and neither is Brad Johnson. They had separate issues with the Council and the Planning Commission, as did I. If I can no longer approach the Council on matters that affect my personal livelihood in this city, just as any Council member might sometime need a variance or something specific from the City Council, that City Council member cannot approach the Council the way I did, then we've got a serious Constitutional problem. I think. I think this editorial and it's an editorial because it certainly is not news; is laden with presumably's and there may very well be good reason's and nonetheless and hopefully's and everything else. I think it 's a pile of crap. Again, without integrity I'm worthless to this Council and I think that seriously challenges this. On the same note, I want to apologize and I think I did apologize to you guys about the situation you were placed in. The first vote came 2 to 2. I think that shows that I'm a poor lobbyist on this situation. We had many votes. I don't think we've ever left a vote tied. The new editor of the paper obviously didn't know that . I don't think we've ever left, we've always sat until 1:00 a.m. to make sure we decided the issues. We don't leave issues ' 31 , City Cou n_1 Meeting - Ma./ 20, 1991 t sitting. What I want to make clear is that the decision, what I got from the Council not create a variance situation to an ordinance or change to an ord_L:r': e . It changed a plan on a building which is changing in a changing doL:rtor . For changing needs. For changing businessmen.of which I would have dnnr tt,e c me for anybody else. I think this Council would have too. I don't ' thin I g,_ ' preferential treatment . When I came to the meeting, I knew that it could go either way. It was based, a lot of the decision at the Planning Commission level and City Council members was based on personal preference. I ' don't life the way ' 1 looks. I don't like the way it 's going to fit into the downtown, which is their perogative but it did not violate any ordinance or need a variance to any ordinance. Unless somebody can tell me that I did wrong, I would do this again. I don't think I'm going to have to have this happen again. ' It seem: like I hit the mother lode. I got everything I wanted anyway but this thing is about as bad as I've seen since I've got on. Nonetheless in a small town this type of thing is to happen. Which type of thing? What did I do wrong') That 's an accusation. Avoid giving the appearance of preferential consideration. There may be very good reasons for approving the proposed signamm . You 're damn right there is. I excused myself but then I approached ' the podium. Did I do something wrong? I don't think so. Presumably the Council was ultimately swayed by the strength of the' arguments and not who presented them. Presumably you guys did that . I think I ended up in better shape it this editorial than the Council did and I think it 's a slap for the ' poerle who spent time looking at it . I don't appreciate it . I'd like to get th 4 off m ' chsst . I did. I had lunch with Ursula a couple days later. She • voted against me on it . She ended up voting for me. ' Councilwoman Dimler: And you didn't slap me. ' Councilman Workman: We didn't even talk about it . And we had a lunch and a conversation that was based on mutual respect that I've had with everybody and I maintained rn integrity on the whole thing and enough said. tMayer Chin e] : Okay. I guess as I saw it too, is just one person's opinion. I've not received any objections to what we have done from anyone. ' Councilman Workman: Council members have. Mayor Chmiel : Have you? ' Councilwoman Dimler: Do you want us to comment on it? Our own feelings? Mayor Chmiei : Well , no. I think more than enough has been said. 1 Councilman Mason: I'd like to make a comment if I could because I, with all deferernce to Councilman Workman, I did not read the editorial that way at all. I didn't feel like I was being accused of having a lac.k of integrity and I didn't feel as though you were either. I quite honestly, when my wife read the editorial she said, well he makes some good points. I'm not saying that I ' agree or disagree with Mr. Lapka or that I agree or disagree with Councilman Workman but I do think that one of the, the needs of the community is to have people raising those kinds of issues. I think its something, particularly with the all the hats you wear and all the hats all of us wear, that we have to be aware of those things. ' 32 City Council Meeting - May 20, 1991 , II Councilman Workman: So you admit that I wear more than one hat? Councilman Wing: That 's not the issue. Councilman Mason: Yeah. I agree with Dick on that . I don't think that's the issue. I mean certainly you have legitimate business interests here just like I have legitimate business interests here. Who doesn't but I do think the editorial raised some good points. I'm not again, agree or disagree I don't know is the point but if it makes us think about what we're doing, maybe it will help us to continue to do a good job. Mayor Chmiel : Good. Ursula, you wanted to say something. Councilwoman Dimler : Yes. I guess now that it 's brought up. I wasn't going to say anything but to me a tie vote is actually a failed voted because the abstaining member, an abstenance counts as a no. So I guess that was never brought to the forefront and so then because it was, never said motion fails, we then decided to reconsider. I voted the first time with my head. The second time I voted with my heart. And just to be honest about it, I don't like to be put in that position. I just think that if the Council member that has an issue before us has a relative or someone else that has an interest in that as well, make the presentation and then leave the room. Granted you can read the Minutes but we all know that reading the Minutes is a totally different thing than being at the meeting. I didn't feel quite free to make the comments that I would have wanted to make. Councilman Wing: Mr. Mayor? Mayor Chmiel : Yes. ' Councilman Wing: I learned a new word out of this. It was called special pleading and I felt that after hours and hours of the Planning Commission work and a lot of opinions went into this, at the very last minute I was subjected to rather substantial pressure. I'm like Ursula. I feel the first time I voted with my head and the second time I gave in. The tie should have killed it right there but I just want to say publically Tom that I don't criticize what you did. I would prefer not to see a Councilman approach the Council on Council to Council, one to one basis. Council to Council based again for special interests. I did call the paper today. I just got this in the mail today and I read it . I read it and I felt it was reasonable and I did call the paper and I did say thank you. I found myself in agreement . I'll leave it at that . Councilman Warkman: Well because again, you're saying to me, and I can tell you where other Council members have had issues pertaining directly to them where they voted on the issues. I chose not to vote on it but that does not mean that I cannot , and you're going to tell me who. I'm a one man business. Who's going to represent me? Councilwoman Dimler: Dale could have come. Councilman Workman: Dale is not in my business. And Dale could not make it apparently. So what I'm saying and maybe it's a Constitutional question. Who represents Tom Workman? When Tom Workman has an issue, you're right. It's 33 ' • Cit , _. _ Me_'+ ing - May 20, 1991 c'i {ficrit E1-' I apologized for the situation. But if there was any way around because we all know how. Ma,Tr C _ &l : RathEr than continue on. Cour:cilwom;n Dimler : Can I just have one more comment? ' Ma;'or Chmiel : I would like to address the billboard issue. Councilwcran Dimler : Okay. Okay, no more comments about that . The billboard issue I looking a,t our upcoming meeting on June 8th where we're going to take the corridor trip to see how the future of this corridor should look and I think- we're all concerned about the aesthetics of it . I think that 's the reason that we 're doing this and so I would like to look in advance and to the •' possibility of having a billboard moratorium in our city. And I'm talking about these big advertising billboards. And I know that we have a few of them already and they would be grandfathered in but I would like to know about the legality of a moratorium and how the other council members would feel about this and basically get started on doing something if we can. I know other cities have done it and I'd like Chanhassen to be one that joins that . Ma c'r Chmiel : That would be Lady Bird Johnson's position on signs. Councilwoman Dimler: Beautification of our highways, right . ' Mayor Chmiel : If hearing no other discussions, I would entertain a motion for adjournment . ' Councilman Mason moved, Mayor Chmiel seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 10:40 p.m.. CumitieC by Don Ashworth Cif ' liafic l=1 Prepared by Nann Opheim I/ I I ' 34 il . CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MAY 15 , 1991 Chairman Emmings called the meeting to order at 7 : 37 p .m . . IMEMBERS PRESENT: Tim Erhart , Ladd Conrad , Annette Ellson , Steve Emmings , Brian Batzli , Jeff Farmakes and Joan Ahrens ISTAFF PRESENT: Paul Krauss , Planning Director ; Jo Ann Olsen , Senior Planner and Steve Kirchman , Building Inspector IPUBLIC HEARING: ' CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A STORAGE SHED TO BE LOCATED IWITHIN THE 75 FOOT SHORELAND SETBACK FOR PROPERTY ZONED RSF AND LOCATED AT 102 SANDY HOOK ROAD, PETER MOSCATELLI . IJo Ann Olsen presented the staff report on this item . Emmings: What is the status of the adoption of the new Shoreland IOrdinance? Olsen: We 've gotten our notification that we have to do it . I 'm going to be meeting with Ceil next month to get the process initiated . IEmmings: What do you have to do? I Olsen : We have to pretty much review all the lake designations to still make sure if it 's a recreational or environmental . Then we go through a checklist of what our ordinance currently , what we have to change . Just go through the shoreland regulations and whether or not we agree to them and change whatever we want to change . Emmings: Wasn 't there something about us having to have it done by a Icertain time? Olsen: 2 years . We have until January of 1993 . , I Emmings : Oh , okay . When do we expect to get it done? I Olsen: When do we expect to? Emmings : Yeah . I Olsen: Well I was hoping to do it this summer . But next year , I 'would not count on it being completed until next year . IBatzli : Until the summer of 1992? Olsen: Yes . IEmmings: So , alright . This is a public hearing . If the applicant is here , this would be an opportunity to tell us anything additional . 111 Peter Moscatelli : I 'm here but I don 't really have anything additional . I Planning Commission Meeting May 15 , 1991 -- Page 2 Emmings : Alright . Are there any other members of the public here that want to address themselves to this application? Is there a motion to close the public hearing? Erhart moved, Batzli seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed . Erhart : Why do we restrict water supply? What difference does it make? Is it the applicant 's request or staff 's request to restrict the water . . .? Olsen: You mean for habitation? Erhart : No . I understand the habitation . I 'm just saying why not , why can 't he have a water hose? I mean a guy can put a hydrant anyplace out there . A guy could put an underground sprinkler system in . What 's the reason for that? Olsen: I think that 's the wordage that the DNR uses for the restriction so I don 't know why it couldn 't have water supply . I think it was more for habitation . For cleaning fish or something . Erhart : Oh yeah . I mean clearly . Everybody . . .habitation . That 's my only II comment . . .that just seemed , I don 't know why that 's in there . Emmings : And along the same lines you know , there 's a lot of our lakes , II the sewer goes between the house and the lakeshore . It 'd be very easy , if you wanted to bring the water in too and water 's actually harder to get in . But having a toilet or something in there . . . Erhart : You mean your concern someone would use it for human habitation? Emmings: I don 't really care but I 'm sure that 's what the DNR 's concerned II about . Erhart : I just think sometimes it 's useful for accessory buildings to have II a hydrant for like putting out lawn sprinklers and stuff . I 'm just wondering why . Emmings: Or just gardening or potting or whatever . 1 Conrad : Was the resident to the north sent a notification? Or to the west? ' Olsen: Right . Everyone within 500 feet . . . I know that even Mr . Pfankuch or Frost was in . Is he to the west of you? Peter Moscatelli : He 's to the east . Olsen: The resident to the west , they were notified . I Peter Moscatelli : There 's actually not a resident . I I • Planning Commission Meeting May 15 , 1991 - Page 3 IIConrad : Is that a vacant? Peter Moscatelli : It 's a vacant lot . IIConrad : What is our standard for height on a building? It says 10 feet . That 's our current standard . What is the standard for size? IIOlsen : For size? Conrad: Yeah . 11 Olsen: Well now the ordinance , it can 't be like 1 ,000 square feet . 1 Conrad: Because that 's a back , that has nothing to do with a lake ordinance? That 's really just a residential lot ordinance? Olsen : Right . That 's our accessory structure . IIConrad : Accessory structure . IIOlsen : What 's the height of the building that you 're putting up? Peter Moscatelli : Oh , well . It would be a maximum about 7 feet . . . I 'll II keep it as short as possible because it 's kind of down , tucked into the hill so the visibility from my house to the lake over it . Conrad : And what do you think if somebody built to the west of you , do you IIthink it 's going to be , is it obstructing any visual line of sight that you can see? II Peter Moscatelli : No , not at all . Because the lake is off in the western diretion so that lot would be the other way and the building is back from the lake . . . IIConrad : I guess I 'm uncomfortable with the ordinance . I don 't know where staff is coming from in terms of the next ordinance that we take a look at but the 10 feet in height in my mind is not acceptable . This has nothing IIto do with the applicant right now . That 's not an acceptable height to me . Olsen: . . . high? IIConrad: Yes , absolutely . 10 feet is as high as this ceiling . On the lake side , I just can 't imagine . If my neighbor put up a 10 foot building , that 's going to block my , that 's going to be offensive . We 're not dealing I with a back yard . We 're dealing with the lake side which many people treat as a front yard . It 's a whole different nLentality here . The 75 foot setback change to 50 , that doesn 't bother me too much because , II environmentally that doesn 't bother me . There 's enough screening and things like that? In 50 feet you can do a lot so I 'm comfortable with that . I 'm not comfortable that the new ordinance or wherever we 're going II is taking care of neighbors and that 's why I was asking if the neighbors were in fact notified? I think in this particular , in a 250 foot standard , II Planning Commission Meeting May 1S , 1991 -- Page 4 1 again that 's a big building in somebody 's front yard . Well on the lake and if we 're talking boat houses , I 'm not sure what we 're talking about . I 'm really kind of uncomfortable with maybe what I see . The staff report is saying our new standards are going to be . I think we need to look at them . I think we need lake people input to tell us whether they 're right or wrong II and obviously we ' ll go through a public hearing but I think we should make an effort , and I know Jo Ann you will , to make sure the lake associations are informed . That aside , the applicant and what they 're asking for , what II he 's asking for tonight , I 'm comfortable with . I just don 't know that , I guess I 'm only uncomfortable with am I setting a precedent? Is there any precedent setting , you know we haven 't gone through a public hearing and we 're saying S4 feet is okay because that 's what our new standard is going II to be and I 'm not sure yet . I haven 't had the input . Ellson: Something new proposed? Conrad: Right . And so I 'm trying to justify it based on something I 'm not sure of but I do feel that the applicant 's proposal is acceptable based on I what I can see . Ellson: I agree that it looks fine . I did want to tell Peter though . I II was greeted at the curb by your nice growling dog so I didn 't really get to see the back yard . After talking with him , the dog kind of liked me but as I took a couple more steps he started growling so I didn 't even come closer . Batzli : Sam? Is there a dog house back there with Sam on it? Peter Moscatelli : Yeah . Batzli : Okay . I called the dog the wrong name . Apologize for me . Ellson : Yeah , he didn 't quite like redheads but I don 't have a problem with it . Batzli : Is that about where the structure is going to go? Back where the II dog house is? Peter Moscatelli : Yeah . 1 Batzli : Because really then the vacant lot to the west is it? That 's really up a slope in addition to the dog house being down a slope so I guess I don 't have a problem with this particular location . Peter Moscatelli : If I could comment on the location of the structure . It II would tend to obscure the view of the lake from my house more than anywhere so I 'm kind of taking on every effort to minimize that . To be as short as possible and to be tucked into the hill as much as possible . Batzli : I just had a comment on the first condition . I assume when we say that it 's made of cedar siding , that we 're talking about it has an exterior of cedar siding? , I 1 I Planning Commission Meeting May 15 , 1991 - Page 5 IIOlsen : Right . Batzli : And in number 4 Jo Ann . Does that mean they have to maintain I vegetation between, the accessory structure and Lotus Lake and the accessory structure and the neighboring properties? In other words , it 's between the water oriented accessory structure and both Lotus Lake and neighboring properties . II Olsen : Right . I Batzli : I guess just really hypertechnical but I mean there 's a path that goes down there right now so obviously it 's not like contiguous . IOlsen: With the lake , right . Batzli : That 's okay? You 're just talking about you need some natural vegetation around the structure? IIOlsen: And to maintain what 's there . Maintain that screen . IBatzli : That 's all I have . Farmakes: I think it 's in an unobtrusive spot . I don 't see where it 's I going to bother any line of sight or anybody 's visual sight to the lake and I have no objections to this . Ahrens : I think the site is fine too . I don 't have any problem with it I although I 'm kind of curious as to why we call this a water oriented accessory structure . It just seems like it 's a storage shed located near a lake . IOlsen : That 's essentially what it was . But also one of the main purposes of this was for his canoes and paddles and boats . IAhrens : But it doesn 't have to be used for a water accessory structure? Olsen : No . IIAhrens : It doesn 't have to be used for . IOlsen : No . It can be used for others . Ahrens : . . .anything that says they have to use it for any specific purpose? I Olsen : No . He can still put his lawnmower in there . IAhrens : Why is it called water oriented then? Olsen: Again I 'm just starting to , that 's the terminology used in the DNR I regulations currently and the new one where it is primarily for the boat accessories . Motors , things like that that need to be closer to the lake 11 Planning Commission Meeting May 15 , 1991 - Page 6 so people don 't have to haul it as far . That 's one of the reasons that they 've allowed exceptions into the 75 foot setback . Ahrens: But it doesn 't really have to be used for that? Olsen : No . Ahrens : Something seems odd there to me . I don 't know . It seems like if it 's not going to be required to be used for water oriented activities , why should we give any special treatment as to how close it is to the lake? The setback . ' Batzli : I think the people who live on the lake would say that anything built between the house , the standard kind of line of the houses are inbetween the lake and should be considered that so you don 't end up with things on the lake . You need to have that setback whether it 's going to be oriented for water uses or just a backyard tool shed . Ahrens: I understand that but I 'm wondering why we call it something if it doesn 't have to be used for that purpose . Batzli : Because it gives it more restriction if you call it that . I Ahrens: How? Batzli : Because then it needs to have a larger setback . I mean if you just called it a tool shed and you didn 't consider that you were on the lake , then you just need what? A 5 foot , 10 foot setback off the back lot I line? Emmings: No . No , because you can 't build a structure within 75 feet of the lake . To have a structure in that area it must be either a boat house or a water oriented accessory structure . You can 't put the 1 ,000 foot . Olsen : Garage . I Emmings: Yeah , or the storage building within 75 feet of the lake . But you can build something you call , so you change the name a little bit . I think as a matter of fact Joan , I have one of these . I have a water oriented . Ahrens: What 's in your shed? , Emmings : All the inflatables that you blow up for the kids to play on . The paddles and the knee boards and the ski equipment and it would be , life II would be pure hell for me if I didn 't have it I can tell you . Ahrens: Well , that was my point . ' Emmings : But I think as a matter of fact people , at least with my neighbors and things , the stuff like lawn mowers and all the stuff you II normally put in a storage shed stays away from the lake side and the stuff I/ IIPlannir D Commission Meeting May 15 , 1991 -- Page 7 I that acts down there by the shore is , it 's either picnic stuff or directly associated with the lake somehow . I Ahrens: I was just noticing that the applicant said it was going to be used for storage of lawn equipment . That 's all I have . II Emmings: Alright . The only thing I 've got is in number 4 . It seems to me that the applicant should be required to screen this by vegetation . Not just maintain by vegetation . But other than that , I don 't really have a . - problem with this . Is there any further discussion? Conrad: Are we setting a precedent on this case? ' Olsen : I don 't believe so . Conrad: Are we prejudicing the new ordinance in any way? II Olsen : Oh no . I 'm still using the same criteria that we 've dealt before with . II Emmings: Under the new ordinance this would be a permitted use if we adopt it the way it is . Here it 's a conditional use permit and we 're going under the old , I guess we 're going under the old ordinance . The only question 1 is , that I suppose you could raise would be , if we don 't want these things at all and if we 're going to make a stricter standard than the new ordinance that 's coming out , do we want to apply that in this case? Maybe that 's the same question you 're asking . IIAhrens : But if we don 't know what the standard is , how can we apply it? IEmmings : It 's hard to apply a standard you haven 't made yet . Conrad : All you can do is what we 're doing and the only thing we 've got is II 75 feet . Batzli : I move that the Planning Commission recommends approval of conditional use permit #91-3 as shown on the plans dated May 8 , 1991 with I the following conditions . Condition 1 to read , the structure must have an exterior of cedar siding and a roof of cedar shakes and be painted a similar color as the principal structure . Number 2 and 3 as in the staff I report . Number 4 to read , the applicant must screen the water oriented accessory . Now wait a minute . What did you have for that? I Emmings: It doesn 't make sense the way I have it . Ahrens : How about for the purpose of screening? Vegetation for the purpose of screening . 1 Batzli : Alright . The applicant must maintain for the purpose of screening between the water oriented accessory structure and both Lotus Lake and IIneighboring properties . II II Planning Commission Meeting May 15 , 1991 - Page 8 Emmings : Is there a second? ' Ellson: Second . Emmings: Any discussion? ' Batzli moved, Ellson seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Conditional Use Permit #91-3 as shown on plans dated May 8 , 1991 with the following conditions: 1 . The structure must have an exterior of cedar siding and a roof of cedar II shakes and painted a similar color as the principal structure . 2 . The structure may not be used for human habitation and may not contain water supply or sewage treatment facilities . 3 . The structure may not exceed a height of 10 feet . 