The URL can be used to link to this page

Consent lb - I - CITYOF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 • (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 Acton by ply Administrator Indorsed ✓ 7211114 MEMORANDUM Injected TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager te: �� Otte Submitted to Commission FROM: Charles Folch, City Engineer g bete Submitted to Council DATE: August 5, 1992 to•�Y SUBJ: Approve Plans and Specifications for West 86th Street Trunk Watermain Improvements; Authorize Advertising for Bids, Project No. 90-10 The project plans and specifications for the West 86th Street Trunk Watermain Improvement Project No. 90-10 have been prepared by Orr-Schelen-Mayeron &Associates (OSM) and have been reviewed by appropriate staff. The plans are available for Council review in the Engineering Department. Staff has worked cooperatively with MnDOT and Al Klingelhutz,the property owner most largely affected,through fine-tune alignment which accomplishes the goals of the project and minimizes impact to adjacent land owners. Due to the timing of this project in relation to the remaining construction season, staff is in the process of obtaining right-of-entry agreements from all appropriate property owners to allow the project to begin construction concurrently as the easement acquisition process takes place. The current project schedule anticipates a project award of September 14, 1992 with completion by November 15, 1992. It is therefore recommended that the City Council approve the plans and specifications for the West 86th Street Trunk Watermain Improvement Project No. 90-10 and authorize advertising for bids. ktm c: Dave Hempel, Sr. Engineering Technician Jerry Boucher, Utility Superintendent Dave Mitchell, OSM Brett Weiss, OSM elk to PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER C I TY 0 F -- CI1ANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 x; Action by City Administratot t.ndorsvi 4/mi Modif ie�_ MEMORANDUM R ect 4 Date — r zi TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager Date Submitted to CommissiOtf FROM: Charles Folch, City Engineer.' Date Subrr ted to Cardlg,10 Div DATE: August 3, 1992 SUBJ: Authorize Easement Acquisition and/or Condemnation Proceedings for West 86th Street Watermain Project No. 90-10 Attached are the legal descriptions for the necessary easements in association with the West 86th Street Trunk Watermain Improvement Project No. 90-10. This authorization is a required formality to initiate the negotiation process and/or condemnation proceedings if necessary. It is therefore recommended that the City Council authorize acquisition of easements for the West 86th Street Watermain Improvement Project No. 90-10. ktm Attachments: 1. Resolution. 2. Easement Location Map. c: Dave Hempel, Sr. Engineering Technician Dave Mitchell, Orr-Schelen-Mayeron & Associates Brett Weiss, Orr-Schelen-Mayeron & Associates tot PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER CITY OF CHANHASSEN — CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA DATE: RESOLUTION NO: MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ACQUISITION OF EASEMENT FOR THE PROPOSED WEST 86TH STREET TRUNK WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT PROJECT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Chanhassen, does hereby determine that it is necessary and for a public use and purpose to acquire the easements described on the attached Exhibit "A" for the proposed West 86th Street Trunk Watermain Improvement Project 90-10. — AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Mayor and City Clerk/Manager are hereby authorized and directed to execute all documents necessary to effect the acquisition of the aforementioned — easements, and that the City Attorney be, and hereby is, authorized and directed to effect negotiations and/or, if necessary, institute condemnation proceedings and to do all things necessary and incidental thereto to acquire the easements pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 117 under the "quick take" provisions of the Statute. — Passed and adopted by the Chanhassen City Council this day of , 1991. — ATTEST: Don Ashworth, City Clerk/Manager Donald J. Chmiel, Mayor — YES NO ABSENT \\ l( tNi 1 7 W I W 8 . 1 '11V \ ...4... rain 7 L I I 1 x — x f ',2 t 2 ( '5io W j =oi — 1 H W t Ij f W _ 11 W t I � WI 3 — VH H + N . j • — 1 1 At ,- 1 I - ( : I I i1 : 1 -..----;:-..„„.. ,....„......." I W I \\ • 7. 1' \ -N. N o z 7 i<\s'y . 1 • S 1 ( 8 - r t a� 1 gl jf S i < 1 i W ; I — I N Z 2 i Li 5 Y W YO I / o m L., a� u _ T 1 a Z11H17oNIIY 'N lY T ---- es CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 Action by City Administrator - Endorsed 1/ a MEMORANDUM Reese oat TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager F Pete Submitted to Commission \ pale FROM: Charles Folch, City Engineer DATE: July 31, 1992 Submitted to Cotrrull SUBJ: Approve Plans and Specifications for Phase I of Upper Bluff Creek Trunk Utilities; Authorize Advertisement for Bids Project No. 91-17 The project plans and specifications for Phase I of the Upper Bluff Creek Trunk Utilities Improvement Project No. 91-17 have been prepared by Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates (BRA) and have been reviewed by appropriate staff. The complete plan set is rather large and would be somewhat cumbersome to include with each Council packet. Therefore, only the cover sheet, location sheet and lift station building architectural sheets have been included in the packets. If anyone wishes to review the complete plans and specifications, a copy is available in my office. Due to the size of this project, it is likely that the improvements will be performed in subphases consisting of the lift station, the forcemain and gravity piping from the lift station north to the Lake Ann Interceptor, the piping from the railroad crossing south to the lift station and the piping from the railroad crossing through the Stone Creek development. The time schedule for these subphases will overlap to some extent. It is also anticipated that winter construction will be utilized to complete the later two subphases of the project. This will be advantageous for the work involved in crossing the creek and lower lying land areas where soil conditions may be saturated. The lift station itself is also to be designed and constructed (pump sizing) for an initial period of 5 to 10 years of flow capacity with some minor upgradings to take place thereafter to serve full development needs of the defined service area. The current project schedule anticipates an award of bid on September 14, 1992 with the project to initiate soon thereafter. The EAW for the project has been published in the EQB with the required 30-day comment period ending in mid-August. It is therefore recommended that the City Council approve the plans and specifications for Phase I of is to, PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 1 Don Ashworth July 31, 1992 Page 2 _ Upper Bluff Creek Trunk Utilities and authorize advertisement for bids for Project No. 91- _ 17. jms — Attachments: From plans: 1. Cover Sheet. 2. (Sheet 2) - Location Map. _ 3. Architectural Plan Sheets. (Note: The above-referenced plan sheets are unsigned. Signed copies will be distributed _ at the Council Meeting) c: Bob Schunicht, BRA — Phil Gravel, BRA Jerry Boucher, Utility Superintendent Dave Hempel, Sr. Engineering Technician — C I TY OF -- ‘ ‘ CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN. MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Don Ashworth, City Manager DATE: July 23, 1992 SUBJ: Eckankar Condemnation, Authorize Stipulation Agreement Obtaining a "ponding easement" on the southeasterly corner of the Eckankar property is necessary to accommodate the drainage from the West 78th Street detachment project, as well as to accommodate storm water from the James/Burdick properties. The condemnation process has dragged for nearly two years, along with the ups and downs of the West 78th Street project itself. Details of the project, i.e. access points to abutting properties, are still being debated. However, the project, in some configuration, will occur. Accordingly, continuing to finalize the acquisition from Eckankar is prudent. Generally, an "easement" is essentially no different than an "outright ownership." The primary difference between the two is that an easement is only valid for the purposes described in the easement, whereas a general property taking gives ownership to the city and all of the rights of property ownership. The log jam to date has been the fact that Eckankar has been reluctant to a "general property taking," fearing what uses the city may consider for the property and/or a potential resale of a portion of the property at a later date for a use deemed undesirable to Eckankar, i.e. a car sales lot. From a city perspective, why should we obtain an easement which may restrict our uses if we're going to be forced into paying the same cost as if it were a total property taking? To the best of my knowledge, the attached settlement agreement is a highly innovative highbred