4 . The applicant must maintain for the purpose of screening between the water oriented accessory structure and both Lotus Lake and neighboring properties. All voted in favor except Ladd Conrad who opposed and the motion carried with a vote of 6 to 1 . Emmings: Ladd why? Conrad: No reason . No , I 'm a little bit uncomfortable with the 10 foot standard . I think I 'd like to review the new ordinance before , or the new II standards that we applied . Emmings: Well , but my understand Ladd is that he 's got to have a 7 foot maximum . That 's the plan we 're approving for him . Conrad: I didn 't see that on the plan . It can 't go to 10 but it 's not 7 feet . Emmings: Wait a minute . We 're approving his plan . Has he presented a plan of the structure showing a height? Olsen: It doesn 't really show the height on it . Emmings : Alright . Conrad: It passed . _ 1 Erhart : Can you make sure it 's clear in the Minutes what you 're . Emmings: Well I certainly passed it with the understanding that it 'd be 7 II feet maximum is what he told us . Olsen : I ' ll put that to the Council when it goes to Council . I I I Planning Commission Meeting May 15 , 1991 - Page 9 IBatzli : Well I think , not to put words in his mouth that that 's the walk in height and then you have a peak . Is it 7 feet at the highest? At the peak? IIPeter Moscatelli : Yeah . I can 't imagine , it certainly wouldn 't be more than 7 1/2 or 8 feet . Very close to 7 feet . There 's a requirement on thy== pitch which it has to . . . I would try pretty hard to keep it within . IIConrad : But it 's also dug into the hill . IPeter Moscatelli : Yeah . The hill would . . .probably at least that high . Conrad : Visually I think it 's going to be . . .uncertain with some of our Istandards nd I 'm making a point . Emmings : Okay . And for his benefit this will go to the City Council when? June 10th? II Olsen : June 10th . IPUBLIC HEARING: INTERIM USE PERMIT FOR THE EXPANSION OF THE DRIVING RANGE AT SWINGS GOLF RANGE ON PROPERTY ZONED A-2 AND LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF HWY 5 I AND GALPIN BOULEVARD, JOHN PRYZMUS . Jo Ann Olsen presented the staff report . Chairman Emmings called the IIpublic hearing to order . Emmings : John , do you want to address us on this at all? II John Pryzmus : Yeah . Emmings : If you could come up here please . IIJohn Pryzmus: Just a couple things . The plan that I used when I did the alterations was a plan that you have had . It was done by a landscape I architect in 1986 so that 's with the berming and what was proposed in 1986 is what we had . And I just had never finished anything north of the parking lot so up until this point , I did all the berming from the north of I the parking lot to the end and I did an additional berm to screen my equipment because the equipment is then sitting in the parking lot . And so the additional berm to the north . Now as far as the additional tee area , you know it 's not at this point , and never will be , it 's for the golf pro I and his student . I just wanted him to be away from the rest of the people and the club which is coming out so staff s protraying it as a big - expansion to my operation . It 's just one person teaching another person I how to golf back there . The batting cages would be all outdoors . There would be nets similar to . . . And the building there would be for the golf pro for his office and you have TV 's in there to review your video of your swing and that . Then I would have it for an additional storage for the winter . My equipment is getting pretty beat up . I can 't keep anything I Planning Commission Meeting May 15 , 1991 - Page 10 I running when it has to sit out in the snow banks all winter so I would , that 's why I need , I was proposing to have another building like the one. up above although the berming that I 've done with the landscaping would pretty much screen it . I don 't even know if you 'd be able to see it from the 11 road . It 's set down in back of the berms so what I 've done so far to this point is pretty much landscaping and the dirt I moved was for the landscaping and now the site for the proposed batting cages would be , you II wouldn 't have to do any more work to it so in effect while I was doing all my landscaping , I was moving dirt from strategic areas . As far as sewer , I had paid a sewer operation to come out and we had planned on having a bermed septic system and somebody somewhere , it wasn 't me , decided I couldn 't have that and they made me put in the tanks . I didn 't know anything about the tanks . All of a sudden that 's what my option was . I didn 't have any other option . So even though I had already paid for all of the technical work for the sewer , somewhere I suppose being that there will be sewer and water out there , they didn 't want to have another septic system put in there for something . Erhart : Excuse me . Who 's they? Was it the City? John Pryzmus: The staff . City staff , yeah . It wasn 't me . Erhart : Can you respond to that? Olsen: It 's unclear exactly why the holding tanks were approved and I 'm not sure , was it Machmeier and Anderson that you worked with on the septics? John Pryzmus: I think they came out . They were recommended by the City to II come out and do the soil testing . Larry Vandeveire had set out , I hired Larry Vandeveire to set out to do the septic system . But now as far as the tank itself , it gets pumped whenever it gets 3/4 full . Jeff Swedlund stops by . He works closely with the people of Chanhassen so it said in the report that they never get a report . He works with the City . I don 't know • who he reports to but he pumps it . He goes by every day so he checks it and we 've never had . I mean if 3 more people used my tank it would cost me more to pump it but it isn 't going to cause any effect on the environment or anything else . The septic company just comes and pumps it and at this II point I don 't know . When it gets 3/4 full and then he checks it and that 's maybe once every 2 weeks , 3 weeks . So I would say with my total expansion proposal , I 'm not going to have but 30-40-50 more people with the batting cage , maybe more than that in the real peak season right away in the spring II but if it fills up every week I 'll just have to pay to have it pumped every week instead of every 3 weeks . So it 's not an environmental problem to have a tank . I thought once the city staff made me do it , I thought it was II a great idea . You know as long as they 're going to put in , we 're going to have the MUSA line out there someday anyway , then all we have to do is just hook up to the MUSA line and I don 't have a big septic system to deal with . II But like I say , I didn 't , that wasn 't something I just dreamt up . Emmings : Just one question John . I 'm sure everybody up here would like to I hear an explanation as to why we see a history like this . Why it appears Planning Commission Meeting IIMay 1S 1991 -- Page 11 I from what we have in front of us and from our prior experience with you and with your facility , why we 've imposed conditions in the past that have not been fulfilled on the one hand . On the other hand , you 've repeatedly improved the site or made alterations to the site without getting prior Iapproval from the ' City and I 'd like to know why . John Pryzmus : Well first of all , I didn 't write that story . If I 'd have I wrote th- dory it would have read a little different . I just explained to you whe- came up here that that plan was submitted in 1986 and it went all through the process . I didn 't get it all done at the time because Ifinancially I couldn 't . Once I didn 't get the building , I didn 't get all the berming done and all the trees planted and I just worked at it when my money became available to do the whole expansion . And all of the trees and all the herming . I don 't know if you ever go by there but every year I 'm 1 doing more and more and it 's always to enhance the beauty of it . It 's always landscaping . I haven 't built anything . I haven 't built one more building . I haven 't built anything and I still haven 't . Emmings: Are you putting up a fence? II John Pryzmus : That was part of the original approval . I was supposed to have a fence not over 6 feet high in the Minutes of a deal a long time ago and I put the posts in 3 years ago but being that I have to go back and forth with dirt and trees and landscaping , I 've never put the fence up . II I 've had the wire ever since and I just never put the fencing on but that was a part of the original approval . I Emmings : Alright , thanks . Is there anybody else here from the public who wants to be heard on this application? Is there a motion to close the public h ing? I Conrad moved, Batzli seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed . IAhrens : I think the site is a real good site for all the things that the applicant is trying to do here . I think it looks to me like there wasn 't a lot of capital to begin with to develop all the things he needed to develop I it from so he 's tried real hard it looks to me , even though there 's been a lot of problems with the city and I 'm not sure who 's to blame for those problems . But it seems to me he 's trying real hard to make it into a nice place . Even though he 's got some problems with completing a lot of these I things he 's trying to do as far as landscaping goes . I have a problem with the whole holding tank sewer issue and I don 't understand . If the City approved holding tanks , why the City is now forcing him to install a septic II system . Olsen: The only reason we could figure out why they would have approved II the holding tank is that the two approved septic sites had been altered . There was a lot of grading taking place out on the site where the two sites were supposed to be preserved and from what I can tell from the correspondence that those sites were lost when the applicant was grading on IIthe site and his only alternative then was to not be permitted what he had II II Planning Commission Meeting May 15 , 1991 - Page 12 1 or to hook up to the holding tank . It 's not clear . It 's just all of a sudden he was allowed to have the holding tanks . Ahrens : But they were approved . And it doesn 't seem to be causing any 11 large problem out 'there . It has been pumped . Olsen: I don 't know . We don 't know how often he 's pumping . We 're not getting . , Ahrens : There 's no impact on the environment or anything like that? Olsen : If it 's being done properly but we don 't have , one of the , conditions of the holding tank was that he do , he does have them pumped and that he does provide us with those records and we haven 't received those . Ahrens: Is there any reason why he couldn 't continue using those besides , I mean . Olsen: I 'm not sure what kind of capacity . . . Kirchman : The capacity of the tank can be whatever the size of the tank is . So there wouldn 't be a problem with continued use . Ahrens : There would or would not? Kirchman: It would not be a problem with continued use if there are no other sites available for septic . I guess our feeling is , the individual sewage treatment rules from the State of Minnesota prohibit holding tanks if septic sites are available . There were two sites available at one time and they were apparently destroyed . If the use on the site doesn 't intensify , holding tanks were approved and I would suggest we let him continue using those as long as we 're provided with a pumping contract and records of pumping as originally agreed on . However , if the use is intensified , then I would suggest that the applicant search the site to find if there are any acceptable sites for sewage treatment mounds and put II in treatment sites . Ahrens: Are there any acceptable sites? Kirchman: We don 't know . He 's got a lot of acreage out there . If it 's all been disturbed then there would be no sites . It has to be on II undisturbed soil and he would have to get someone out there to investigate as he did before and rope the sites off and protect them from any construction activity until the septic systems are put in . John Pryzmus : I think at the time the only site that was available was the II site to the north of the parking lot . That 's where the two sites were . There was going to be a hill and berm system . And at that time they were both approved and they were roped off . Then once they sit , and I don 't know why the tank became an option but once it was , then that site was not preserved anymore . There weren 't any other sites because it was all altered . flarini nD Commission Meeting IIMay 1 c , 1 c3`C'1 - Page 13 II AhrenL : There are no other sites is what you 're saying? John Pr/zmus : No . Everything had been scraped . . . You have to stay so far from the creek and you have to . . . IIOlsen: But those were two sites that were protected and that was very clearly understood that they were supposed to be preserved so . ilKirchman: We don 't know when the sites were disturbed . If they were disturbed after he put his holding tanks in or before . We 're assuming that IIthey were disturbed before because I can 't imagine why we would have forced him to have holding tanks when he had two sites that were roped off and protected . That 's the whole idea of it was to have sites available for septic so our assumption is that they were disturbed before the holding IItanks went in . The reason the holding tanks were allowed was because the sites were disturbed and there were no available sites . But here again we don 't have any records to back that up . IIAhrens : What are the issues involved? I guess I really don 't understand still why the holding tanks aren 't satisfactory even if he expands the I site . Kirchman : Well , holding tanks traditionally have problems in that they deteriorate under ground and they get cracks and they leak . Pumping has IIalways been a problem . Getting the pumping contracts . Getting them pumped out properly and then properly disposing of the septage after they 're pumped . So that is why an individual or a septic site is the preferable II way to treat sewage as opposed to pumping . Ahrens : But if it 's maintained well and . IIKirchman : If it 's maintained well . Ahrens: I mean septic systems can leak too right? 1 Kirchman : Well , if they 're designed correctly they work . I Ahrens: Right . But if the holding tanks are designed correctly and they 're maintained they ' ll work too right? Kirchman : That is correct . However , another point is that State Statute says that if another site 's available , he can 't have holding tanks . So if sites aren 't available and that 's no choice , then that would be his only alternative . IIKrauss: If I might add too , there 's a policy question involved here . We 've just gone through a 2 year effort to get the MUSA line moved and I II think you 're all familiar with that . One of the concepts with the MUSA line that the Metro Council feels strongly about , I think as a policy question we should feel strongly about . Is that areas outside the MUSA line should not be on the metro service system . That 's the whole point of IIit . Holding tanks get around that . Basically we 're not having on site II PlanninD Commission Meeting May 15 , 1991 - Page 14 I dispoEal . All that stuff is trucked to where we do have a site and dumped into our system and it 's the City that 's paying for the treatment of this stuff . I 'm sure there 's some kind of a drop charge . . .but it gets at , you know there 's a related issue that , remember several years ago Mills Fleet Farm was talking to the Metro Council about some sort of special allowance to allow them to have tankage for on site systems on the presumption that they could be developed as a rural use . Well , I mean this is sort of an oddit/ and we 're willing to live with this oddity as a status quo . But there 's some policy limitations if you 're allowed to expand based on the use of the tank and it goes against the building code , it goes against Metro Council policy and it goes against what I think is good rational policy for us to adopt in the City as well . Ahrens. : I don 't argue with you on that Paul . It 's just that it was approved b/ the city at some point and the approval may have been against public policy at that time but there was an approval for him to use that . Olsen : But not necessarily for expansion . ' Ahrens : No , but the expansion here involves some batting cages , a building that 's going to contain , it 's not really going to increase the use by that much . They 're going to have a storage area for some equipment and what you 'd say , a video? John Pryzmus : A TV screen to show your , the pro uses a video camera when he gives his golf lesson . . . Right now he 's using his van . He has a generator in his van until we get an acceptance . Ahrens : It just doesn 't seem like the use is going to be that intensified . I I mean it 's not like the State Fair or something where you 're going to have thousands and thousands of people going through every day . Krauss: We don 't have good numbers for this but I think it should be clear too that the applicant is desiring to have substantial increase in on site parking . I Ahrens : Well that also may be a very optimistic move . Krauss : They get pretty busy . ' Ahrens: Yeah they do but most people go on the site for about an hour and 11 then leave . Anyway , do you plan to have as many , I mean the area . . . is huge for the batting cages . John Pryzmus: No , mine would be about half that . You would never have more than , well the person that comes to hit will spend about a half an hour hitting softballs and so right now I don 't have any parking problems at all'. I 'm assuming that I could but with my berming and with my design and I think Dave , when I was doing the landscaping , I already predesigned to make sure the drainage goes into a holding area with rock and so it seeps out into the grass . We won 't make any additional runoff . . . You can 11 have . . .maybe 10-15 more people there but we don 't get hardly any use of the 1 fl nn n Ccmmission Meeting 1 May 15 , 1991 - Page 15 II t<<throer . That 's why , and really I will have Jeff drop off the receipts of his pumping . I thought he was doing that . I didn 't know there was even a proLlern with the septic until a couple days ago . But there is very little use of that facility at this point . People that hit golf balls come IIthere and they 're there for about half an hour . Ahrens : Yeah , I can 't imagine . IIJohn Pryzmus : They do use it periodically but it 's not something where you have dinner and you sit there for an hour and a half or two and drink a lot Iof liquids and then use the bathroom . Ahrens : No , I agree with that . That 's reasonable and I 'm going to recommend approval of this despite the problems . However I would like to I condition that on you coming into compliance in at least the landscaping areas and the berming . That was an issue? I don 't have a problem with the building . It 's going to be the same size as the existing building . It 's II not a very large building . I don 't see that the use of the bathroom facilities is going to increase that much to require a septic system , to requir : t ' He applicant have to comply with septic system requirements . I third h: ` :ling tank , if the City wants to require conditions that he I submit the receipts . Are there receipts of the pumping of the holding tank_ or something or regulate the upkeep of the holding tanks , I 'd go along with that but I think it 's sufficient for the use that 's there now IIand that will be there when the expansion takes place . Emmings : Time out . Your recommendation is that we approve the sign and I the 10 video games and otherwise deny any improvements until everything he 's been required to do in the past has been done , right? Ahrens : Correct . II Emmi_nc a : And the alternative they 're asking for Joan is , if we 're going to approve: expansion , then they want us to table it so they can develop Iconditions . Are you saying something different than that? Ahrens : Their recommendation is that we approve the sign and the video Igames and that we deny the improvements to the site period . Emmings : Okay . Is that what you 're saying? 1 Olsen: Fight . On page 13 at the bottom we were saying that should you recommend approval , that we would recommend tabling until we can . IEmmings: Wait a minute . We have too many conversations going here . Batzli : Take charge . ' IEmmings : I think if we followed your recommendation we 'd be denying the expansion . The other improvements that he wants . And I take it that we 'd consider those again once he 's done , lived up to all the conditions that Ihave been imposed on him in the past that he has not yet? Planning Commission Meeting 111 May 15 , 1991 - Page 16 Olsen: Right . That 's one of the options . That 's correct . , Emmings : Okay . But if there 's going to be approval , you want it tabled so you can develop conditions? I Olsen : Correct . Emmings: Alright . And I want to know if when you said you 'd like to see ' this approved , if you 're saying something different than one of those two things? Ahrens : I 'm recommending that we approve the sign . The interim use permit to permit the signage . Emmings: Okay . And? Ahrens : And the expansion of the site . Emmings : With what conditions? That 's the problem I 'm having . We don 't have conditions . We have a few here from the staff but the staff says they ' don 't feel they 've developed , adequately developed conditions for an approval . Or are you just going to approve it the way he wants to do just whatever he 's proposing? Ahrens : Well there are existing , I 'm a little confused about this . There II are existing conditions of approval as I understand it . Olsen: Correct for what was approved . , Ahrens : . . .conditions . Olsen: Well those were just some . Giving you a start on what we would be requiring . Like grading and drainage plans . Ahrens : Those are just some . That 's not a complete list? 11 Olsen: No , it 's not a complete list because we need more , to really recommend approval we need more complete plans . It 's still not real clear the parking that he 's proposing . Emmings: Well , we don 't know if he 's proposing batting cages inside or , outside . If it 's inside , what the building 's going to look like . If it 's outside , is it going to be lighted . Ahrens : I thought it was outside . Olsen: We don 't know that . Emmings : Well it may be . Ahrens : He said yes . ' Emmings: But he hasn 't submitted a plan in enough detail for the staff to even look at it Joan I think is the problem . I Planning Commis on Meeting May 15., 1991 - Page 17 1 Ahrens : Maybe we 're looking at this prematurely then , the whole deal? Olsen : For approval , yes . IEmmings : Okay . Why don 't you think about it . IAhrens : I will Steve . How much time do I have? Emmings: 4 minutes . I 'll be back . IIBatzli : By the time it gets back to her , she ' ll have a lot more . . . Farmakes: The plan that I 'm looking at right now says '86 . This plan I showing vegetation that 's planned or is it also showing existing vegetation? There 's a notation on the north side that says existing vegetation and it 's got a little arrow . Is that the only tree we 're II looking at that 's still standing or , I was out at the site today and there seems that there 's some vegetation that 's not on this plan . Do you intend on altering the vegetation as it stands now or where the batting cage area 11 is or the parking area is by there? KH John Pryzmus : No I basically , other than we 're doing a massive flower planting . . .geraniums this past weekend and another 600 vinca vines and II we 'll be doing a couple thousand petunias but I will be adding shurbs and trees periodically but I 'm about 95% done . I mean the berms with the evergreens and the shurbs and the willows and a lot of the trees have I stayed there . I saved them all . They 're expensive so I tried to save as many trees as I can . This spring now I planted 21 more Black Hills spruce in case someday the willow trees , you know I have to take the willow tree down or something . I 'm trying to replace . . . IFarmakes: Do you intend on cutting down many trees that are there now? IJohn Pryzmus: No , not at all . Farmakes : So your intent then is to . . .this plan here eventually when you have the funds to do it? II John Pryzmus: Yeah . This is , I 'm done . I mean I don 't have to move any , all the dirt I moved was for the berming purposes and the planting of the I trees and the flowers and making the flower beds . In other words we 're just about done with making our planters and what have you . We 've got about a . . .and flower planting is what we 're doing now . IIFarmakes : In the plans that you submitted in 1986 , was there a batting cage listed in there? I John Pryzmus: No . On that particular plan , where the batting cage was going to go , there was a proposal for an indoor golf and batting building . IIFarmakes : What would be the maximum height of that cage? Is that a tent structure with a . . . il John Pryzmus : Yeah . From the berm , maybe only 5 feet above the berm . It would be , I designed it when I was building the berm pretty much contained Planning Commis :on Meeting • May 15 , 1991 - Page 18 within my area . That 's the tree planting , what have you . I would hope that you could . . .as far as seeing additional building going on now . . .what I 'm proposing now . The new building I 'm proposing is set inbetween two berms and you won 't see it from the road . The batting cages will be , you 'll be standing where you won 't be able to be seen from the road . The machine will be pitching up from down . You know the balls will run down . I don 't know if you've ever been to a batting cage . Farmakes : Yes . John Pryzmus : Some of them the ball comes rolling back down this way and then it goes on an elevator . These would go down . You know I think they made a note that there was some washing . Well my berms all the grass has started to come down . I 've sodded around into there . . .but I didn 't do anything with that area that would be . . .I think I 'm going to put blacktop and then carpet instead of like . . .has concrete . Farmakes: Do you have any architectural things that you 've submitted? Does II the staff have anything as to the height of this cage or whether or not it would be seen or would be screened? Olsen : We haven 't received anything . Farmakes : So it wasn 't submitted in '86 and it 's not submitted now? John Pryzmus : I said what was submitted in '86 was what I 've done so far . The perming and planting and that . On the plan in '86 there was an area right where I put one of the teaching holes . Farmakes : So it wasn 't your intent to build these batting cages or whatever until