of the two typical forms of taking. Key points of the stipulation agreement include: The agreement maintains the taking as an easement, but ensures that all potential uses by the city are identified as a part of the easement so that the property can be used without additional payment, i.e. future north frontage road, pedestrian/bike trails, utilities, etc., have been identified as permitted uses; and - The agreement recognizes that the value for the property should reasonably be set by a condemnation commission to guarantee to both the city and Eckankar that a reasonable n t 0, PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER Mayor and City Council July 23, 1992 Page 2 value is set for the property. However, regardless of the value selected by the independent condemnation commission, the stipulation agreement would spell out that the _ city's payment to Eckankar would be set at 66-2/3% of that award. The latter position reasonably assures that the city is not paying the full cost for property which has been limited in use. Not only is the proposed agreement unique in that it provides a highbred which meets the concerns of both parties, but it also represents a major cost savings to the city. Without the agreement, we would be assured of paying the full cost of the commission's award. Knowing that in advance, we would seek to take the property as an general property taking. That position would be strongly opposed by Eckankar, which would assuredly lead to a number of motions (court decisions--attorney bills) testing the necessity for the taking, the type of taking, etc. I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate the attorney's office for reaching an innovative settlement which I sincerely believe has saved the city significant dollars. Approval is recommended. CAMPBELL , KNUTSON , SCOTT & FUCHS , P .A Jul 20 , 92 10 :47 No .003 P .01 CAMPBELL, KNUTSON, SCOTT & FUCHS, PA. Attorneys at Law Thoimh),CanThe l (612)452.5O00 Roger N.Kntir:,,n Fax(612)452•5550 Thomas►I.Sc,,tr airy G.Fuch. James R.Walston FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION - COVER SHEET Elhoct Iv Knewl, Michael A. Rr.+hack Renac D.Srciner TO: DON ASHHWORTH CHANHASSEN Facsimile Number: • FROM: GARY FUCHS Campbell, Knutson, Scott & Fuchs, P.A. — Facsimile Number: (612) 452-5550 DATE: July 20, 1992 TIME: COMMENTS: Re: Chanhassen v. Eckankar Don: Transmitted herewith is a re-draft of the Sti7ulation in the Eckankar condemnation that contains changes as discussed in our meeting with the Eckankar representatives a couple of weeks ago. All the changes to the previous draft are underlined for your quick review. As you might note, the Eckankar •representati\•-s have withdrawn their demand that the language regarding density and set backs be included and have agreed to exclude that language. The} have not changed the percentage of compensation. Call me with your approval or changes . Gary THIS TRANSMISSION CONTAINS 12 PAGE(S) , INCLUDING THIS COVER SHEET. IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL PAGES OR IF THE QUALITY OF THE TRANSMISSION IS POOR, PLEASE TELEPHONE CINDY AT (612) 452-5000. — Suite 317 • Eagandalc Office Center • 1380 Corporate Center Curve • Eagan, MN 55121 CAMPBELL , KNUTSON , SCOTT & FUCHS , P .A Jul 20 , 92 10 :48 No . 003 P . 02 STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF CARVER FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT CASE TYPE: Condemnation Court File No. 89-25440 City of Chanhassen, a Minnesota municipal corporation, Petitioner, vs. • STIPULATION ECKANKAR, a not for profit religious corporation and County of Carver, Defendants. The CITY OF CRANRASSEN, Petitioner herein (hereinafter "the City") , and ECKANKAR, a not for profit religious corporation, Respondent herein (hereinafter "Eckankar") , HEREBY STIPULATE AND AGREE AS HEREINAFTER SET FORTH. RECITALS A. Eckankar is the fee owner of the following described property, which Eckankar considers to be of treasured spiritual value to the religion of Eckankar, occupying an irreplaceable aid _ vital position within the faith, situated in the City of Chanhassen, Carver County, Minnesota: Tract B, Registered Land Survey No. 88 , files of the Registrar of Titles, Carver County, Minnesota ("the Property") . B. The City has commenced an eminent domain proceeding to — acquire fee title to a portion of the Property. The legal CAMPBELL , KNUTSON , SCOTT & FUCHS , P .A Jul 20 ,92 10 :49 No . 