you submitted the proper? , John Pryzmus: Right . Until I get the plans . What I 'm saying is , I didn 't do anything basically that was illegal like it makes it sound like I was II doing all kinds of things illegal . I was planning on coming and getting. a permit for the batting cages once I can financially do it . I won 't be able to financially do it this year but I am getting , I 'm basically getting pressure from the city saying I 'm expanding without permission so now I 'm going to get a permit hopefully and I 'll maybe for next year . . . Farmakes: Well , I have some concerns . One is the maintenance on the holding tank . The other one is I 'm a little , this is sort of the second time around and there seems to be a bit of an attitude problem on some of this stuff for development and it seems naive to me to think that if you 've got approval on plans in 1986 or 1987 that you believe that construction is alright to begin in 1991 . Times change . Ordinances change and I don 't think it enhances that attitude or a working relationship with the city to get into this sort of thing . I hope that 's changed or that that attitude ,. will change . I like the facility . I 've used it with my children and I agree . It seems that the landscaping and so on , they 're making an effort to improve it and make the place look nice and I hope that that continues . II And I hope that the relationship that you have with the City staff , maybe it will improve . Maybe it 's a matter of circumstances . I hope that 's the case . I guess I would approve this with conditions and I believe also that one of those conditions should be that we should hold that until he I , Planning Commission Meeting May 15., 191 - Page 19 I conforms to some of the points that city staff has listed on here . That 's the extent of my comments . I Batzli : A year and a half ago I started out by saying I have a real tough time being objective on this application . It seems like he does something and then we find out and he says , oh by the way can I have that . That 's I kind of irritating . I 'm starting to sound like a broken record I guess but I guess I 'd like to see follow through on both sides . If we have conditions and if we have these things , you know both sides I think have to show a little bit more commitment to following through on these things that II we agree on and I 'm not convinced yet that if we come up with conditions that we 're going to get anywhere with them . So I don 't know exactly what • kind of conditions we 're supposed to put in here . If that means he I complies with them 5 years down the road , does that mean he complies with them right away? I like the facility . I 've used it . I think it 's actually an asset but the cavalier attitude about doing things and then II coming in after the fact is irritating . I still try to look at this objectively but that 's tough to get over . That part of it . I think that given the fact that we imposed the holding tank on him as a condition and he 's made the investment in that , if in fact he can get the contract in II here and demonstrate that it 's pumped regularly and what have you , I don 't see why we would make him go to a drainfield kind of thing . I 'd like to see this tabled . I 'd like to see the staff work with him . See if we can II work with him and come up with something and a time table for doing these things . If we 're just going to put conditions on here that says he 's going to do something and not put a time table where if he doesn 't have it done , then what 's the point? That 's all I have . IIEllson : I would recommend denial of the expansion until he brings it up . I don 't know that I would be heavy duty on the septic system though if we 've Ialready said it 's okay to have a holding tank . But I think that if some of the other things haven 't already been met like he needs a certificate of occupancy , let 's get it all cleaned up . Since the batting cage is probably I a next year apparatus and things later , I 'd rather not see myself approving all that until the rest is cleaned and totally agreed upon between the two and then move forward with the next request . IConrad: When the holding tank was put in , do we inspect that? Steve Kirchman: We inspected the installation . The only inspection is , I it 's a manufactured tank . We just take a look at the installation to make sure that it was properly installed . Conrad : So can you have different conditions of holding tanks? Can it be IIused or do they have to be new when they go in? What are the standards? I don 't know what we 're talking about . Is this a metal? Is this synthetic? What is the holding tank? ISteve Kirchman: It 's a concrete , basically a septic tank is what it is . It 's concrete and it comes in different sizes . It 's got to be water tight . IIt 's got to have a manhole cover and two clean outs on each end . Conrad : And how do we know that it was when it went in? IISteve Kirchman: It was inspected when it ' went in . Planning Commission Meeting May 15 , 1991 - Page 20 Conrad: So we know that it was good . When it went in , it was a state of the art holding tank? Steve Kirchman: That 's correct . Conrad : Okay . There are some things that I think just have to be brought up to standards before I even consider anything here . And John , I think we like the facility out there . I think people are using it . I just really want to see the few things . The things that have not been done . I don 't want to consider anything , sign , video , anything until I can see what I perceive to be some simple things just done . Some things that haven 't been II approved . The flood light issue is still there and my understanding is they weren 't approved except for security and apparently maybe not on but they 're there and pointed in the wrong direction or something . I 'm not sure about the fence . The fence was not approved in the beginning? Olsen : On the exterior , yes . There 's now fence on the interior and now the ordinance requires you to get a permit for fencing . Conrad : So it was , say it again Jo Ann? Olsen: There was fencing shown on the first approved plan along •Galpin and II TH 5 . That 's where there 's posts and now there 's some internal fencing also . Again , they just need to get the permit . It 's real simple . Make sure the height is the right height . Conrad: You know , that seems like a simple thing to do . The permit for the fence . I think the building has to receive the Certificate of Occupancy . There 's just some simple things but until they 're done , I really don 't want to see anything . I just want to get rid of this and it has to be done right before we take a look at any sort of expansion . And I II think these are real simple things . They 're not difficult but I 'm not budging on that until they 're done . Erhart : Let me try to get clear in my mind . What is the problem? What do II you think they 've done? What do you think they haven 't done and what do you think they have done? What 's not conforming today in your mind Jo Ann? Okay, I got one . You think there 's flood lights? ' Olsen : Right . There are flood lights out there for lighting after hours . The hours were set at sunrise to sunset . So that 's one issue that we haven 't . Erhart : How many flood lights are out there? Olsen : How many? Erhart: Yeah . , Olsen: There are about , I noticed about 2 or 3 along TH 5 on the telephone poles or whatever and they were on the building . Saw it on at least 2 sides . 3 sides? 2 sides? Erhart : And who are you? , Plarninj Commission Meeting IMay 15 , 1991 - Page 21 ISteve Kirchman : Steve Kirchman . I 'm a building inspector . Erhart : Alright . I don 't know , did you introduce yourself or did I miss II that? Olsen : I kind of introduced him . IIEllson : Jo Ann introduced him while you were sleeping . Erhart : . ; e I was sleeping? Okay . John , what are the flood lights Ifor? Ark-. /ou using them? What are you using them for? John Pryzmus: Yeah , we use them for up lighting on all the shurbs is what the original approval was on it . IErhart : To do what? Up lighting? II John Pryzmus : Yeah . You know they 're only like this high off the ground and to shine on all the paths . IErhart : For what? People to get around after dark? John Pryzmus : Yeah . IErhart : So you are , you 're using the facility as a business after dark? John Pryzmus : The miniature golf has been open yes , after the sun went II down . Erhart : And that 's not permitted . - IOlsen : Not permitted . Erhart. : Okay , so in fact you are using it after dark and that wasn 't Ipermitted . Okay . What else? You 're saying you have some internal fences? Olsen: He just needs a fence permit for that . IErhart : If Bluff Creek Golf Course came in and wanted to put up a fence between their club house and the first tee , would they just do it ,or would they come in? IEllson : If you wanted one you 'd have to come in . I Olsen : I can 't tell you what they would do . They would be required to get a permit . I Erhart : Is there any limit to how short the fence can be? Let 's say they wanted to put up cedar rails or something . Olsen: It 's still a fence . You know we don 't have a limit on how low it Ican go but how high it can go . The video games is another thing which . Erhart : Hang on . Let me get this clear in my mind . So you think there 's IIsome internal fencing going on not shown . Planning Commission Meeting May 15 , 1991 - Page 22 Olsen : I know there is . Erhart : On a golf course you can 't move fences .without a different site plan? Olsen : Yeah , if it 's different from the site plan . The only fences are agricultural . Steve Kirchman: The only issue here is he has to come in and get the permit . Nobody 's objecting to his fence but he does need a permit for his perimeter fence . He just has to come and get a permit . Erhart : Okay . What else then? You said there 's some grading going on? Emmings: He got a permit for that didn 't he? ' Olsen : He got a grading permit for some of the grading . Correct Dave? But some of it still was going to be part of this whole permit because it II included some of the tees. The parking lot . Grading for where the batting cage is and the drainage . We don 't have any plans on that . We don 't have the detailed grading . , Erhart : How many cubic feet are being graded? Olsen : We wouldn 't know . We need to know that . ' Erhart : What does the ordinance read? Olsen : It 's 50 cubic yards . Erhart : Is it more than that or less than that? Hempel : Definitely more than that . Emmings: He needs a certificate of occupancy is another one Tim . • ' Erhart : Yeah , I 'm getting to that . Before we get to that one , any other ones? ' Conrad: He needs to supply us with a schedule of the pumping of the septic tank . Erhart: I 'm waiting for that one for last . Olsen: The video games . It 's the hours of operation . Erhart : Yeah , I got that one . Olsen: He is currently putting in the parking lot . It looks that way . Erhart : Was that on the '86 plan? There 's so much stuff here . Okay , let 's go back to the septic system . If you look at the conditions on page 3 there . Condition 4 is that two septic sites be protected from grading . In condition 5 it says the applicant shall install a holding tank . Why would we have done that? , Planning Commis_. ion Meeting 1 Ma-.' IS , 1951 - Pi ge 23 IOlsen : Where tii e you? Erhart : Your page 3 of the report . On the bottom there . 4 says two I sept c stem sites shall be protected from grading activities . Then you go or, with item 5 , the applicant shall install a holding tank . Olsen : Shall comply with ordinance 10B . That 's where it , I remember that I there was conversations between the applicant and I believe Don and Barb . Do you remember? IJohn Pryzmua : I don 't remember why it was changed from septic . Erhart : This was part of the conditional use . These were the conditions the conditional use permit right? Ito Olsen : I believe that it was one of the issues was cost of installing . My recollection was that the applicant wanted the holding tank . I remember Ithat there was a meeting in Don Ashworth 's office I believe with Barb . Erhart : Before it went to Council . Alright , so let 's not try to do that . I Let 's go back to Steve — Your letter then . Essentially is it clear to everybody that we gave him , per your letter here , essentially approved a holding tank? I Steve Kirchman: A permit was issued for the holding tank and the installation was inspected and- approved . I Erhart : Okay . Then you go on to say , I strongly urge that no further development be permitted on the property until existing violations are corrected . This would include installation of an approved septic system . IDoes that contradict what? Steve Kirchman: Well , State Code requires that if you 've got Sites available , that you have to have a septic system . IErhart : I understand but . I Steve Kirchman: If the possibility exists that there are no available sites . So if there are no available sites , then he has to continue with that holding tank . I Erhart : I understand but I guess what I 'm saying is , I think there 's a tremendous insensitivity here . This memo drives a lot of what 's going on here . ISteve Kirchman: I realize that . I Erhart : Okay . On the one hand it says that we 've told John and gave him •a permit to put in this holding tank and then a few inches down the paper here you 're saying don 't do anything here until this comes into conformity essentially . ISteve Kirchman: As I said earlier , I 'm assuming the reason that we let him put in a holding tank was that the original septic sites were disturbed . IThat 's just an assumption on my part . I don 't know why anyone would let Plz:nnin:_3 Commi jon Meeting May 15, , 1q91 - Page 24 him put in holding tanks . ' Erhart : I don 't think that 's the point . The point is if you 've given him approval , then you 've given him approval . I don 't think we can go back then and said gee whiz , you can 't do anything because . Olsen : But that is , you know the whole driving force behind this report . That 's one of the reasons . It 's also that there 's additional . Erhart : Well that seems to be the only major one of all these . I guess establishing whether they can continue using the , whether he can expand using the holding tank or not . I guess my recommendation I think is pretty I much along with everybody elses . I guess overall I think the facility is fine and useful to people here and John has made his way of trying to make things work . On the other hand I think sometimes , I think we have to be a little more sensitive to these styles of businesses . Not everybody is able to put in a plan , able to work in a normal , timely fashion . And if we preclude that process , I think we preclude a lot of creativity . On the other hand it appears to me like John seems to be alittle more organized today than T think when he started in 1986 and so I think we 're both learning on how to get Tong a little bit better here . Both John and the city . The issue on the septic system , I realize that the Code says you can 't. , we 're not supposed to go in disturbed areas but that 's , practicality is that you can make systems work in disturbed areas . Steve Kirchman: I disagree . If the area 's been disturbed , then it just destroys the properties of the soils of accepting effluent . The effluent may not show but it also won 't get treated . , Emmings : Can you do it in a mound? Erhart : Essentially when you go and do a septic system you do disturb the soil . And certainly in a mound . Steve Kirchman: No , you don 't . ' Erhart : You just lay it on top? Steve Kirchman: You lay it on top and you have to use track machinery and I you 're not allowed to drive a truck over the surface where the mound is to go . Erhart: Well anyway , I think obviously the tank is working and I don 't see that this is , it appears that it can work . Steve , I think you 're saying that it can work properly if properly maintained . On the other hand , I I would prefer to see a septic system . On the other hand , when do you expect the sewer line to be put through here? Krauss : Well we 're looking at serving the area behind , across the street 111 from this site hopefully next Friday . Theoretically , but this area is not included in the MUSA line expansion . This area is the study area so there would be no service to this property in the foreseeable future , Erhart : So that 's what you , the other thing is I think it 'd be to their advantage to get this as an interim use permit so I 'd agree with your IPlanning Commission Meeting May 15 , 1991 - Page 25 Irecommendation to try to , anyway try to get it to that so we can tie some kind of date on this . So I guess I 'd go along with staff 's recommendation I in terms of approving with the video games and trying to get interim use permit and try to come back with , table it and come back . I guess I 'd like to see him clear up , maybe Steve or someone to try to clear up a uniform recommendation on whether this holding site or septic system or something so it 's a little clearer at the next meeting . And then have conditions . Olsen: Yeah , we 'll confirm the capacity and things like that . IErhart: That 's finally it . ' Emmings: Okay . I 'm going to adopt Brian 's comments and Ladd 's comments just to shorten things down . I 'm not going to , I don 't care too much about the sign or video games . Whether we do something with that but he has to I do , in my mind , he has to do what he said he would do in the past or fulfill the conditions that were imposed on prior approvals before I 'm willing to look at any expansion . And that 's primarily because although I 'm sure that John has his own version of how things have evolved out I there , all I 've seen here over the years is John filling in the wetland . Being told to stop . Coming in and asking for a permit . Being denied . And now he 's doing something else and he 's being told to stop and he 's coming I in again for a permit after the fact . I think he 's had enough interaction with the City to know that he should come here first and he hasn 't been willing to do that so I 'm not willing to look at an expansion until he gets everything up to snuff . If it was one time I could understand it but it I hasn 't been one time . This is at least the third time that I can recall sittlrg here and looking at this and maybe it 's the fourth . So that 's where I stand . Is there a motion? IConrad : Yes . I move that we table action until the applicant brings the , satisfies the staff 's concerns about the previous conditional use permit . IBatzli : Second . Emmings: Is there any discussion? Conrad moved, Batzli seconded to table the Interim Use Permit for Swings Golf until the conditions of the Conditional Use Permit are satisfied. All I voted in favor except Ahrens and Erhart who opposed and the motion carried with a vote of 5 to 2. Emmings : Do you want to put the reasons on the record? Ahrens: Well I 've been thinking about this and I can go along with the staff recommendation on this for approval of the Interim Use Permit for Idenial of expansion of the site . Erhart: What was your second one? IAhrens: Basically the staff 's recommendation . Denial of the expansion but that the staff continue to work with them to bring the site into tcompliance . Planning Commission Meeting May 15 , 1991 - Page 26 Erhart: Okay and I think that was what I was thinking . That 's what I was voting for denial . So if that 's what it is , that was mine . , Conrad: Now with my motion , I just want to make sure that the tank , the holding tank . It is permitted so we 're not asking staff at this time to figure out how to do a drainfield . We 're not asking John to do that . We are bringing it into conformance with the previous conditional use permit and what the city has granted John to do . Emmings: And you 're not in any way discouraging them from continuing to work together to bring it up to snuff and then look at a proposal when they 've got one . Conrad: That 's all I want . I just don't see there are allot of things that you have to do John . I just do want , I want to force you and the I staff doing things together the right way . We 're not trying to be the bad guys . I want to do it the right way so we can review this without having some history and some negatives out there . Then we can take a look at the real issues . i Emmings: Right . I think we ought to at this point take a quick break for a North Stars update . PUBLIC HEARING: ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO AMEND THE CITY CODE TO CREATE A BLUFF LINE PRESERVATION SECTION. Emmings: I understand that you 're recommending that we table this matter so that we can notify affected property owners and then hold a public hearing and complete the official map . What should we do on this tonight? I think that 's obviously the thing to do . Olsen: Look at the map . Krauss: We 'd like you to look at the preliminary draft of the official map we had . We 'd also like to discuss some standards with you that are in the ordinance . In fact Jo Ann and I had a long conversation . After coming back from the bluff hike , Bluff Creek hike , my personal opinion is that some of the standards that the DNR recommended aren 't adequate to protect what we want to protect over there . One of the other things we wanted to do , first of all what we 're proposing is an ordinance based on an official 1 map rather than a we know it when we see it approach and so to designate where this thing is . You should know though that when you see this map you ' ll see it . It really does interfere indirect with a lot of properties up there and a lot of property owners may fell disinfranchised by it and I 1 think that the environmental benefits of this have to be so , in addition we have to have some mechansim wherein existing situations are grandfathered . Not made non-conforming but grandfathered so we accept the status quo . Ellson: That couldn 't expand? Would that be grandfathered? Krauss: Well no . I think we 'd like to work out some language where they could if there wasn 't prejudice against them because they happened to build earlier . The other thing that we 'd like to do too for the public is , Dave I Planning Commission Meeting May 15 , 1991 - Page 27 and I have been involved with a number of properties on the bluff that have I incredibly se ?re grading problems because of how they messed up drainage or they built in an inappropriate place . Basically man made problems that are , I mean we want to get this on video for you and whoever comes to this II meeting because they 're so dramatic . You really have to see what these are . For example , we were out at the Dypwicks property the other day . This fellow had built a storage building of some sort that 's probably about I 20-25 , maybe 30 feet from the bluff . The erosion here is something you would not believe . You stand on a precipice and you look out and you 're looking 70 to 90 feet and there 's a sheer drop . And there 's two sets of erosion . There 's erosion that drainage was tinkered with coming off this 1 field around this building and he is dumping huge amounts of garbage and literally trash basically in an indiscriminant manner in an attempt to stop the problem . 1 Erhart : Where is this? Krauss: I can show it to you on the map but it 's off of TH 101 . West of TH 101 . In the process of doing this , this is making matters worse . He 's actually thrown a lot of money into this but when Dave and I went around the back of his property where the second serious erosion problem is , he I actually tried to channelized the water where he collects it in a system and puts it in a pipe . Well the pipe just outletted at the top of the bluff in that sugar sand and that pipe is now suspended 15-20 feet in space because the cliff is gone . And the whole reason this drainage problem existed is because whoever built this house , either he or whoever built it , excavated out a low level garage door and to drain that area they built a trench from the house all the way to the bluff . And now all the water 's II funneled through there and you 've got a problem that 's just got to be seen to be believed . Emmings: When we were on the hike in Bluff Creek , a guy from the Riley Watershed District . Was it Riley-Purgatory? IKrauss: Yeah . Emmings: Watershed district was along and he said that that 's a big problem in a lot of bluff areas that are in that watershed district because II when people build their houses close to the bluffs , you get all that runoff just from the roof concentrated and it has a dramatic impact on the bluff he says . Just even that change . Apparently these areas are real fragile 1 because of the slope . Olsen: Well , anyway do you want to look at the map? IIEmmings : Sure . Where do you want to do it? Olsen: Well I thought we could just put it and maybe stand around it . IIt 's kind of an odd shape . ( Staff presented the bluff line preservation map to the Planning Commission and outlined points of interest . ) I Planning Commission Meeting May 15 , 1991 - Page 28 1 Krauss: I just want to do this cautiously . I think we 've got to recognize that there 's a selling job that has to be done with this . There 's a real need to be diplomatic with these folks who have gone around thinking that . they can do whatever they need to do and all of a sudden we 're intruding in their own private little world . That can be a disturbing thing to happen . II Even though is probably ecologically and philosophically the right thing to do , they still need to be . . . Farmakes: Is there any outside financial advantage that can be sold to them? Krauss: Well I did ask Roger , after that came up last time . I asked the City Attorney to look at that and there is a tax abatement that can be given for land designated for certain public or environmental purposes to do that . I 'm not sure that this particular land has been assessed at all that great a rate anyway . We need to bring in the County Assessor . I mean II if he 's already only valued this at some nominal amount because of the slopes , then there 's probably not much of a net tax benefit . Emmings : You ought to have him look at a sampling of properties to figure it out . Tell us for this property would mean this tax advantage because that would certainly speak loud to people . What else do you want us to do II tonight? Krauss: I don 't know if you have any more guidance to give us . Otherwise we ' ll proceed with it . I 'm not sure it 's going to get on the next agenda but . . .getting video done and talking to the County Assessor and getting the map together . Batzli : I think that after Saturday there 's a lot of enthusiasm by the Council and various Planning Commission and other people and I think we should proceed full steam ahead while we have that enthusiasm . 