003 P .03 _ description of the parcel being condemned by the City in . the eminent domain proceeding is as follows: All that part of TRACT B, REGISTERED LAND SURVEY NO. 88, files of the Registrar of Titles, Carver County, Minnesota, which lies southerly and easterly of the following described line and its extensions: — Commencing at the most southerly corner on the easterly line of said TRACT B; thence on an assumed bearing of North 0 degrees 37 minutes 28 seconds East, along said easterly line of TRACT B for 1, 000 . 00 feet to the actual point of beginning of the line to be described; thence North 89 degrees 22 minutes 32 seconds West for 675. 00 — feet; thence South 27 degrees 37 minutes 28 seconds West for 1, 185 . 04 feet to the southerly line of said TRACT B and said line there terminating. — (hereinafter "the Parcel") . C. Representatives of Eckankar and the City have discussed the proposed public use of the Parcel and the interest being — acquired by the City and have negotiated this Stipulation which reduces the interest in the Parcel to be acquired by the City. D. Pursuant to this Stipulation, the City will amend its Petition herein to acquire separate temporary and permanent easements over the Parcel for public purposes including a public — street, pathways and bikeways and sidewalks, sanitary sewer, water, storm sewer, public utilities, ponding and drainage systems. Eckankar has agreed to convey the necessary easements to the City upon execution of this Stipulation. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual terms, _ covenants and conditions hereinafter set forth, Eckankar and the City STIPULATE AND AGREE AS FOLLOWS: - -2- CAMPBELL , KNUTSON , SCOTT & FUCHS , P . A Jul 20 ,92 10 :49 No .003 P .04 TEMPORARY EASEMENT Eckankar, in consideration of Ten and no/100 {$10. 00) Dollars, and other good and valuable consideration to it in hand paid by the City, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, does hereby grant unto the City, its successors and assigns, a temporary easement (the "Temporary Easement") , for the purposes set forth below, over, on, across, under and through the following described property (the "Temporary Easement Premises") : The easterly 90 feet of the southerly 1, 150 feet of Tract B, Registered Land Survey No. 88, files of the Registrar of Titles, Carver County, Minnesota. The Temporary Easement shall commence upon execution of this Agreement and shall expire on December 31, .1994. The Temporary Easement is granted only for the purpose of the City' s construction of a public street, public utilities and related facilities. Eckankar grants the Temporary Easement subject to the following conditions: 1. The City shall have the right to remove trees, brush, undergrowth and other obstructions as necessary from the Temporary Easement Premises for the street and utility construction project. 2 . After completion of such construction project, the City shall restore the Temporary Easement Premises, except changes in grade, to a condition as nearly equal as possible to that which existed prior to the construction, within a reasonable time after completion of the construction. 3 . If the City does not so restore the Temporary Easement Premises within a reasonable time after construction, the City shall pay to Eckankar all costs incurred by Eckankar in restoring the Temporary Easement Premises to a -3- CAMPBELL , KNUTSON , SCOTT & FUCHS , P .R Jul 20 ,92 10 :50 No . 003 P .05 condition as nearly equal as possible to that which existed prior to construction. 4 . All soil, gravel , mineral deposits, trees, wood and the like removed from the Temporary Easement Premises shall be the property of the City. — Eckankar grants the Temporary Easement conveyed herein without — divesting itself of the right to use and enjoy the Temporary Easement Premises during the term of the Temporary Easement, subject only to the superior right of the City to use the same for the purpose and pursuant to the conditions herein contained. PERPETUAL EASEMENT Eckankar, in consideration of an additional sum to be determined pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Chapter 117 , and other good and valuable consideration to it in hand paid _ by the City, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, does hereby grant and convey to the City, its successors and assigns, forever, a perpetual, nonexclusive easement (the Perpetual Easement) for the public purposes set forth below, over, across, on, under and through the following described _ property (the Perpetual Easement Premises) : All that part of Tract B, Registered Land Survey No. 88, files of the Registrar of Titles, Carver County, Minnesota, which lies southerly and easterly of the following described line and its extensions: Commencing at the most southerly corner in the easterly _ line of said TRACT B; thence on an assumed bearing of North 0 degrees 37 minutes 28 seconds East along the easterly line of said TRACT B for 950.00 feet to the actual point of beginning of the line to be described; — thence North 89 degrees 22 minutes 32 seconds West for 695. 