1 Ahrens : I would expand it too to this area as Tim suggested . Is that west , across the . Emmings : West of Chaska . Ellson: I like the idea of touching bases with Chaska . I Batzli : I would at least talk to them and tell them what we 're doing and seeing if they have any interest in at least preserving that . 1 Krauss: One of the things also that 's personally related is Moon Valley . Just to update you quickly on that . I 'm having the City Attorney review these things because we 're in litigation with Moon Valley , Judge Canning gave Moon Valley an additional , Judge Canning supported the City 's position in that we have the right to require that they get a permit . He gave them an additional 30 days to get it . They have retained John Voss who 's a planning consultant who I 've known for quite a while . He 's a legitimate consultant , to prepare their permit application . But they just told him about it and the drop dead date is May 25th . It 's been my expectation since we 've gotten into this that what we 're going to get is an incomplete permit request which will have to go to the Judge and get some findings on and then when we take them through this , when we actually have conditions , Planning Commission Meeting May 15 , 1991 - Page 29 II then they 're going to take the conditions back to the Judge and it 's going to be a very long , drawn out process . But this is , I mean it 's integral to the bluff line . Here we have , I mean if you talk to Tom Zwiers , as far as he 's con- :reed , the bluff should be knocked down to the cornfield type land II and flat • n it out and that will make it good for development . So I think you have a clash of values there and I 'm not sure how that 's going to get resolvea . You assume that he 's got some rights to do what he 's doing to a certain extent . There 's going to be a conflict . Ahrens: Is the application in front of the Judge? IKrauss : Excuse me? Ahrens: You said , what was going to the Judge? IIKrauss : Well , the only thing that 's been to the Judge so far is they sued us telling us that we didn 't have the right to require them . IIAhrens : Right , but you said something else was going to the Judge? Olsen: He feels the conditions will be contested . Krauss : I think they 're going to contest everything along the way . IIEmmings: I just noticed that this is a public hearing . I want to ask if there 's anyone here who wants to comment on the zoning ordinance amendment to amend the city ,code to create a bluff line preservation section . Can someone make a motion to close the public hearing? 11 Batzli : Let the record show there 's no one in the room that 's willing to speak on the topic and I move to close the public hearing . IIEmmings: I 'll second it . Batzli moved, Emmings seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Krauss: Don 't you want to continue the public hearing? IIOlsen: Close it or do you table it? IKrauss: Continue it . Emmings : We 'll continue it . Batzli : I 'll withdraw my motion . I move that we continue it . Emmings : Why didn 't you say something before we voted? What do we have to II do to undo this? Krauss : We ' ll just correct the Minutes . IIOlsen: That 's okay . Just close it . Do what you did . We 'll just open it again . I Planning Commission Meeting May 15 , 1991 - Page 30 1 Emmings: Okay . I like that . It 's easy . Batzli : Strike my withdrawal . Emmings : Does ann'one else have anything on the bluff line? You have our blessings here to do whatever . . . PUBLIC HEARING: i ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO AMEND ARTICLE VIII OF THE CITY CODE CONCERNING PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS FOR RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS . Paul Krauss presented the staff report on this item . Chairman Emmings called the public hearing to order . Erhart: Let me ask you this . What other reason why a developer would want I a PUD as opposed to , anything other than a smaller lot? What other reasons in a residential area? Is the crux? Olsen: The setbacks . Erhart : Okay , so then the question would be , let 's say the guy just wanted I different setbacks . So he wanted to go to a PUD but the way this is formed now , he automatically has got to give up 25% , even though he 's willing to stick with the 15 ,000 sqaure lots . That 's where I guess in looking at this , if you were to use the minimum lot size which you ought to have as a II scale . Like if it 's 9 ,000 , then it 's 25% . If it 's 10 ,000 then it 's 20% . If it 's 11 ,000 it 's 18% . Krauss: That 's a possibility . If you figure it on the average lot size . Erhart: Well it seems to me it ought to be done on the average lot size . Not use the minimum lot size at all . And you have a scale so that yeah , it does allow him to get more total lots as the average gets smaller and in exchange we get some open land but I don 't think you can just pick a spot and say that 's it . Ellson: You 're saying as we squish people more , we get more open space? Erhart: Yeah . And the advantage to the developer is that he gets more lots and we get more open space but what you can 't do I think is pick one point and say , if you 're going to come in for a PUD , whatever the reason is , you 're going to be on that point . Because then you give up any creativity at all to adapt to the land itself or what the developer 's trying to accomplish there . Krauss: Realistically though nobody , I can 't understand why somebody would come in with 15 ,000 square foot or better lots and request a PUD . If the sole purpose of their requesting a PUD is to be let off the hook on setback I standards or street widths or something else , then there 's no net gain for the city . Erhart: Okay , so that 's just as unrealistic as the guy coming in with 144 II 9 ,000 square foot lots? What I 'm saying is there 's going to be someplace between that spectrum . That particular development or that developer or II Planning Commission Meeting May 15 , 1991 - Page 31 I what he 's trying to accomplish in terms of house styles and values of the houses , that he 's going to pick and what we ought to do is , you want to nail it down so it doesn 't get to be a negotiating , totally arbitrary and let 's put a little table together . It says okay , if your average lot size I is 10 ,000 square feet and the City wants 20% , every size is 11 ,000 square feet . . .so you allow the developer to kind of , you can still create . We can get what we want but he can still create the development that he has in I mind . Krauss: That might be reasonable . Again , we 're flying a little bit by the seat of our pants on this one . Many communities experiences with single I family PUD 's are similar to Chanhassen 's and there 's not , and that I 'm aware of , there 's not a lot of progressive thought on okay , you 've all been burned . How do you then fix an ordinance that doesn 't do that? I mean I it 's clear to me the trade off is , some of the trade off involves open space . What the magic number is I think is an issue . ' Erhart : Yeah . If it 's just open space for the same number of lots , there 's no incentive to pay the extra fees and everything . You 're going to have to give them a little bit of incentive to give us the open space by actually increasing the number of lots . I don 't think it has to be a lot . IKrauss: We can certainly play with that . I Erhart : I know that a guy 's going to come in with the whole place isn 't going to be 9 ,000 square foot lots . I guess I 'm having a hard time even envisioning that . tConrad: Would we still get a Near Mountain development with this? Near Mountain is a good PUD . I kind of like what this does but I guess I don 't know what it discourages or if it forces one thing versus another . So I I guess my feeling is that I 'd like to have staff work a couple scenarios just like this one so we can see what it does encourage . And one would be , if it could go back and reconstruct the Near Mountain PUD and see what this I would do to it . Now they have a lot of ponds and , I 'd just like to know if we could have another development like that or if this would not allow a Near Mountain . Krauss: We could certainly check that . I didn 't have the time but in doing this I was , my gut reaction was that Near Mountain should qualify . If it doesn 't , then something 's wrong . IErhart : Do they get 25% open space? IOlsen: They may have to give more open space . Krauss : Except that we 've credited , I mean there are ways to credit . We 're not only looking for , this is open space that the public can use or I that 's common open space . We 're saying that of your 25% , one quarter of that can be park . You 're probably going to have to dedicate more than that but it could be . One quarter of that can be wetlands but then we 've said II if you 're protecting other natural features . For example Near Mountain has a lot of forested areas . If we had those forested areas , which may or may not be on somebody 's lot , protected by a conservation easement , then that would be , you could attribute that towards your requirement because we 're II Planning Commission Meeting May 15 , 1991 - Page 32 I guaranteed that that open space amenity , that natural feature is going to be preserved in perpetuity . - Olsen: . . .remember where the outlot , the summit? That was originally going to be condos and now it 's single family lots . That probably wouldn 't II have been . . . . Krauss: It 's kind of tough adopting that after the fact too because those II lots were not structure with this sort of ordinance in mind . What you 'd have to do is go back and make some assumptions which you may be able to do but I think it 's a useful exercise . Conrad: What I don 't want to do is force , you know I don 't want to stiffel the creativity and I don 't want developers coming in here with all 9 ,000 square foot lots . So Near Mountain had a mixture and that 's kind of what we 're trying to look for , plus the open space and I get lost in the formula . I don 't know what happens . So again , I think some of the concepts is kind of neat if it works . If it works for multiple sized II developments . Now I don 't know how it works from a 10 acre subdivision or PUD to 1 ,000 acre so I guess it 's a neat concept to pursue . Erhart : I think you ought to try it with the average because we don 't want II all 9 ,000 square foot lots . This is what . . . kind of what we 're encouraging here . Table of different averages and see how that works . I think that the concept that you 're working on is right on . I Emmings: Maybe you ought to show Terry Forbord your example and get some feedback from him . Krauss: I will . I 'll bump a copy over to Shardlow too . Emmings : And also ask him if the system that Tim isn 't talking about wouldn 't be , I think that 's kind of . . . Erhart : I think you actually mentioned it . , Krauss: In fact he suggested , when he and I were talking , that was one of the topics that we thought of . Batzli : Paul , would your zero lot line type things , if it was 4 foot away from the lot line , would that come under your single family detached? Krauss: I intentionally didn 't deal with that and Roger raised it again as II a concern . The most recent ordinance I 've written before this one , I actually set that up as a separate district . ' Batzli : Separate from the PUD? Krauss: Well no , as a PUD but it was separate standards . Single family I detached lots on typicaly single family homes were treated one way . Zero lot lines were treated another way . As I read through this ordinance again tonight though , I think that the reason for that is when you get closer . II When you 're building on the zero lot line , you have more implications as to what the architectural design is . How you 're imposing on the adjoining property owner . How you want to treat common space because there has to be II ' Planning Commission Meeting IMay 15 , 1991 - Page 34 more common space when it 's that tight . But as I thought about it , the ' ordinance , the way we 've structured it right now , the single family detached works pretty well because we 've built all that architectural stuff in there and the language is loose enough that we could allow zero lot I lines under the same set of procedures and standards . I don 't think we have to change very much to allow that . One thing you may want to consider though is some communities have a problem with zero lot line homes being in Isingle family neighborhoods . I don 't know that I ascribe to that philosophy because basically they 're single family homes . They 're just scrunched to one side . I don 't see us lowering the lot size much . I don't see us lowering the lot size below 9 ,000 ever in the RSF district or in the 11 low density district . If somebody wants to do a high intensity zero lot line development , it really in my opinion ought to belong in areas that are guided for medium or high density use in the Comp Plan because that 's the I densities you 're dealing with . And I think we can make that differentiation . It 's not that hard . Batzli : Did Forbord like , did you show him the whole proposed standards? Krauss: No , we haven 't had a chance to sit down . I just briefed him on the phone . Batzli : I was curious what he thought about the foundation plans and architectural standards . The other elements of this besides the 25% . IKrauss: I don 't know . I suspect he didn 't have a problem with that because that 's the way they design their project anyway . I mean we 're not specifically designing for Lundgren Brothers Homes . Ahrens : Yeah , I was going to say . Terry Forbord , it 's fine to run some things past thim but we 're not designing our ordinance for him . Especially 1 since he 's going to be coming in with probably another PUD . He has some property in Chanhassen and we don 't want to give him our ordinance and say how do you want this to read and what 's the best deal for you and then he can design it around whatever development he wants to come in with . Batzli : No , and I wasn 't proposing that . I just thought it was interesting because other developers don 't develop to their standards and 1 while Terry might not have had a problem including certain number of trees and plantings around the foundation , I 'll bet you a lot of other developers would . I was just curious . IKrauss: Well I 'll be happy to sit down with him . We can certainly do that . He 's useful as a gauging point though because on the spectrum of Iresidential developers , they tend to be a little better than most . Ellson: Right . If you want to encourage anybody it would be him . IKrauss: Yeah , and if he has a significant problem with something , it 's probably note worthy . If he believes he can live with something , it doesn 't imply that all other developers can live with it but it may mean to us so what? That 's the standard of development we want to achieve . i Planning Commission Meeting May 15 , 1991 - Page 35 , Ahrens: But there are a lot of good developers in town too . You may want to run it past them . • Krauss: We can send it out to a few people who develop in the community and see what they think . ' Conrad: I had a couple just statements or comments on what we see in front of us and I think Paul 's going to work some things but just philosophically my intent on this ordinance was not to put more density in but to shift it . If there is more density that 's fine . I guess I was , well if there is more density , I want to make sure that it 's good quality density . That 's just a general comment on my part . I 'm interested about the density transfer issue too because I really feel that that 's a viable thing . Again , if I had my way , if a site is approved for 10 units and we can shift 5 of those units to the other half of the property and leave the other half open , that 's what I 'm trying to do . So I don 't mind building up the density . I 'm kind of interested in how the transfer formula works . Using gross versus net . Is there a conversion factor? We 've always used net before in terms of units per acre and now we 're going to use gross so have we compensated for that changeover in terms of the number of units allowed per acre? Krauss: There 's no standard factor Ladd because it 's really highly contingent upon the individual site . How much park are you dealing with? How much wetland are you dealing with? I think though that the PUD gets at II that issue in another way . It 's demanding higher quality design . It 's demanding higher quality landscaping . It 's going to demand some modicum of additional open space . You know you 're achieving your goals through a different mechanism and if the developer happens to get more units out of it but it looks better overall and is less impacting , I guess that 's a fair compromise . Conrad: But what is the standard? The standard that you set is 1 .7 units II per acre . How did we get there? How did we get to 1 .7? Krauss: We developed that in doing the Comprehensive Plan . Basically what we wanted to do is the Metro Council was telling us that the rule of thumb , everyone develops 2 1/2 units an acre . We said well that 's not an appropriate assumption here because we are basically a no net loss wetlands 11 community . Our park dedications are pretty stiff and all this and so we went back in . Jo Ann and Mark and I and took apart , I don 't know , 12 or 15 plats we 've done over the last 5 years and tried to find what the average density is . Now this is standard platting . This is not PUD 's . Conrad: So average gross density? Krauss: Right . Conrad: Based on history? And that turned out to be 1 .7? Krauss : Correct . Plannin g Commission Meeting May 15 , 1991 - Page 36 Conrad : Okay . Over how many years? IKrauss: I would say it was the plats over the last 5 years probably . IOlsen : Maybe even 10 . Conrad: And just a picky point . On page 5 , letter ( g ) . It said , more than one L _. 3ding may be placed on one platted recorded lot on a PUD . What Idoes that mean? Krauss : Under standard zoning you 're obligated to have a separate tax I parcel around each building . Within a PUD you 're approving an overall master plan . You 've got a lot of control over exactly what happens . What 's built where . It becomes less important to us if an industrial occupant has three buildings on a single tax parcel . You 've exercised all Ithe control you need . Conrad: Okay . IEmmings: Does anybody have anything else on this? Any other comments? IBatzli : Yeah , I don 't like 9 ,000 feet . I think it 's too small . Ahrens: You think 9 ,000 is too small? I Emmings : I wonder , what if it said something . Instead of saying you can have single family residential PUD allows lot sizes down to a minimum of 9 ,000 square feet and seeing some developers just licking their lips . I Can 't wait to go in here and make a development of all 9 ,000 foot lots . What if we just said that some of the lots may be as small as 9 ,000 square feet . IErhart: That 's where I think you tie in this average thing . Ellson : But if someone does 9 ,000 and it looks good and transfer and Ithings like that , I think we have to , we don 't know . Emmings: What were , the lots that we were all remarking about in . 111 Krauss: Were 9 ,000 square feet . That 's where that number came from . I Erhart : -ah I know but there was only a lot here and there . It wasn 't a mass of t e lots . Were there? Batzli : Yeah , they 're all on one end . IEllson: It 's one group of them and they 're very well done . IConrad: There 's probably about 60 . 40 to 60 . Something like that . Krauss: All of the professional literature says that , don 't take the micro view of what the property line says . What kind of context is it sitting Planning Commission Meeting May 15 , 1991 - Page 37 in . I mean if you have a 9 ,000 square foot lot backing up to a protected forest , it 's going to look a whole lot better than a 15 ,000 square foot lot II in a cornfield . Ahrens: I think though that we 're worried about implying that we 're going II to give them something that we really have no intention of giving them . Batzli : I think if somebody comes in here with a bunch of 9 ,000 square foot lots , we 're all going to be stunned and we 're going to sit here and say , help us . What can we do to stop this? Ahrens: I think we 'd better put some language in there just to give us the II right to reject it . Emmings: Or that we consider PUD 's where some of the lots were as small as 9 ,000 square feet but not less than that . Something but you 've got to make II it a lot more . Krauss: But we have that existing PUD that has the average , it doesn 't ' work . Emmings: I don 't understand . ' Olsen: Well we have it right now where there 's an average of 13 ,500 and you can go as low as 12 ,000 . And it has worked where it 's not all 12 ,000 square foot lots but the PUD 's haven 't been successful for other reasons . Because we still don 't require preservation of open space and creativity but . . .average doesn 't work . Krauss: Well I think what came across loud and clear though again for Forbord was that a deviance of 1 ,500 square feet isn 't enough to induce anybody to do anything . ' Ellson: That 's why we came up with the 9 . Erhart: . . .gross density . That 's not now what you 're doing . ' Conrad: But Paul is changing the formula . Erhart: No , he 's increasing the gross density . You 're getting more lots on the original piece of land . So that gives him the incentive then to preserve some other piece of land . ' Krauss: But you 're not going to get more lots if you have a high average minimum . Erhart: I 'm not saying whether it should be high or low . You kind of have to work it out what it is . The way you have it now , you 've only picked one point and it has to be 25% and what . . . , Krauss: Well that 's variable but I thought the intent of this was to get away from the hard and fast , thou shalt have an average of no less than 13 . 11 IIPlanning Commission Meeting May 15 , 1991 - Page 38 Elison: That 's what I want to do too . I think we should leave the 9 ,000 ' and our intent in here is telling them that we don 't want to see all that and then you guys are certainly going to see it and the fact that it 's a PUD , we have a chance to negotiate . That 's the whole idea behind it but we 're putting more fences around them before we 've even seen it . We 're not II even giving them a chance to try to bring something to us . We 're telling them right off the bat we just have decided there 's no way you can do it well and don 't even bother . IErhart: I guess I 'm a little confused there . You don 't want a formula in here now or you do? IKrauss: No , no . We 're talking about two different things . The open space formula I think we need because that 's one of the trade offs we 're getting . That 's one of the benefits of going with the PUD . The question is what I kind of minimum lot area do you adhere to and from a strictly designed , philosophical standpoint , I don 't care if all the lots are 9 ,000 square feet if everything else is done well . IErhart : Okay , but what we could do to satisfy I think the concern is to say yeah , you can have 9 ,000 square foot lots but your average can 't be any ' less than . Ellson : 9 ,000 . Erhart: No , no . Ellson: That 's what I 'm saying . If he can do a thing of all 9 ,000 square I foot and it looks good . See you 're making an assumption that you 'll never see a 9 ,000 average that would look good . You 're making a big assumption . Like he said , if they 're all backed up against this bluff area and things ' like that , it might not be that bad . Erhart : That 's not realistic . IKrauss: It is if 25% of your land has to be in open space . Erhart : Oh , I see . IIConrad: That could be . Ellson: I think you ought to give them a chance to do it and if you don 't Ilike it , tell them then . Batzli : The problem is , somebody 's going to come in with a plan . ' Elison : That 's when we deal with it . IBatzli : Well , it 's going to happen and then we 're going to look at it and say why in the world did we let them build 9 ,000 . Ellson: No , we didn 't let them . We get a chance to look it over . ' 1 Planning Commission Meeting May 15 , 1991 - Page 39 , Conrad: We don 't give them the PUD . It 's not what we 're looking for . Ellson: You 're not trusting them enough . Batzli : We 've seen what , never mind . I 'm not convinced that we will look at it and know what we 're looking at because every time we look at PUD 's we sit there and we say , gee . We don 't really get a sense of what they 're doing and we don 't see this and we don 't see that . We won 't see it . We will not see what is actually occurring in the PUD until it 's in and then it will be too late . • Krauss: One of the problems we 've had with PUD 's is , and I 've heard the II same thing echoed on the Council , is Ursula 's often going well what are we getting out of this . We 're supposed to get something . What are we getting? And I don 't have a good answer normally because our PUD ordinance right now doesn 't demand anything . Ellson: And we haven 't given an intention of it to anybody until now . Krauss: This ordinance says , if you 're going to want this , you 're going to II have to earn it and here 's how you earn it . Ellson: I think because of that intention will ward off the guy who thinks II he ' ll be able to sell us a PUD with a 9 ,000 back to back thing . He 'll go well I know I 'm not meeting it . I 'm just trying for it . We 've got every I reason to say forget it . I don 't think we should say an average . I think it could potentially be done . Who am I to say no without seeing it? Erhart : What you 're saying is if the average . . .maybe . It 'd be interesting , to look at . Krauss: There 's lots of examples to demonstrate it . I have some slides of it . I can give you books that show those kinds of plats . What happens when you bottle up that space . It 's a fairly . . . Ellson: It 's not like we 're changing the residential lot size to 9 . 1 Krauss: Keep in mind too that a PUD is a rezoning and I think it falls into that legislative ability of the city . You can be fairly arbitrary on II rezoning and especially when there 's an intent section now that lays out what your expectations are . If you really feel something doesn 't meet the standards that you 've adhered to, don 't approve it . Ellson: That 's the leverage we have . Conrad: Do you feel Paul that we have to , my statement was, I 'm not really trying to pack more in . I 'm just trying to shift it so it 's economically more viable but basically it 's your gut feel that we really should allow more density to encourage . Economically we need more units per acre to stimulate the open space? I ilPlanning Commission Meeting May 15 , 1991 - Page 40 I Krauss : Well there 's certain trade offs there . I mean Forbord indicated I that that indicates when you cluster you save money on streets . You save money on utilities . You save money on development costs . You probably . make a mcr -attractive development which will help you sell it quicker but I don 't pf osophically have a problem if they get 15% more lots and we 've I achieved tale open space that we want and we got the better standards , that 's fine too . They 're still consistent with the Comp Plan . They can 't exceed the gross density that we have in that . IBatzli : I just , you know my feelings are , I live in a PUD . I don 't even know what size my lot is . We have a big park next to us . I still think the lots that our houses are on are too small . I 'm the kind of guy , I like I a big yard . Maybe it 's just personal but I 'm in a PUD every day and if you made the lot sizes 9 ,000 square feet , and I go by those in Lundgren all the time . I think those are too small . I mean the picture makes them look I really nice but those things are crammed together . They back right up against the little extension of Town Line Road there . Whatever it 's called there . IAhrens : Pleasant View? Emmings: But do the people that live there like them? I Ellson : Is there a market for it? That 's what Terry was saying . You 're not that customer but there evidentally is people . IBatzli : They 're tiny lots and I don 't find them attractive personally . Now maybe there 's a market for them but I don 't know . I would be hard pressed Ito find something that I 'd like , you know if I had a chance to look at it . If enough landscaping , enough transferring , enough open space to make it worth while to give them that small of a lot . I Ellson: Well his example was that people wanted a 15 minute mowed lawn and things like that . IBatzli : I would buy something else , yeah . If I did it again . Ahrens: Where are we going on this? IEmmings: Well I guess what I hear is that you 're going to work out some more examples . Maybe give us a little more concrete idea . Maybe try and work out a schedule and get some input from some other people to what I you 're doing here and bring it back again . This is a public hearing again . Did we close it? Do we need to close it? Why is it a public hearing? I Krauss: One thing you may want to consider . There doesn 't seem to be a whole lot of concern or issues any longer with the body of the PUD ordinance . It 's the single family section that 's generating the comment . I 'm growing increasingly concerned that if the Metro Council does what I 'm I hoping they 're going to do in the next week or two , we 're going to need this pretty quick . I Planning Commission Meeting II May 15 , 1991 - Page 41 Emmings: What do you propose Paul? Can you pull that section out and get the rest going up to the City Council? Krauss: Yeah . Emmings: So it 's basically just pulling out 20-506? , Krauss: Yes . Emmings: Now what if somebody came in with asking for a single family detached PUD? Krauss: Well there is an existing single family detached PUD section that we would not be eliminating until we replace it . You may want to cancel that because it 's a bad section . Emmings : Right . Couldn 't you do something like this? Could we put in a new section 20-506 to replace the old one that says that the City 's in the process of developing standards and just use that to retract the old one? II And just not have standards but put everybody on notice that standards are in the process of being developed . Krauss: You know you 'd almost be better protected by leaving the old one in place since nobody wants to use it anyway . It will kind of hold our spot for us . Emmings: Okay . Is there a reaction to that? For passing the rest of the II ordinance and just pulling out 20-506? Erhart: I think we should just leave . You 're talking about not making the II change at all then? Emmings: No , we pass everything that 's here except Section 20-506 . ' Krauss: And we 'll leave the existing single family intact until we can replace it . ' Ellson: So you really think that if it gets approved we 'll have stuff really quick? Krauss: I don 't know how quick it 's going to be but we 've got people that seem to be chomping at the bit . But some of these projects are so large , they 're going to take a while to get off the ground . ' Conrad: So your intent is to vote on the rest of the motion tonight? Emmings: That 's what Paul is proposing . ' Batzli : I didn 't feel like we 're that far away on 20-506 . I mean I 'm whinning about the square footage but I 'm a sole voice here . I 'm just trying to see if anybody is . . . If everybody else likes 9 ,000 . ' Planning Commission Meeting May 15 , 1991 - Page 42 IConrad: No , we 're just looking right now Brian . We don 't know yet and it may be , yeah I just don 't know so it 's not that I don 't agree with you . I I just don 't know how to handle . I think Paul and Jo Ann have a good , there seems to be one simple solution and that's what they 've presented but I want to see how that works in a variety of circumstances . I haven 't I disagreed with anything you 've said yet . If we want to pass the rest , then I 've got to get batik into something on page 3 . Under Section 20-505 , Required General Standards . Under Section ( b ) . The applicant shall demonstrate that the PUD plan offers the City high . That 's the word I 'm I questioning . High quality . . .and then the last line says that represents improvement over normal ordinance standards . So are we saying higher? Is the word higher? Krauss : In that sense that 's what you 're looking at . Conrad : Maybe that 's just a small thing but I guess I 'd rather see the word . Batzli : that about the word highest? IConrad : I guess I like the word higher in there . And then I get back down to my density transfer . In single family detached ,' which is what we 're I debating , so I don 't know what that means . I don 't know how that works . I don 't know how to approve that right now until I see what we 're doing in single family . II Krauss : Well that wouldn 't be applicable until you passed the new section anyway . ' Conrad : Until we passed the new section? Okay . I 'm comfortable . Emming' . Anybody else want to comment on whether the , what they think about passing the rest of this except for 20-506? IBatzli : Paul on 20-505( f )? Is parking lots and driving lanes shall be set back 20 feet from all exterior lot lines? IKrauss: Yes . I Batzli : Never mind . I was confused . Do we cover in here or have we previously covered our recurring problem of somebody putting in a road next to an existing lot? Do we talk about that at all anywhere in here? 1 Olsen: We did somewhat address that with the setback . Batzli : In here? IOlsen: No . . .accessory structures and . . . That was something that you could determine as part of the subdivision of the PUD . You could say no , we I don 't approve . . .application . To determine setback for a road . We found out it was difficult . • Planning Commission Meeting May 15 , 1991 - Page 43 Krauss : I don 't understand the question . Olsen: We don 't want to allow a street at the edge of a PUD connected to ' somebody else . You know like happened in Vineland . Batzli : You 've covered it for existing streets but not streets that may be II put in later . Okay . Emmings: I think we need a motion to close the public hearing. ' Ahrens moved, Ellson seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. Emmings : Is there a motion with regards to the ordinance? Erhart : I ' ll move that we recommend adoption of the PUD ordinance as outlined in the memo to the Planning Commission , May 6 , 1991 . Is that a good way to describe it? Do we actually have the ordinance written out in here? , Conrad: It 's right here . Erhart : Okay . Alright . The ordinance as stated in Article VIII , Planned I Unit Development District except for Paragraph Section 20-506( e ) which will be left open with a note that . Krauss : Well I think you 'd want to preclude the whole 20-506 . Erhart : Okay , the whole 20-506 which will include a note that says , what? I Krauss : If you just exclude this one , what will happen is you 'll have a new PUD ordinance with the old single family section . So you don 't have to do anything . Just exclude this . Erhart : Okay , so we 're going to exclude Section 20-506 . Emmings: I ' ll second it . Ahrens: Did you have some changes Ladd? Batzli : I thought Ladd made some changes . Erhart: Oh , I 'm sorry . Yeah , Ladd had some changes . , Emmings : He intended to incorporate those . I heard him say that . Erhart : Yeah , I said that . , Emmings: And I intended that in my second also . Batzli : Paul , is the old standards for residential 506? Or this is a brand new section isn 't it? Why don't we just put a 506 in there that says • ' Planning Commission Meeting May 15 , 1991 - Page 44 reserved or something? I Emmings : Because , is the single family PUD section that we have now called 20-506? Krauss: Not unless we 're real lucky . But I 'll change the numbers around . Emmings : We don 't have a 506 right now . IBatzli : Because 501 , well . It 's 504 . • Erhart : It 's not going to work . Krauss: Well yes it would . If you just replace , if your motion says delete this one and replace it with Section , where am I? Batzli : 20-504 . Erhart : Delete 20-506 with and add existing . IKrauss: Section 20-504 . Olsen: We 'll be sure not to repeal that section . The single family kind of , it 's not real separate . ' Batzli : Yeah , that 's the problem . Ahrens : Why don 't we just identify the standards as guidelines for single family detached PUD 's? We 're reserving that section . ' Emmings: Yeah , and not have one . We 'll just won 't have anything for single family until we pass one and let 's put in the section heading and Ijust say , to 20-507 reserve for single family . Ahrens: 506 . Emmings: 506 . Reserve for standards and guidelines for single family detached PUD 's . Okay? Is that okay Paul? Krauss: Sure . Emmings: Alright , do you want to include that in your motion? I 'll Iinclude it in the second . Alright . Any more discussion? Erhart moved, Emmings seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of ordinance amendment to Article VIII , Planned Unit Development I District with the following changes: Amending Section 20-506 to state that it's being reserved for Single Family Detached Residential . Changing in Section 20-505(b) the word "high" to "higher" . All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Planning Commission Meeting • May 15 , 1991 - Page 45 APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Chairman Emmings noted the Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated May 1 , 1991 as presented . CITY COUNCIL UPDATE: , Krauss : I gave out tonight copies of the Metro Council 's staff recommendations on our Comprehensive Plan . They 're favorable . They 're recommending that we get what we want . In fact they told us we could have asked for 300 or 400 more acres if we really wanted . Now this is with voodoo statistics that I don 't know how they got to this number but I 'm happy that they did . Elison: For this reason alone you deserve a raise . Krauss: We 're basically agreeing to disagree on population and employment . So what? There are conditions attached to their approval and it 's on page 15 . It starts , there 's 11 conditions . Most of them are real nominal . The ones that are of particular mention are , they 're applying the same water quality . First of all they acknowledge that we are an advanced community in terms of environmental sensitivity and water quality initiatives and all II this . And we received a lot of support particularly relative to the lack of response they received from Eden Prairie on the same issues . But conditions 4 and 5 are the same conditions they applied to Eden Prairie . We 're being asked to adhere to better standards . Better requirements on grading and erosion control . I don 't have a copy of what they 're quoting here yet so I 'm not exactly sure what we 're buying into but to the extent that it 's better technology that we use right now , I don 't see why we 'd have any problem adopting it . I 'm sure it 's more construction management type things that we 'd be looking for . Number 6 is an interesting one . What they 're basically saying in number 6 is that as 212 is built , the highway 17 interchange should not be constructed until or unless the MUSA line 's expanded to include the interchange . And we have a very short run . It 's only about a quarter mile . When you think about timing , I don 't think that this is all that big a deal . This interchange is not going to be open until 1998 anyway and this is in our 1995 study area so presumably the dates will work out . The Metro Council is right now in a very major battle • fighting the cities of Shakopee and Prior Lake and Savage over a proposed interchange that they want with the new Hwy 18 bridge . Prior Lake wants to access it but the area where the interchange would go is between Prior Lake 's MUSA and Shakopee 's MUSA so the Metro Council is opposing it . And they 're insisting that they be allowed to grade the interchange but not pave it , I think is their compromise position but their whole premise is that there 's not supposed to be any highway facilities that induce growth located outside the MUSA line . They 're very sensitive to this issue now and we technically fall into that category , even though it 's only a nominal distance to the existint MUSA . It could trip us up if 10 years from now when the highway comes ,through that part , if we 're not prepared or able to I bring it into the MUSA line . If they still want to argue it so it 's potentially a problem . It 's a longer term concern I guess . Erhart: Which intersection? TH 101? ' I . Planning Commission Meeting May 15 , 1991 - Page 46 IKrauss : No , TH 101 is fine . 101 's in the MUSA . It 's 17 . I would be willing to raise this . We 're going to the committee tomorrow and to Metro I Council next week . I 'd be willing to raise this as a concern but I 'm very leery to because I don 't want to rock the boat at this point . • I mean we're getting 99 ,90 of everything that we want and this one has a long enough I horizon on it that I think we 're going to get it anyway that I 'd rather not kick too much . But basically those are the only substantive conditions . It 's a pretty clean recommendation . So unless somebody comes up with a real wildcard on the committee tomorrow or on the Metro Council Thursday , I Ithink we 've got it . We ' ll see . Ellson: We should at least send a copy to Barbara . IEmmings : I see that the Council approved the Kurvers Point recommendation with just a long cul-de-sac . IKrauss : Yes they did . Ahrens : That 's not a surprise . IKrauss : No . It was somewhat of a difficult meeting . Not only did the Kurvers of course not want to construct the cul-de-sac , they didn 't want to I construct the emergency access and our fallback position on that was to say okay . Look you got away with a less than optimal intersection at the existing curb cut . If that 's all that 's going to remain , we think that this should be upgraded to having full turn lanes into there . I mean I everybody 's talking about safety here . This is a safety related issue . Well the Kurvers even kicked about that . They did what I thought they were going to do is they called up somebody at MnDot and said MnDot doesn 't want I us to do this . Who are you to demand that we do it? Well , MnDot doesn 't care about TH 101 . It 's been a fundamental problem from the start . We have to care about TH 101 because we 're eventually going to have it or the I County 's going to have it . We have talked to folks at MnDot who think that this is a dandy idea but officially they 're not able to write you a letter that says that . The Council did finally agree . . .to make some improvements but we 're supposed to work with MnDot on exactly what they are . IEmmings: And they gave the applicant their alternative plan on the Chanhassen Medical Arts facility to have a 3 foot sign band as a I compromise . We said 2 . They wanted 4 . They came in after the meeting here , they came into the City Council with a 3 and the Council gave it to them . IFarmakes: What was the vote on that? Krauss : It was 4 to nothing . Tom abstained . IConrad: And the 3 foot gives them bigger , what was the mechanical problem? Emmings : Bigger type . • Planning Commission g Co mzssian Meeting May 15 , 1991 - Page 47 Krauss: They agreed to 12 inch letters which I 'think were the standard . You were looking at 10 inch , they were looking at 12 . What they had said I was that making neon backlit letters , you cannot make them 10 inches . The smallest that they can fit these tubes in is 12 . Now I don 't know if that 's . Emmings : Give me a break . Krauss: That 's what their sign consultant was saying . Conrad: But on a 3 foot band can they stack words? Krauss: They can stack it 2 high . ' Farmakes: There 's no color restrictions? They can make it whatever they want? Krauss: Right . Emmings: Okay , well . Krauss: A couple other things briefly . As I said , the Metro Council 's coming up . The bluff line tour , I 'm not going to get into . It was a useful exercise I think . June 8th is scheduled to be , June 8th is a Saturday . It 's scheduled to be the bus tour visioning kind of a start of a process on TH 5 . It 's going to be held with you folks , the HRA and the City Council and we 're in the process of laying out some sites and we 're going to have at least 2 designers on board one of whom , Barry Warner has worked with the HRA and a lot of downtown stuff out on TH 5 . It will be good for you to see that . The other guy is a fellow named Bill Moore who works for the University who I attended a seminar he gave and he 's sort of an interesting guy . You know it 's an academic slant on things so take it I with a grain of salt but it should be an interesting exercise . Last thing is tonight we completed the short list before this meeting . The short list of consultants to do the Surface Water planning for us . We 've got it down to 5 firms . We 're going to be sending out final requests for detailed proposals from them and hopefully before the end of June we will assemble a group of ourselves being staff . Some of you and some of the City Council to spend the better part of a day interviewing these people and selecting somebody so we can get this show off the road and get going on that work . That does it for me . Ahrens: I saw you on TV . Krauss: My 15 seconds of fame? Ahrens: Yeah . _ Batzli : How come they cut the Mayor? Krauss: I don 't know . Planning Commission Meeting May 15 , 1991 - Page 48 Ahrens: They had a lot on a couple of the other cities though . I w P g was kind of disappointed . IKrauss : Well except they gave , they had- the Polster 's on . Chris Polster and his wife . The lead in to the story was about Chanhassen so I guess if I you figure in how, much time they gave it but that was an hour and a half of interviewing between the Mayor and myself . To wind up with 15 seconds . ' Conrad: Was there a point to the thing? Krauss : I didn 't think the whole thing was very well constructed . I Conrad: There was nothing . That was the disappointing part to me . There was no conclusion . ' Emmings: Is there a motion to adjourn? Erhart moved, Ellson seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 10:30 p.m. . ISubmitted by Paul Krauss Planning Director IPrepared by Nann Opheim 1 I I I CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION REGULAR UNEDITEU MEETING 21 , 1991 MAY Chairman Schroers called the meeting to order at 7 :32 p .m . . MEMBERS PRESENT: Jan Lash , Dave Koubsky , Larry Schroers , Curt Robinson , Wendy Pemrick , Jim Andrews , and Dawne Erhart ' STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman , Park and Rec Coordinator ' APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Robinson moved , Lash seconded to approve the Minutes of the Park and Recreation Commission meeting dated April 23 , 1991 as presented . All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously . Lash: It just seemed like we missed . I don 't know if the equipment wasn 't working or we just didn 't get the tape switched but there seemed like there were a couple of areas where Nann said either she couldn 't hear or there was a break or something . Hoffman: Yeah . I can 't recall if it was this one or one prior but we had some old tapes mixed in which did not record well . I think that may have been the last one . Lash: I think the majority that was missed was about the railroad right-of-way discussion where a lot of the public comments were not . Hoffman: Larry , if I might have a moment . I think it 's worthy of an ' announcement that the Lake Ann Park shelter building did pass City Council last evening on a unanimous vote . ' Andrews : When do we start? Hoffman: Probably late July , end of August . Lash: What kind of a completion do you look at then? Hoffman: The building itself will be fairly complete by the end of October ' and then they 'll come back in in the spring and do finishing touches . Andrews: Will that be the Curt Robinson building? ' Lash: Memorial? Oh no Hoffman: Discussion went well on it . They took a look at some cost savings by replacing a large laminated beam with a steel beam encased in a box to make it look like a fake beam instead . And they took out $2 ,500 .00 in landscape lighting . Other than that , it passed through . Lash: Was there any discussion on the water , because when we were walking , went on that hike there was a little discussion of looking at putting in a well and septic instead of sewer and water . Was that discussed? Hoffman: Discussion on utilities was the majority of the discussion . It 's felt that installation of a well then leaves us potentially with having to I I IIPark and Rec Commission Meeting May 21 , 1991 - Page 2 IIcheck that water , the quality of it and the maintenance of another well within the city where if we hook up up front , then we have the capacity . I We have the lines to run throughout the park and we have the safe water there which is already hooked up to the city system . ILash: Did they have a public hearing? Hoffman: Not an official public hearing . They wanted to hear comment , public comment and they felt the publicity received in the Villager , not IIone Councilmember received any calls so . PHEASANT HILL PARK , PRESENTATION OF NEIGHBORHOOD SURVEY RESULTS AND PARK I "MASTER" PLAN ALTERNATIVES . Public Present: II Name Address . Jim & Doris Mielke 1645 Lake Lucy Road II Mary Cordell 1730 Lake Lucy Lane David Hughes 1780 Lake Lucy Lane IIHoffman: I 'll quickly just run over the results , as you have in your packets of the neighborhood survey then allow Bruce to present the proposed II park plan . Basically as you, can see , the results were not surprising . They fell into what we know is a typical neighborhood park or what facilities we typically find in neighborhood parks . Obviously the essentials of playground equipment and open playfield , totlot structure and I basic other park amenities such as picnic tables and park benches and those types of things were all at the top . Grouped in the middle were more intense or indepth type of recreational activities taking larger dollar II amounts and more time to construct those type of things . Basketball court , tennis court and down towards the bottom were more specialized or less common park facilities such as the drinking fountains , open picnic shelter I and grills . . .typically as being found that grills within neighborhood parks are not necessary as people do their grilling in their own backyard . Parking down in the lower ranges as is separate skating or hockey rink essentially because there is a hockey rink located on one of the holding IIponds . . .that is one of the outlots of the development itself . Robinson: Todd , what does that average mean? IHoffman: Average? Robinson: I expected to see the larger number at the top . What am I doing wrong? Lash: I was confused too . IHoffman: I received that comment from a number of people . As people ranked this , they ranked their top priority as number 1 or number 2 so IIaverage response is low which means it 's ranked high . So an average II Park and Rec Commission Meeting I/ May 21 , 1991 - Page 3 response of 3 .93 or essentially 4 means a lot of people ranked that 1 , 2 , 5 , 6 or in the real low range which is one of their top 4 or 5 priorities . ' Pemrick: Todd , it says the total responses were 32 . Is that the entire neighborhood? Do you know about how many responses that would be? Hoffman: That would be about a fourth of which were distributed . Approximately 120 surveys were distributed . Half a dozen or so straggled in after the date when this was published so it 's probably up to close to 40 responses . Robinson: Which isn 't real good is it? ' Hoffman: . . . 120 in that area . It still gives a good representation which is not unusual . ' Robinson: True but it also almost shows you a lack of interest , a whole lot of interest by 2/3 of the people . Hoffman: Or in excess of that . Bruce , would you like to go through and run down the proposed park plan . Bruce Chamberlain: We lost the easel . What I think I 'll do , once I start II describing the master plan I 'll just hold it up like this . I just want to go over a few of the objectives of the park initially . As Todd was just speaking , there was a neighborhood survey done and we tried to include as many of the park amenities that were identified on that survey in the park as were possible . There were constraints in the park given the topography of the area and we tried to use that as much of a benefit as possible . So you ' ll see that as I describe the master plan . We also wanted to build safety into the park , as is the case with any neighborhood park or any public park . We also wanted to take advantage of the natural I characteristics of the site . There 's some really very unique characteristics of this site and this can be a really fantastic park and I think they got a great amenity there and something they can really be proud II of sometime in the future . The unique opportunities in this neighborhood park are we have an opportunity to connect the north side of the neighborhood with the south side through this park . It 's in kind of a I central location so we have that kind of unique opportunity to use it as a coming together point . Kind of a destination point and also to make that connection from the north to the south . It serves a dual function because the natural characteristics of the park . It 's 11 .6 acres so we do have quite a bit of space to work with for a neighborhood park and there 's room II enough for plenty of active recreational facilities as well as more natural habitat areas and natural recreation , passive recreation areas . Why don 't I go through the , I 'll describe the park at this point . It 's going to be hard to show everyone but I 'll show it to the folks in the audience after we get done reviewing it . I 'll talk about the recreational amenities first . We tried to congolmerate the recreational facilities on the north side of the park . There are several reasons for that . One is that the topography is most conducive to any recreational facilities in this area of the park . There 's quite a large , fairly level play area in this area and II I Park and Rec Commission Meeting May 21 , 1991 - Page 4 there 's another kind of plateau in this region of the park right here and I there is another plateau that 's the highest plateau of the three in this region right. here . It 's kind of a little knoll . Just to orient yourself , Wood Duck Lane is right up here on the top . Lake Lucy Lane is right here and Lake Lucy Road is right here and curves down to the south . Just to 1 give you an orientation . As I talked about the connection between the south and the north , what we did is create a bituminous trail . A paved trail all the way from Lake Lucy Road or Lake Lucy Lane , winding through 1 the park all the way up to Wood Duck Lane . I don 't know if you know but there 's a right-of-way , an easement between the two lots off of Wood Duck Lane that allow for a trail or actually is originally a road easement . There 's plenty of space there to allow a trail access to Wood Duck Lane . IIAlong that paved trail we tried to locate the facilities . So the trail was laid out in a way that would allow people to get to the facilities that are in the park . One is the open play field . Another is a tennis court area . II Another is a totlot or playground area . These things are all fairly malable . They can be adjusted . At this point there 's one tennis court that 's included in the park but we did some grading experiments and there 's II plenty of space for a second tennis court area . That 's a wish to expand so there 's a possibly of two tennis court areas . We 've included two half court basketball courts on the tennis court so they 'd be overlaying this tennis court right here . And if the second tennis court were added , the II basketball courts would be rearranged to take more advantage so there could be someone playing tennis and basetball at the same time . In this configuration , either someone is playing basketball or tennis . It 's 1 impossible to play both at the same time . But I think that 's probably the most efficient way to use the pavement surface that we 've got . As far as the open play field , there 's opportunity in the future and if the I neighborhood desires , to include an aggregate infield and backstop . There 's enough open space and we can level it out enough and do some grading to allow for a backstop in this area right here with the field pointing towards the southeast . The totlot and play structure is in this II area , the highest knoll of the site . And on the plan it is shown in a way that tries to take advantage of the natural topography . Kind of winds around that knoll a little bit and there would be a grade change through I the center of the totlot and playground area . So there 'd be either a ramp or steps from the lower area to the upper . And the play structure would be connected between the two so there would be connection all the way along that area . There are two picnic areas included in the park master plan . IIOne is in this area to take advantage of any activities that are happening on the totlot and playground area . Another picnic area is in this area to focus on the open playfield . The sand volleyball court is right here and I these amenities , the picnic area in this area , sand volleyball court and the open play area are all fairly conducive to one another . There are a few benches that are located along the paved trail . They can be really 1 located anywhere but it was our feeling that they would be most appropriate if they could be overlooking a play area so one is near the open playfield . Another is in , actually it 's up in the forested area . The parking we brought off of Lake Lucy Lane and in conversations with Todd and Charles , II the City Engineer , we decided that the most appropriate way to bring parking into the park is from the south and we have a 250 foot setback from Lake Lucy Road for the park entry point which is at this point . At that IIpoint it curves in and goes up a slight incline and kind of rests on a 11 Park and Pee Commission Meeting May 21 , 1991 - Page 5 little plateau area . So there 'd be a bermed area that 's higher than the parking lot in this area to screen the home in this area and it 'd be higher II than the wetland area so there 's no chance of any flooding possibilities. So it 's kind of mid-range as far as the low point of the park to the high " point . At that point , anyone who is parking in the park can jump on the trail and head up to the more active areas . As far as the more natural amenities to the park , what we tried to do is use vegetation as a tool , both to kind of create enclosure within the active areas of the park and also use it to make the most out of any vistas that are existing in the park . So what I have done here is include a mowed grass trail that 's winding through the natural areas of the park and crosses into the more active amenities right through here . And I 've proposed that this is a real opportunity , if the city and if the residents so desire , to do some real fantastic habitat restoration . By that I mean prairie restoration , forest restoration and some savannah type of restoration . There are kind of three different habitat types and from the comments that we got from the II at the last meeting , it seemed that they 're very interested in the wildlife in the area . One way to mitigate the loss of the quantity of habitat in Chanhassen is to improve the quality . So one way to do that is I to create some habitat restoration areas like this . So that 's a real opportunity in this park , if you so desire . So I wanted to put it out there and make sure you knew that the possibility is there . Even if the habitat is not restored , I would recommend that same vegetation types and cover and pattern be used because it does take advantage of the vistas that are happening up here to the lower areas . Plus it 's a nice transition zone from the parking area as you walk through up into the more active areas of the park . I think that covers it . I 'll take questions . Erhart : How about the Class 8 wetland? Was there any talk about changing II it to a Class A like Eric brought up? Is that possible? Bruce Chamberlain: Well I called the DNR on that because I wanted to see what their position was . The position that they take is that if a Class B wetland , or any wetland has been altered in some way due to our work or road building or whatever , then they will condone it 's restoration to what it was before . If the wetland is in it 's natural state , then they do not condone any change . Erhart : So this is a natural state Class 8? Bruce Chamberlain: Well yeah it is . Given the site constraints , it is . Schroers : I have two questions . The parking lot . At this point have you II designated it for a particular number of vehicles? Bruce Chamberlain: Yes , 6 . There 's a 6 car parking lot in this area . Schroers: Okay . And do you anticipate tilat grading in the northern half will have any affect on the current natural amenities in the south? Bruce Chamberlain: No , I don 't . What would happen is that a lot of the grading that would take place within the recreational areas on the north , the grading changes will happen within this green area . Within the ' I IIPark and Rec Commission Meeting May 21 , 1g91 - Page 6 I recreation areas . So a lot of the grading that will happen here will II impinge on this area up here . A lot of the grading that will happen here will impinge on some of this area up here . So there 's not a lot of the grading that will spill over into the more natural areas of the park . I Robinson : Would the initial grading , would you propose that it accommodate a backstop and another tennis court , whether or not we decide to do that right now? IIBruce Chamberlain : Yeah . I would recommend that . That it be graded right . away when you do the park because if you get the grading in place , then I it 's a whole lot easier . You don 't have to disturb the vegetation sometime at a later date . Andrews : From the backstop out to where the sandlot volleyball would be , I would that present a distance problem as far as somebody being injured chasing after a fly ball? IIBruce Chamberlain : No . It 's 280 feet from the backstop area to the sand volleyball court . Andrews: Plenty of distance then . Another question would be , with the II totlot . Is that so heavily wooded that we would want to have some sort of electrical service there for an arc light or something for evening lighting? II Bruce Chamberlain: Yeah . If you think evening lighting or evening use is a priority , then I think that 's . II Andrews : Most of our totlots are very highly visible , open areas and this one is going to be one that 's not so visible . We might want something with better visibility . IBruce Chamberlain : I guess visibility from the homes , you 're right . Isn 't very , they 're not visible from any homes . But I would guess that anyone I who 's using the park can have clear visibility if they 're watching over their children . If they 're in the park itself , then they 've got clear visibility from any of the active areas within the park . But yeah , I Iunderstand your point . That may be a concern . Lash : I guess I would like to see some of the benches in that area also . When people take their kids to play . IIBruce Chamberlain: Yeah , there are two benches proposed in the totlot area . There 's 5 benches total . 3 are along the paths and 2 are in the IItotlot area . 5 picnic tables in the 2 separate picnic areas . Schroers : We can take comment from the residents or the public as soon as Iwe 're done here . Are there any more commissioner questions or comments?� Robinson : It 's heavily wooded in the northeast area . What about the rest in the northwest? Any trees in that area? II II Park and Rec Commission Meeting May 21 , 1991 - Page 7 Bruce Chamberlain: Yeah . You can see that the trees are included as a screening material in the northwest area to screen it from some of the residents areas in this area . Robinson : I mean currently are there? Bruce Chamberlain: Oh currently? Robinson : Yeah . ' Bruce Chamberlain: There is a slight , very little vegetation right here in the very northwest corner . There 's some vegetation right down here but as far as this area , it 's fairly open within the park . Although just beyond the park boundary it 's fairly heavily wooded in this area . So at this point there is some vegetation outside the park boundary . Lash: So this is , you 're not anticipating a lot of disruption in the current vegetation to do this? Bruce Chamberlain : No . what it would do , I don 't know if you 've II been out to see the park but there are quite a few dead trees in the area so it would mean revegetating some of the areas . Revegetating with over story in the forested areas . In other words , planting in more trees to make it look more dense and then as the overstory builds itself up , the understory will kind of take care of itself . With birds dropping seeds and what not . So that will kind of vegetate itself . So the forested areas would have a fairly dense understory . A wild , wooded area . The savannah area would have a prairie understory with a few trees scattered around as you can see in the plan . It would make management . It 's not something , I guess the proposal for the natural areas isn 't something that can be left . In order to maintain the appearance and the aesthetic it creates , it would take management . Not nearly as heavy a management as the recreation area but it would take some work . Schroers : Anything else? Is there any residents that have any questions or concerns regarding this plan? Jim Mielke : I 've got one question . I 'm Jim Mielke . I live across Lake Lucy Road on the south side . The 6 car parking area there , do you envision that as the only parking that the park users will be using? You don 't envision any along street parking on that north park there with the ballfields and stuff? Bruce Chamberlain: Up here? Jim Mielke : Yeah . Bruce Chamberlain: Well at the last meeting there were several residents here who were fairly strongly opposed to any parking or any parking entry , a road entry into the park at this point so we tried to take their concerns into heart . We proposed , since this is a more heavily used and less residential road , to bring the parking in from the south side . 11 IIPark and Rec Commission Meeting May 21 , 1991 - Page 8 r Jim Mielke: I know what you proposed but what people actually use II sometimes is not what you proposed . What people are going to be doing . The reason I ask that is there is part of the housing development to the- east of that park . IBruce Chamberlain : Yeah , right down here . Jim Mielke : And the ballfields and picnic areas are going to be quite an II attraction for those people to come up here and use the park . I can envision you know . . .ballgames or whatever . So I was just wondering , will the city permit parking along Lake Lucy Lane in case the parking lot is full? I Hoffman: That would be determined at some future date . Ideally , or typically the residents feel it 's not ideal but in that area it would I either need to be determined whether we would post no parking signs or not . It 's done in many other areas adjacent to parks and would be an issue to wrestle with at a later time . ISchroers : I think right now it is not posted for no parking . It is alright to park there currently and Lake Lucy Lane does not support nearly the traffic that Lake Lucy Road does . I guess that I real ' y wouldn 't see a I problem with overflow parking along there . I wouldn 't advocate advertising that but let people just determine that more or less on their own . 1 Hoffman: It would typically be one of those wait and see type of situations . No need to jump in there and mark the street no parking if the problem is not going to occur . 1 Robinson : How far is that big development? How far away is that from the park? By Lake Lucy Road there . 1 Lash : Because they have their own park . Hoffman: It 's proposed for Curry Farms Park , right . They have a Ineighborhood park within that development . Schroers: Also with a very few exceptions , the neighborhood parks are nearly all pedestrian type traffic . We have a couple of exceptions . Help IIme with the name right down below Kerber here Todd . Hoffman : Meadow Green? IISchroers : Meadow Green , right . But Meadow Green has two developmed ballfields that are used for practice and that sort of thing so there is I more drive-in traffic there . But other neighborhood parks basically have more pedestrian . Doris Mielke: My comment probably has nothing to do with parks and recs I but we live across the road on Lake Lucy Road and just around the curve . That is a terrible place for kids on the south side to cross over to get to the park and I 've been working with Scott Harr and . . .put a stop sign on IILake Lucy Road where Lake Lucy Lane comes in or a speed bump or something II Park and Pee Commission Meeting I/ May 21 , 1991 - Page 9 r because we 've got cars just flying by . So I guess I 'm real concerned about the safety of kids that cross Lake Lucy , and myself crossing Lake Lucy Road to get to that park . I guess . . . Hoffman : Public Safety Commission . Bruce Chamberlain: Just a comment on that . If there were eventually in the future a stop sign included on that road , that would be the typical or logical place to put a crosswalk that would connect with the trail in the park . Mary Cordell : My name is Mary Cordell and I live across from the park virtually . 1730 Lake Lucy Lane . We 're up on a hill overlooking the parkland . It was my understanding from the last meeting that the parking situation , what I understood is that it was going to be primarily or just sort of informal parking along Lake Lucy Lane . How did it develop into a parking lot? Bruce Chamberlain : Todd and myself and Charles , the City Engineer , talked about this issue a lot . We decided that , well there 's really a couple of reasons . I ' ll talk about the psychological reason first . One is that if we designated on street parking , a wide shoulder along Lake Lucy Lane , there might be a psychological connection for people to drive up to Wood Duck Lane and assume they can park along Wood Duck Lane also . And the residents in that area I think probably wouldn 't like that very well . We can post it . , Mary Cordell : I don 't like it . Bruce Chamberlain : Yeah , yeah , I understand . But from a safety standpoint I also , I think in an area where the homes are fairly spread out , we do have a neighborhood to the south and a neighborhood to the north and the lots are fairly large and the neighborhood is fairly spread out . There 's also II an obligation to provide some type of parking area that 's kind of a safe haven so to speak for people ' to drive into , unload their gear , their kids . Things like that and then move on . ( A portion of the discussion was missed during this portion of the meeting due to the tape running out . ) Lash moved , Andrews seconded to approve the Pheasant Hills Park plan as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously . 1 1 Park ana Ree Commission Meeting May 21 , 1991 - Page 10 I VISITOR PRESENTATIONS= IILAUREN HUNTINGTON , MINNEWASHTA HEIGHTS PARK . Public Present: IIName Address _ I Lauren Huntington 6300 Dogwood Avenue Susan Hickey 6301 Elm Tree Avenue Lauren Huntington : Yes , good evening . Lauren Huntington and I 've lived in I the Minnewashta Heights area now for 2 years . I just wanted to bring to the attention the park that is in on the corner , the playground equipment that 's there is pretty rough in shape . I guess it was put in before safety I standards were really a main issue . The neighborhood has kind of made a big change around in the last couple years . There 's a lot of little kids now in the neighborhood and there 's no protection under the playground I equipment . It 's like 3—feet off the ground . The wood itself , a lot of splinters coming from it . There 's no sand in the sandbox . It just needs some major updating . The skating rink is wonderful . It 's used more now than it has in the past because of the change around in the neighborhood I but the outdoor equipment needs , I think it just needs new equipment put in for smaller kids . II Schroers : Can I ask . How many children typically are using that area? Now we 've discussed that park in the past and to be perfectly honest , one of the things that we had a problem , we didn 't know about , was how much use Ithere is in the area . a Lauren Huntington : I think it 's been used a lot . I don 't take my daughter there right now because it 's just too dangerous to take her . She 's 2 and ' she can 't even go down the slide unless I 'm standing there catching her at the bottom . If she falls off , she 's not going to hit any grass . The skating rink is getting used more because there 's more kids . IISchroers : It was our impression , maybe mistakably but that the Minnewashta Heights area is an area that had been there for some time and we thought II that the age group of the children in the area was probably exceeding the totlot stage . Lauren Huntington: I think if you 've looked , within the last few years , I I mean the houses have been going up for sale and changing hands very , very rapidly . There are , I would guess , on our block alone . ' Susan Hickey : I 'm a mother , I have two preschoolers . On our block alone , I live on the block next door to Lauren . I 'm right behind her . There are other families on that block who 's children are under the age of 5 . There 's a house that just sold across the street from us that the people Iwho bought it have a 4 year old daughter . Lauren Huntington: It 's changed . When we moved in 3 years ago , it was Iconsidered an older neighborhood . II II Park and Rec Commission Meeting May 21 , 1991 - Page 11 II Schroers : I think that was our general impression . Lauren Huntington: It was . And when we moved in I saw nobody at the park . II I mean Ellie and I were always there by ourselves . Now there 's , I think there 'd be a lot more people if the playground was updated . It 's a pretty 11 little park . . . It 's a nice sized park I think to . . . I guess I 'd like to see new equipment and maybe an undersurface put in . Schroers : I think we definitely need to address any immediate safety II concerns . We can direct staff to have the park maintenance people look into what immediate safety concerns there are and then I think that we probably have to look at our proposed budget and see what we can do in II regards to replacing the equipment . Lauren Huntington: Yeah , I thought maybe we could get an undersurface put in , maybe large enough to . . . That 's my main concern that the bottom of the slide right now . . . life threatening but the bottom of the slide can be pretty far . Schroers : Okay . Well thank you very much for making us aware of that . II Hoffman : During our park inventory visits this spring , it was consensus of staff that that equipment is not the type of equipment that you 'd look to an addition to or expansion of . It 's past that useable life portion . It 's a piece of equipment that we need to limp along with and try to make it 11 through until it 's deemed necessary to go ahead and replace it . Now the installation of resillient surfacing and the borderwood is something which should realistically be squeezed into the 1991 budget . Take some dollars from somewhere . Reallocate them to install that surface . We 're being aware of it at this point , we 're not addressing it if we don 't go ahead and do that . Andrews: Todd , I noticed on the agenda there 's some reduction of the II development of South Lotus Lake Park . Does that free up monies that could be reallocated specifically from? Hoffman : No . That change strictly deals with the master plan , not II budgeted items in 1991 . Schroers: Is this something Todd that we can just direct toward II maintenance as a project that needs to be done without taking a formal action as far as just applying the needed amount of surfacing under the slide and addressing other safety actions or safety situations just as more II of a normal means of the maintenance operation? Hoffman : I would still need some action from the commission to go ahead and coordinate that with them . It 's going to take $1 ,500 .00-$2 ,000 .00 to II go ahead and purchase and install a large enough blur area which will then suffice in future years when new equipment or expanded equipment would be installed . The issues about taking out the splinters or attempting to do some sanding , that 's just routine maintenance which can be completed . Other than that , currently the slide exits right out onto the dirt surface Iand the remainder of the play equipment sits on a dirt surface . 1 IIPark and Rec Commission Meeting May 21 , 1991 -- Page 12 II Schroers: Can we ask then that staff come back at the next meeting with II proposal of cost and the other amenities or changes that we would like to make currently and also where we might .be able to appropriate the funds from? II Hoffman: We certainly could do that . Otherwise we could just take a few short minutes tonight and just page through the 1991 budget and probably come up with that . I would think it 's going to be approximately $1 ,500 .00 Ifor that . } Schroers : Do you have that information with you? I Hoffman : Sure do . In every budget year , last year $175 ,000 .00 was budgeted . Just over $50 ,000 .00 was expended so this year we 're going to be much tighter than that . We 're going to be much closer to our budgeted I amount but there are some leeway . Things don 't get done at one park for a variety of reasons and to find $1 ,500 .00 within this would be fairly easy , if you want me to bring back specifics . IISchroers : Tonight 's agenda is really probably rather short . I think that we 're going to get through it pretty good . I hate to put things off when we can get something accomplished right now . If that 's okay with the rest Iof the people , that 's have at it . Andrews : I think we definitely have to prioritize safety above new II development . If we want to make a motion right now to allocate $1 ,500 .00 to provide necessary safety construction at that site , I think that would be a good thing to do . IISchroers: Can we leave it up to staff to determine the best location to acquire the funds? II Hoffman: You sure can . It will essentially fall out in the end of the year budget . We can go in and attack something right now for $1 ,500 .00 and it may be switched at some other time . ISchroers : Do you feel that the $1 ,500 .00 figure will address the current needs? II Hoffman: Yes . To purchase border wood and pea gravel , that will take care of it . I Lash: Do you have a project in mind? A budget area there that 's coming to your mind right away of where the money could come from? I Hoffman: One that comes to mind on the first page at Lake Ann is the nature trail . We had $4 ,000 .00 budgeted . The trail was cleared at virtually no cost . We had minor rental of equipment . We 're taking a look at aggregate but $4 ,000 .00 will not allow for paving of that trail . And if I we install aggregate at this time , upgrade the surface at a minimal level but at some year down the future we can go ahead and put that aggregate with bituminous surfacing in all at one time . Right now what we 're doing 1 is seeing how the trail works with the natural waterways that are in there 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting May 21 , 1991 -- Page 13 and those type of things and kind of letting it be used and discovered over a y==r . Th_ trail is cleared , by the way if you 're in there and can take a walk around that area . It will be mowed down to restrict growth but that $4 ,000 .00 , if it is still the desire , we can certainly go ahead . That will purchase , it may not potentially even purchase all of the aggregate so we may find 75% of if ` and run out of money . That 's one that comes right to the top of my mind that may not be expended by the end of the year Schroers : Wouldn 't it seem more practical to maintain that as a mowed surface and look at the amount of use and so on that it is getting before we spend that kind of money to either use aggregate or pavement on that trail? ' Hoffman : Correct . Schroers : I don 't have a problem with that . With that , is anyone , interested in making a motion to reallocate $1 ,500 .00 from the Lake Ann nature trail to the Minnewashta Heights Park? Robinson : For the purpose of pea rock or whatever and border wood . Hoffman: Correct . And I 'll go ahead and work with some dimensions as far as what we feel a future play structure will need in that area and then we 'll go ahead and install an area large enough to accommodate that ,future development . Lash : Do we have anything in the future? We 've got that 5 year budget . Has there been anything in there in the future? Hoffman: At Minnewashta? Lash : Yes . Because I know that 's one we 've just kind of left alone . Hoffman : Totlot updating $5 ,000 .00 and there was $10 ,000 .00 potentially put in there for a shelter . Warming house type of shelter . 11 Lash : Within how many years? Hoffman: 1992+ . ' Schroers: Okay . So we could look at improvements from that? Hoffman : Correct . It would become part of the 1992 budget process which ' will initially start next month to start shagging out where the dollars for playground are going to go in 1992 . Obviously this will be one of them . Schroers: Great . Well is anyone interested in making a motion? Andrews : I move that we reallocate $1 ,500 .00 from the Lake Ann nature trail to safety improvements at Minnewashta Heights Park . Pemrick : I ' ll second . IIPark an_? Re- Commission Meeting. May 21 , 1991 - Page 14 II Andrews moved , Pemrick seconded to reallocate $1 ,500 .00 from the Lake Ann I nature trail to safety improvements , [installation of resilent surfacing ( pea gravel ) and border wood] at Minnewashta Heights Park . All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously . - IIAndrews : I 'd like to make one more request of Todd . If there 's any other emergency type safety concerns at that park such as the slide , if that 's just something that 's too dangerous tp be left , I 'd like to hear about it IIright away so we can take action immediately . Schroers: Thank you very much for coming in . IHoffman : One more clarification . If we go ahead and expand the totlot area , it jeopardises the second of the two sandboxes which we have within city parks . I 'm just wondering if we eliminate that , if that 's going to Icause severe grief . Lauren Huntington: I personally , there 's a beach down the block and 1 th^re 's a lot of cats . Schroers : One sandbox is adequate? ILauren Huntington : I 'd rather see . . . IJUDD FUHRMAN, EAGLE SCOUT PROJECT . Hoffman : I 'd like to introduce Judd Fuhrman . Judd has been into the I office working with myself on and off for about the past 2 1/2 months to develop an Eagle Scout project as one of the requirements for his pursuit of the Eagle Scout rank . Initially we had taken a look at the construction of a bridge , of a third Boy Scout bridge at the Lake Susan site to cross II the creek as part of the trailway connection . That did not come about . However as the bridge that needs to be constructed in that area , it needs to handle vehicles and the distance and the load and that type of thing IIwould net accommodate that . So we put Judd off for a few more weeks . I informed him that during our park visit this summer we would go ahead and take a look at some appropriate parks and spots for projects . What I came I up with was working with the revitalization of City Center Park with the play areas and that type of work which is going to be going on there this summer . Specifically the removal of the existing border timbers , ties , that type of thing . The few that are there on the north playground and I then do the site work , the digging out of the trenching for the area for the new border and then the installation of new border wood in that area and the installation of the pea gravel . Judd has discussed this with his II troop leader and his advisor . It works with their requirements for the Eagle Scout project . Judd will be the coordinator of the project . Getting together the other Scouts and coordinating; the entire project . Doing the site surveying and that type of thing so I 've invited Judd in tonight to I explain his pursuit of his Eagle Scout . How long he 's been a Scout . That type of thing and then to look for your approval for this Eagle Scout project within the Park and Recreation Department . I II Park and Rec Commission Meeting I May 21 , 1991 Page 15 IIJudd Fuhrman: My name is Judd Fuhrman and I live here in Chanhassen . I 've lived here since I was about 4 years old . I am now 17 . I 've been a Scout since I was 7 years old . I started in Cub Scouts with Troop 330 in II Chanhassen . I went through Cub Scouts -and Boy Scouts , which I am right now . I am currently of rank . . .which is second highest . It 's right below Eagle Scout . I am working on my Eagle Scout . There are several requirements of the Eagle Scout , one of which is the project that was just II described and . . .Mr . Schmidt who is my Scout Master and was my Cub Scout master . I work with him very well . He will be my advisor throughout the project and will be helping me make some decisions about what to do II throughout the project . Kind of instructing me on how to go about things . Basically my job with the project will be not only to follow through with doing the planning and the actual work but to gather Scouts or other II civilian people to come in and assisting in the construction of the border wood and pea gravel . More or less my job is , my goal to become an Eagle Scout is objective of an Eagle Scout is to not just accomplish the project but to go about it in a way that I will be coordinating it . Not just doing I the project . I have to get people together to work on the project . Kind of like a manager and won 't actually be doing as much as work as the rest of the Scouts or as the rest of the people that will be on the job with me . II I 'll just be like a supervisor or someone who gets everything together and I will be actually doing work with them . It 's an honor to be working with the City and getting a project through the City and helping out the City II and the community in making revisions out at the park and updating it and improving the . . . Basically I 'm eager to get started on my project . Schroers: Okay , thank you Judd . Does anyone have any questions or 11 comments for Judd? Andrews: I 'd like to thank him for doing this work on behalf of the City . II I think it 's really appreciated . Erhart : We 're also honored to have you , so vice versa . Schroers : I admire your ambition Judd . This is quite a sizeable undertaking and I guess if you feel that this is something you 're confident you can accomplish , you certainly have my blessing . It 's a big help to us . II Koubsky: I 'd like to thank you for coming in Judd . This is really great . I admire your dedication to the Scouts and to seeking your Eagle Scout . I il think all along you will be very grateful that you did do that and are achieving the goal and the rank of an Eagle Scout . I know in my endeavors and even employment opportunities , resumes that indicate the achieved an Eagle Scout are looked at very closely . It 's an accomplishment and I II commend you for sticking through it and really happy to be able to work with you on this . Judd Fuhrman: Thank you for your time . I Schroers: Is there some action required on this Todd? II Hoffman: The only potential action is , as you know , $3 ,000 .00 is budgeted under Eagle Scout projects . If we had a project which was alone by itself II • 11 Park and Rec Commission Meeting May 21 , 1991. -- Page 16 Iand needed funding , we would have come before you tonight with a funding proposal . However as you also realize , the projects , these particular projects are very tight in their budgets . We 're working with grant money . IBudgeted dollars . Those types of things and that $3 ,000 .00 can roll over into next. year . It can be banked in case we do have another applicant for that type of money or a portion of it could be incorporated into this I project . So you rave your bunch of options which you may choose to act on or you can just approve the project as is . As far as the financing , we can say $1 ,000 .00 of the $3 ,000 .00 should go towards this project to be II dedicated to this project for both miscellaneous and direct expenses as part of the project . Or $2 ,000 .00 or $3 ,000 .00 or none of it . Lash : How many Eagle projects do we typically get? IHoffman: Typically 1 every year . Every other year . I Andrews : I think since such a large number of people in the community are likely to be involved in this project , I think we ought to allocate some money for nothing else than to provide refreshments and some assistance to II the project itself . R.. Lash: And this is a big project with a tight budget and I think I recall in our last packet some communication from you trying to get additional I funding so obviously we 're running a little short and we 're going to be cutting corners and I would rather allocate some money towards the project too to help with that crunch so we don 't have to skimp too much . ISchroers : And I would like to see any excess money be allocated to the purchase of the equipment that we are looking at for the area . I Hoffman : Correct . That 's where the actual cuts are going to be made because you need to go ahead and complete all the site amenities , border wood , installation , grading , those types of things . The cuts are going to Ibe made in the play equipment so any additional funding then would supplement those dollars . I Andrews: I would like to see us allocate some money for this project . If nothing else , with Judd 's experience as a general contractor handling some budgeting of money or being involved with how that money might be used would be also valuable experience and it provides a lot of good for the I City . So I guess for me personally I feel that we could safely allocate at least $1 ,000 .00 and then take another look at this later on in the project . If more money is needed , we could allocate an additional amount because I Ithink $1 ,000 .00 is a conservative amount of money to put towards this project . IILash: At what point are we going to be ordering the equipment? Hoffman : For that site I would , late June . ILash : Maybe we could address it at that time . I mean allocate some now and then in June review it and see if we want to allocate some more to get the most we can . I I Park and Rec Commission Meeting I/ May 21 , 1991 - Page 17 Hoffman: Sure . I can bring that back to the Commission . Andrews: I 'd like to make a motion right now that we allocate $1 ,000 .00 at this time and that at our June meeting we re-evaluate this project to see if additional funding might be necessary . Schroers : Okay , I will second it . . , Andrews moved , Schroers seconded to approve the installation of playground border at the north elementary school site as an Eagle Scout Project for Judd Fuhrman, Troop 330 and to allocate $1 ,000.00 of the $3,000.00 budgeted II for Eagle Scout projects to assist in the funding of the overall project . All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. ORDINANCE AMENDMENT , GLASS RECEPTACLES WITHIN CITY PARKS . Hoffman: Thank you Chairman Schroers . Item 4 is very straight forward . Robinson : That 's short and to the point . Hoffman: Straight to the point . No confusion whatsoever and if it is the wish of the commission to approve this , I will take it to the City Council for their approval . Schroers: Okay . Are there any commissioner concerns , questions? Erhart : How are we going to educate the people on this? I was just out there yesterday and saw a few glass containers . How are we going to let the people know? Hoffman: Currently I 'm working on a coordination of signage within our parks . Doing a cataloging of the signs . Park rules signs , park regulation signs which we currently have within the parks . I 'm going to be bringing that to the Commission throughout the summer . Refining an overall park sign which is basic . Short . Simple . To the point but covers the most important and essential park rules which we deal with . We 'll run that II through the City Council and make sure we 're addressing all park rules and regulations which need to be addressed and then look to ordering those for the spring of 1992 . Erhart : Okay , so signage you 're saying? Hoffman: Yep , signage . ' Lash: How about in those mailings? The booklets that you send out? Erhart : That 's what I was wondering . Hoffman: Correct , newsletter . Schroers : And also in the newspaper . The Villager . 11 Park and Rec Commission Meeting May 21 , 1991 Page 18 IIHoffman: Once it passes , we can get some coverage in a variety of ways . Basically I think people should , or at least some people should oblige . Erhart : Oh I think they will as long as they know , I would like to think that anyways . II Schroers: I think it 's kind of a trendy program these days anyway . Most people that are concerned with the environment will pick up on it . Well good . We 're looking for a motion then to approve the ordinance amendment il as proposed . . Lash: So moved . II Robinson : Second . Lash moved, Robinson seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission II recommend to approve the ordinance amendment prohibiting glass receptacles within city parks_ All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously . 1 SOUTH LOTUS LAKE PARK , MASTER PARK PLAN CHANGES . II Hoffman: Item number 5 deals with the South Lotus Lake Park , master plan changes . This came to light again in the park tours and then looking at the purchase of play equipment for South Lotus Lake Park . The ballfield which is shown there , it 's one of those deals where diagrams on maps can I play tricks with you . It looks good . However , the distances which we have available , orientation of this basically here with the boat access parking area , the two islands and the turn around , proposed play area location and IIthen the ballfield . Again , the distance on this foul line was substantially short of what it should be . 120 feet long and then again the distance from home plate to TH 101 is just 200 feet so designation of that II as a ballfield would be inappropriate . It would be much more appropriate to just designate the area , which would accommodate a long soccer field , open play area in this orientation just as a play area itself . Open field and not a softball field . IIAndrews : To reinforce that , there 's never any parking available there when the fishing season 's open . It 's just impossible so we really don 't want to Iattract softball to that area anyway . We don 't have the parking to accommodate it . Robinson: Has that been seeded? Was it seeded last year? IHoffman : It was seeded late last summer , correct . So the seed is coming up and then once we have the plan change and then go ahead and have time I later on in July , we can order up the equipment which was approved and install it . ISchroers : Okay . Well that seems like a pretty clear cut issue here . Do we have anyone interested in making the recommendation to amend South Lotus Lake Park plan and to eliminate the construction of the ballfield and designate it simply as an open play area? II • Park and Rec Commission Meeting I/ May 21 , 1991 - Page 19 Robinson : So moved . I Erhart : Second . , Robinson moved, Erhart seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend to amend the South Lotus Lake Park plan to eliminate the construction of the ballfield and designate it simply as an open play area . II All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously . POWER HILL PARK TRAILS. ' Hoffman: Item 6 , as it deals with the trails . We also , it would behoove us to speak of the parking area which is proposed in that area as well . In I recent discussions with the developers and Dave Hempel and other engineering staff , as they 're bringing in the approval of the 7th Addition , we 're taking a look at the construction of Flamingo Road . When is the II appropriate time to bring in the park entrance road? Is it appropriate to install the trailway at this time or at least the trailway stubs from the curb side through the lots to the back of the lot line? As we 're well aware , that becomes a dfficult situation on down the line . So I want to bring it to the attention of the Commission at this time since the construction will begin within a few short weeks . So we can begin to address those issues . They may not be able to be resolved this evening . II It could be resolved in a subsequent meeting on this particular issue . To explain the different items that we 're looking at , park orientation is currently in this fashion . Powers Blvd . to the east in this location . Lyman Blvd . to the south coming across in this location . Mallard Court is II currently the extent of the development . This cul-de-sac is developed and houses are going in this area so we are working with the developer to have this trailway installed . A bituminous surface off of the back of the lot line to alleviate any future problems . Continuing the trail then is currently labeled turf trail in this alignment up to the parking lot where then at the time of master plan discussion it was labeled bituminous from that point down past the play area and then to the tennis court in this location . The other stuff coming in along side the road would be bituminous and then coming in off of future additions to the subdivision , crossing the dyke or the berm inbetween the two ponds , was labeled turf at II that time as well . Current issues are , if it 's the desire of the commission to ever see that trail a hard surface so baby carriages , bikes , those types of things can be used in that location , now is the time to begin addressing it . Obviously as you see it there , it does come into the back side of just essentially all those lots along Flamingo Drive in the area of the trail . If it was installed as a mowed trail and then at some point in the future we attempted to install it as a bituminous , it would just not be possible . For that very reason it may not be desireable at this time to even consider bituminous surfacing . However , this park is somewhat limited in it 's active uses . It serves a large variety of II residents and we need to go ahead and address all recreational activities . Walking , biking , skateboarding , rollerblading among them . The other issue concerning the parking area . As we know , this will eventually develop as being at least a neighborhood sliding hill and potentially somewhat of as so called community sliding hill if people find it desireable to go there and slide . That is the reason for bringing in , one of the reasons for I/ IPark and Rec Commission Meeting May 21 , 1991 - Page 20 Ibringing in the parking in this location . And again , bringing in the parking lot is most easily accomplished when the street contractors are II there doing the street work . We would need to enter into a contract with them to complete that work . As you recall , during budget discussions it - was discussed . What about trail improvements? How do we budget for those and as noted in my item , it was very difficult to forecast what type of I things are going to be coming in . We labeled them in our 1991 budget as fund reserve and we talked about a wishy washy figure of $40 ,000 .00 . $40 ,000 .00 we would think that would be a reasonable amount to expend in II 1991 if the opportunity arose . To go ahead and construct these then , that would be possible . It would require a year end budget amendment to bring those dollars in to clarify then the year end expenditures versus the I budgeted amount . At this time I 'll open it up for commissioner discussion . I 'm interested to hear your thoughts on it as well . One other side note is that we 've asked them to stub in a water connection in this area so then at some point in the future we can bring in a copper line and put a drinking fountain into the park area adjacent to the play area or the parking lot . Schroers : I 'm a little bit unsure of my orientation on this . Is this the I trail section that I looked at where there was a question of the easement that two gentlemen were concerned that called me out to their house where it goes between their house and down the steep hill? ILash : No . Hoffman : No . That 's in Chanhassen Hills . There 's another one up there . IILash : Oh ! Herman Field . That 's the one I was thinking about . II Hoffman: The one Larry looked at was in Chanhassen Hills . Barbara Court . That one is resolved and has been installed so you can go ahead and go take a look at that connection route . The one Larry 's speaking of is the connection from Chanhassen Hills which is isolated currently by TH 101 and Ithen will be isolated by TH 212 as well so we need to leave them that outlet to get out into the open area . The large expanse there which is in between Chanhassen Hills , Lake Susan Hills West . Up the west side of Lake I - Susan and then into the community park . This one is on the other side to the west across Powers Blvd . and currently it 's hard to visualize . IISchroers : Laid out it 's almost , I envisioned it being . Hoffman : It lays out essentially the same . If you want to go ahead and take a look at the area there . IILash: I have just a couple questions just to clear this up . So what you have planned now is the 3 different accesses from the neighborhood into the Ipark as being bituminous? Are all three supposed to be paved? - Hoffman: At least the ones coming betwee,' the houses to designate them as a trailway . The other one corning in from alongside the roadway would be Ibituminous just to make it a continuous bituminous loop from off street into the play area into the tennis court . The other one which is somewhat I II Park and Rec Commission Meeting I/ May 21 , 1991 - Page 21 wider , if it was elected not to go with an asphalt surface all the way down II could be left turf . Lash: And there are no homes there now? These are just lots? II Hoffman: There are homes in this cul-de-sac area and abutting Flamingo II just in this area here . So this is the extent of the development right now . That ends here and it will continue up Flamingo Drive and around in a couple of weeks . Lash: Okay , and those people up there know about this? The people up on II the cul-de-sac? Hoffman: Correct? I Lash : Okay . II Andrews: How much distance from that north cul-de-sac down to the sliding hill area are we looking at? Hoffman: We taped it off the other day . We had 300 . I think I was taking 1 a look at about 1 ,500 feet in this area so considerably under a mile . Schroers: As development occurs , is there going to be more paving done in II the area and would , is the potential there to work a deal with the contractor at the time that will possibly save us some money down the road II as far as paving it at a later date? Hoffman: Yeah , I can 't address the saving money . It would certainly be advantageous for them to go ahead and partake in that work at the time II which they 're constructing their roads . Laying sub-base of the road and asphalt so it 's a good opportunity for both sides . Koubsky : As I think right now , Flamingo isn 't paved . I Hoffman : No . Koubsky: It 's just some rough site grading out there . II Hoffman: Yep . I Andrews: I wanted to ask this question . I think you 've already answered it but just to be sure . The three paved stubs are a done deal . Is that correct? That they are going to happen regardless of what we decide to do tonight or not? Hoffman: These two will . This one is up to your discretion . It 's II considerably wider than the other ones . If we want to asphalt that in , we .. Andrews: I guess I feel it is important to put pavement in between residential lots so we don 't get into these problems of this never has been a trail and I don 't want a trail going through my yard when it isn 't their yard to start with . II II Park and Peo Commission Meeting May 21 , 1991 - Page 22 ISchroers : And since there are two paved stubs going in and the development is yet to occur , I think we 've even kind of adopted as policy to try to get I that type. of trailwork done along with construction and development in the area . I would definitely think that would be the avenue to pursue here . Hoffman: It would be my intent in future review of subdivisions such as I this to go ahead nd incorporate these things that continually come back to the Commission and cause you headaches and pain , namely trail connections and parking lots . Those are included in the master plan and deemed I necessary , the best time to go ahead and install them is to develop them right into the development contract and make them a requirement of the developer . They ' ll want some reimbursement for that . That can I appropriately be done through the reduction of park fees . That type of thing but then it 's a done deal . The grading , the asphalt work and the inter park trailwork is done up front . I Schroers: And we know that the entire area there is scheduled for rather intense development . We have you know every indication to assume that that 's something that will be used a lot and could justify having a paved Isurface . - Lash : That little road thing that goes into the parking lot? Would it be safe to assume that the City plows in the winter then will go in there and Iplow that out in the parking lot so people wanting to use the sliding hill can? I Hoffman: Correct . The street would become property of the City and they would plow Flamingo Drive , they 'd just swing in there and plow that out . I Schroers : Okay , would you then be looking for a recommendation from us to go ahead with the paving of this trail in conjunction with the development of the project? IHoffman : Correct . Andrews: I just want to be clear . Are we talking about paving all the I darkened trail sections up there including the stubs and all the connectors or are we talking just about the stubs at this point? Schroers : No , we 're talking about the trail . I Andrews : The whole thing? 1 Schroers : The whole thing . Lash: Because I 'm not in favor of doing that . I think we 're blowing a Iwhole chunk of money there on a little neighborhood trail that , I think we 've got some bigger fish to fry than this one . I definitely see the advantage of paving the stubs in because then future people coming in know that this is there and they can 't come back with a problem and I think the I original plan with the bituminous connecting the parking to the tennis makes sense but I don 't know about going all through the whole thing with bituminous . I think the turf trail would be , personally I think that 's I Park and Rec Commission Meeting I May 21 , 1991 - Page 23 adequate for what people , it would be a way of connecting . Actually it 11 would just be kind of a hiking trail in my opinion . I don 't know how many people would he walking . . .a.nd if people want to take their strollers or ride their bikes . . .problem taking Flamingo . It wouldn 't be that much farther . To spend $17 ,000 .00 or $25 ,000 .00 out of our $40 ,000 .00 budget , " that 's a big share of our budget for trails . Wendy Pemrick asked a question that wasn 't picked up on the tape . The recording was had at this point . Lash: We 'd never be able to do it . Hoffman : Yeah , it 's my opinion that the homeowners there . . .at a future date it would become impossible . Lash : I did , just to let you know I happen to , I carpool with a gal who lives right over by this and she just commented to me last night that she was very happy to see that . I think she lives by Sunset Ridge . That it had been graded and they were very happy to see that and I knew this was on and so I happened to mention this to her just to get her opinion of it . I I said that my understanding of it was that a portion would be paved to the tennis courts but that the other part could be turf or it could be paved and her opinion is that turf would be adequate for the neighborhood use . She said that she would rather see a trail on Powers if we were going to spend . Koubsky: Todd do you know , in this whole area you know they are providing II sidewalks through the lots , or do you know if sidewalks are slated for the west lots? Hoffman: Sidewalks are slated for Flamingo . Which side of the road ' they 're on , I 'm not sure . Koubsky: Because if they were on the west side that might be a little I overkill to have sidewalks on the front of the house and then bituminous pavement on the back of the house . Erhart : How can we find that out? Hoffman: I can find out pretty easily if it 's that much of a difference whether it 's on the west or the east side but I know for sure that a sidewalk is going on Flamingo . Erhart : Because that would have something , it would make a difference to me on how I voted on this . Lash: I think even if it 's on the east side . I mean you 've got off street . Koubsky: Coming in on Lake Susan there on the west side . So I 'm assuming they would carry it down Flamingo on the west side which would be in these lots here . 1 IPar ! an~' Re: Commission Meeting May 21 , 1q(-1. - Page 24 ILash: I guess the other thing that 's in my mind is at our last meeting when we talked about the right-of-way on the railroad and that seemed to be I ssmething that we were all in favor of and that 's going to cost us some mone;' too so I hate to end up being short funds to do some of those kind of things as they come up that would benefit a more of the city . ISchroers : I think that the real thing that we have to key on here is that whether or not we want to identify this as a turf and aggregate trail from this point forward . If we have any idea that at some point in time we 're Igoing to want to pave it , then now is the time to do it . Hoffman : Correct . And there is just differing uses . A hard surface trail I versus turf trail provide distinct opportunities for each and if it 's thought that those opportunities , be it skateboarding , rollerblading , access by wheel buggies , that kind of thing , can be carried out on the sidewalk and Flamingo Drive , that has some merit . If we want to include Ithose as part of the interior of the park , we 'll look the other direction . Andrews : I just can 't personally see providing both a paved trail and a 1 sidewalk that close to each other . I think that 's a waste of our resources when there are so many other areas in the city that are desperate for park funding . IRobinson: I would agree with that totally . And all the points that Jan also made . ILash: It 's not that I don 't think it would be nice . It 's just that fiscally I don 't think that we have the money to do it in this area . I 5chroers : I 'm kind of assuming by the way it was presented here that staff didn 't really have a preference or a particular recommendation on this issue? I Hoffman: No . I was just merely presenting the information to the commission and allowing discussion to be held with a motion being made . We do however need to address the roadway issue . I apologize . That was not Iincluded as part of the report . Just in discussions within the past few days , the developer is taking a look at the grading plan and coordinating with our contractors with the work that is going to be done . If we want to I include this as a separate contract , we need to look to doing that . Again , I 've not received a firm estimate on that but that would be less than installing the whole entire trail segment in bituminous so it would be under $15 ,000 .00 . Under $17 ,000 .00 . And if we 're going to do that , now 's IIthe time to do that as well . Andrews : That 's the road connecting to the tennis court area? IHoffman: Yeah . The parking lot . We won 't have a question raised . Whereas if we do it a year from now , we 'll have to address the same Iquestion . Andrews : Can I put a motion forward so we can see if we can put it to a vote and see what we can do here? I 'd like to move that we provide paved I U Park and Rae Commission Meeting I May 21 , 1991 - Page 25 access stubs between private property lines to the turf trail system and then also provide paving for the road entrance , the parking area and the connecting trail to the tennis court area . I think those were the three things you wanted Todd? Hoffman: Correct . Erhart : I ' ll second that . Andrews moved , Erhart seconded to direct staff to coordinate the II installation of bituminous trail stubs at all entrance points to the park; the installation of the access road and parking area serving the sliding hill , play area and tennis court and the installation of the bituminous trail at the south end of the park linking these facilities as allowed by the 1991 Capital Improvement Budget _ All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously . Andrews: I 'd like to make one point for further discussion . Todd I 'd appreciate on further issues like this if there is a sidewalk system , if you could include that bn the report to the Commission because I think that II was a key thing to this decision . Hoffman: Correct . I was kind of rushed preparing this packet . Erhart : That did make a big difference though to get it early . COMMISSIONER PRESENTATIONS: ' Lash : I 'd just like to commend you guys on the summer activities that you have planned . The Super Events . I was the first one to sign my kids up . They really do though and I just think that 's great to have those -kind of activities for kids during the summer . Hoffman: Thanks Jan . The City newsletter did go to print today . Will be distributed . As you know , our park and recreation activities have become part of the overall city newsletter so you 'll see that in the mail in the next 4 or 5 days . ' ADMINISTRATIVE SECTION: Schroers: Are there any particular points of interest there? ' Andrews : I want to make one comment . Todd , I really appreciate how you 've • kept us moving on all these projects . We 've had something presented . It gets acted upon or if not you bring it back to us and I would really like to mention that . I appreciate that very much . Hoffman : Thanks Jim . ' Lash: Yes . And then I made a little note here but I can 't find what it was . It was on Heritage Highlights . What thing was it? Oh yeah . That was it . This little circle thing on the geese control . Is that something maybe we could get inserted into the paper or in the city booklet or I ilPark and Rec Commission Meeting May 21 , 1291 - Page 26 something . There 's a lot of people who are frustrated with geese and maybe that would be an easy solution for them to try . • Hoffman : Oh the? Lash : The goose tape . IHoffman: You bet . ILash : That 's a good idea . Hoffman: Another home remedy . ILash: Well I know some people who are frustrated with that situation . You should put that in the paper . 1 Cchroero : You know if we were able to change that , that Class B wetland at Pheasant Hills to a Class A , we would be promoting more nesting area . We would be looking at relocating more geese . ILash : But then we 'd have to hire this guy to come pick them up over there too . I Andrews: I guess the last thing . I 've got one more thing too . With the Lake Ann Park pavillion construction , would that be anything that could be tied in with the 4th of July celebration as far as ground breaking or is Ithere anything we can do to really kick that off? I think that 's a big accomplishment for the City . Hoffman: That 's a good point . I think it 's going to be slightly premature but by no means does that mean it can 't be included . Andrews: How about having the sketches and the artist renderings at the I celebration for people to see it . I think people would be impressed with that , I Lash : Also , now that I think of it , Fiskness . No , not Fiskness . What 's that Watershed . IErhart : Conrad . Lash: Conrad Fiskness . Yeah , that 's it . He was telling us when we were hiking down in Bluff Creek the other day that he thinks , but he 's not sure , Ithat this is the 20th Anniversary of Lake Ann . Erhart : Right and we were suppose.:: to check on that . Isn 't it 20 years Inow since the development of that park? Hoffman: 71 to 91 sounds real close . IErhart : He didn 't know but . Hoffman : But 71 sounds right . I Park arH Pee Commission Meeting I/ May 21 , 1991 - Page 27 Lash: Maybe the 4th of July we could kind of beef up just the fact that it 's the 20 year anniversary . Just throw that in . Hoffman: We 've got a lot of things . We 've got the war to ride in on and everything 's red , white and blue and the 20th and the ground breaking . Good ideas . Andrews: Did we invite General Schwartzkopf to come to our 4th of July? Hoffman': Not yet but we asked Prince and anyone else with money for contribution to the park shelter and did not receive any . But I did see that two local companies , DataSery and Varitronics bought one of the $100 ,000 .00 host tents at the U .S . Open so they had a little cash to spend . Kou.hsky • Medtronics did? Hoffman: Varitronics and DataServ . ' Schrcers : I just have a question for anyone who attended the Bluff Creek orientation . That was , the timing on that was not good in conjunction with opening of fishing but did anything of particular interest come up or anything happen during your tour that you felt the rest of us should be enlightened on? Lash : You should know , yes . Dawne was there in her form , leaping from rock to rock . Crossing the creek and teetering across logs and she deserves a letter of accommodation for that . Above and beyond the call . We were all pretty worried but anyway , there were some Council members there and they were very impressed and I think they seemed to be extremely supportive of the idea of trying to come up with some way or form of doing something to preserve that . I think it 's being addressed already isn 't it by the Planning Commission or it 's going to be shortly? Erhart : Yeah , quite a few of the Planners were there . ' Lash : And another thing that they did kind of teeter around a little bit . There was no commitment or anything but there was talk that maybe the route to go with if the City was interested in pursuing the golf course idea would be to try and consolidate the Bluff Creek Golf Course because then we 'd be killing two birds with one stone . Getting the golf course and then I they own about half the bluff creek area . Schroers : Alright . Good . Robinson moved , Erhart seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in. favor II and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 9: 10 p.m . . Submitted by Todd Hoffman Park and Recreation Coordinator Prepared by Nann Opheim CHANHASSEN SENIOR COMMISSION 'ALM al REGULAR MEETING MAY 17, 1991 Chairman Montgomery called the meeting to order at 9: 35 a .m . . MEMBERS PRESENT : Barbara Montgomery , Sherol Howard , Bernice Bellison , Jan Kubitz , Emma St . John and Selda Heinlein MEMBERS ABSENT: Betty Bragg STAFF PRESENT: Sharmin Al-Jaff , Planner I APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Montgomery: First of all we have approval of the agenda . I would like to add a couple things to it if I may . Does anybody else have anything? Al-Jaff : Please . Can we switch items 3 and 4 so that 4 would become number 3 and number 3 become number 4? Montgomery: Sure . Also I 'd like to add an item about planning a trip to the Chaska Senior Center . Let 's talk about it and see if anybody wants to arrange that . Let 's see , let 's make that item 5 . APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Montgomery: Does anybody have any additions or corrections of the Minutes of the last meeting? Okay , if not they stand as read . SERVICES OFFERED FOR SENIORS BY THE CHANHASSEN BANK - CINDY REESE , ASSISTANT VICE-PRESIDENT MARKETING BANKING MANAGER . Montgomery : We think it 's very good of you to come and explain some of your services to us . Would you like to just stay where you are? Cindy Reese : Sure . Can everybody see us or do you want me to stand up? Montgomery : I think so , sure . Cindy Reese: Okay , well I 'll start and then pass over the microphone to Dave after I get finished . My name is Cindy Reese and I - brought some of my cards if you want . But what we wanted to do today , I was talking with Sharmin and reading in the Villager that you had formed this commission and I wanted to come out today and let you know that the Chanhassen Bank , as you probably know , has been in Chanhassen for 72 years serving the community 's financial needs . We really try to take a very active role in the community and give back a lot of the things that we get . We have , there 's such a thing called the Community Reinvestment Act which is some legislation nationwide that all banks are supposed to comply with and what that really says is , it 's very important for a bank to give back to the community that it serves in many different ways . Whether it 's through special products and services to meet the needs of special groups of residents or donations and contributions to important organizations and • Senior Commission Meeting May 17 , 1991 -- Page 2 groups . Or just by service of the individuals at the bank and giving of our personal time to help meet the needs . And at the Chanhassen Bank , I wanted to come today and let you know that we have 8 officers in the bank and we 're all very active in different aspects of the community . Whether it be Chambers and Jaycees and School Boards or School Foundations . We try to support the youth in the area and do a lot of things to support the Just Say No to Drugs effort and the Project Charlie and a lot of the things for the youth . We introduced the Outstanding Youth Awards last fall for Grades 1 thru 12 recognizing our outstanding youth and we try to support the businesses and do different things we can , both for our small retailers in town as well as the bigger businesses out in the industrial park . And something that I hadn 't realized we had was a Senior Commission until I was talking with Sharmin . We do have some special services already for Seniors and I wanted to come today and tell you what we already have and let you know that we 'd like to do what we can to make our services available to you even more so . If you don 't know about them , we want to be sure you know about them and if there are things that you need that we don 't currently have , I 'd really like to either part of your group periodically or if I can visit with you from time to time and you let me know what you need . At the bank we 'd like to do what we can to listen to your needs and try to respond to that and meet any special needs that maybe you as the group of seniors might have that we haven 't yet recognized . Let me start I guess by just showing you what we do have at the bank for seniors and I 'll tell you a little bit more . I ' ll tell you a sneak preview of something that we 're planning to introduce later and you 're like one of the first to know . And of course here I am on tape so you have to promise to keep it a secret . But we 'll go through this first and then I 'll tell you what else we 're planning . We have a special checking account and group of services for anyone who 's 55 years or older and we call it our 55/55 checking . But basically it 's totally free checking for anyone who 's 55 years or older . They don 't have to keep a minimum balance . If they keep $1 .00 in it or $1 ,000 .00 in it , there 's no monthly fees whatsoever and we feel that when someone 's reached the age of 55 , that 's the least they 've earned so we 're happy to give free checking to our seniors . Then the other 55 part of it is we give SS% discount on all of our check orders . Whatever kinds of checks a person would like , they get 55% off . In addition to that , we have free notary service , free telephone transfer . If they 'd like to transfer money out of checking to savings or out of savings to checking , they can do that over the phone . Half off of safe deposit boxes and we 've got all different sizes . Heinlein: That 's new . I just paid by bill . Cindy Reese: And you didn 't get half off? Well I ' ll have to write your name down . I ' ll go check on that Selda . Jay Johnson: Maybe they didn 't realize you were 55 . Cindy Reese : That 's right . Do you know Elaine at the bank? Heinlein : Yes . 4 Senior Commission Meeting May 17 , 1991 - Page 3 Cindy Reese : Yeah? Well I 'll check . We 'll see if Elaine 's got our records right . We ' ll see what your bir-thday , maybe it says 1941 or 51 . Heinlein: 1913 . Cindy Reese: Maybe those numbers got transposed and it says 31 . I 'll check on that . Well we ' ll get that corrected Selda . If you haven 't been getting half off , you will get that rebated . And then we have first year free credit card and I know a lot of times our senior customers say oh , I don 't want to use credit cards but sometimes it 's nice just to have , if you 're going to go on a trip and you always needs two forms of ID so if nothing else it 's an ID that you can have . This is what we currently have in place for anybody 55 years or older and here 's the sneak preview part . Now don 't tell until you hear it officially but we 're planning on enhancing this even more . The target date to introduce this is August of this summer . It will be even better . You 'll be getting interest on your checking with no minimum . And we ' ll be giving checks free . Instead of 55% off , it will just be 100% off so it will be totally free . We 're going to have different trips that you can take advantage of . Maybe day trips . Longer ones . A couple of nights . Overnights to some select places like Dorr County . Different nice spots that are fairly local but make a nice outing . And we really checked out the different companies that we want to work with to make sure they 're very reputable and run excellent programs and that kind of thing . Some seminars we would like and plan to offer . Maybe on estates and wills or different planning things . Some safety issues . Maybe some crime prevention type things and this is where your feedback , you tell me what is important to you and we ' ll plan accordingly but we really plan on enhancing our program for seniors even more so than it is right now . There will be I think free traveler 's checks involved and some other things too . So that 's a sneak preview and don 't tell please because I don 't want all my competition to hear about it okay but I just thought I 'd let you know that we do really value the seniors of the area and the bank really does try to take a great interest in the residents of the community of all ages from the youth to the seniors and we 'd like to get even more active if there 's anything we can do . Heinlein: I found you very , very helpful . I was only up here a short time when my husband died and I got a lot of help . Cindy Reese : Well I 'm glad . We try and we 've got a lot of really nice folks . We 've got some new faces that you probably haven 't seen and then we 've got some folks that have been there for over 30 years . Elaine and Theresa have been there over 30 years and then we 've got some brand new personal bankers that are really nice and really sharp and everybody inbetween so we really want to go the extra mile and I wanted to be sure today that I told you that . We want to be receptive to your needs 'so if there are things we aren 't doing that we could be doing , let me know . Dave is my sidekick here and Dave Amundson is our Real Estate Loan Officer so he handles all the mortgage needs , home buying , construction and that kind of thing . And when I visited with Sharmin on the phone , she mentioned that a new product , a fairly new product called a Reverse Mortgage is something that was brought to your attention by the Metropolitan Council . That it 's