00 feet; thence South 16 degrees 37 minutes 50 seconds West for 760. 00 feet; thence North 88 degrees 05 -- minutes 45 seconds West for 230. 00 feet; thence South 01 -4- CAMPBELL , KNUTSON , SCOTT & FUCHS , P . A Jul 20 , 92 10 :51 No . 003 P . 06 degrees 54 minutes 15 seconds West for 282. 16 feet to the southerly line of said TRACT B and there terminating. Eckankar conveys the Perpetual Easement only for the following purposes: Construction of public street, und.around public utilities reasonable abovec;rotd appurtenances thereto (including, but not limited to, fire hydrants, street lights., tel hnnp _and cable television boxes, etc. ) , sidewalk, bikeway, pathway, drainage and ponding facilities (the Public Facilities) , including: The right of the City, its contractors, agents, servants and assigns, to enter upon the Perpetual Easement Premises at all times to construct, reconstruct, inspect, repair and maintain the Public Facilities; The right of the City to grade, level, fill , drain, pave and excavate the Perpetual Easement Premises as necessary for construction, maintenance and repair of the Public Facilities; and The further right of the City to remove from the = Perpetual Easement Premises trees, brush, undergrowth, s soil, gravel , mineral deposits and obstructions interfering with the location, construction, maintenance and/or repair of the Public Facilities. All soil, gravel, mineral deposits, trees, wood and the like removed from the Perpetual Easement Premises shall be the property of the City. In consideration of Eckankar's conveyance of the Perpetual Easement, the City covenants and agrees as follows: 1. Following the completion of construction, grading, filling or excavating activities on the Perpetual Easement Premises, the City shall stabilize the disturbed areas of the Perpetual Easement Premises as soon as possible within a reasonable time so that the Perpetual Easement Premises do not remain in a disturbed condition for an extended period of time, knd shall restore those areas not part of the Public Facilities, or sppurtgaant thereto, to a .condition as nearly equal as possible to that which existed prior to construction. -5- CAMPBELL , KNUTSON , SCOTT & FUCHS , P .A Jul 20 ,92 10 :51 No . 003 P . 07 2 . The City shall minimize, to the maximum extent possible, clearing, grading or other activities in the northerly • - 325 feet of the Perpetual Easement Premises. 3 . The City shall not install any street within the northerly 325 feet of the Perpetual Easement Premises. Any — installation of sidewalks, bikeways or pathways within the northerly 325 feet of the Perpetual Easement Premises will be approved by Eckankar. — 4 . The Perpetual Easement Premises shall not be used as a public park facility. 5. The City shall not establish a public parking area or any other use not specifically permitted in this Easement Agreement on the Perpetual Easement Premises. 6. The City, at its sole expense, shall be responsible for construction of the Public Facilities proposed for the — Perpetual Easement Premises; for restoration and rehabilitation of the Perpetual Easement Premises following construction; and for the permanent maintenance of any Public Facilities constructed or installed on the Perpetual Easement Premises, including the removal from time to time of debris from the storm water pond and outlet structures and shall further assume all liability therefor. City will levy no special assessment against theProperty for a`ny public in ro :mQnt _ hat _ rtoludes _ap ,a jasis for the levYany of the Perpetual Easement Premises. 7 . The City shall forever indemnify and hold Eckankar harmless from any claim or cause of action arising from the City's possession of the Perpetual Easement _Premises or related to the construction, maintenance, repair or use of the Public Facilities to be installed on the Perpetual Easement Premises . This indemnification shall not apply — to any claim arising from Eckankar' s use of the Perpetual Easement Premises as allowed by this Easement Agreement. The covenants by the City and Eckankar set forth herein shall run with the land and shall bind the City and Eckankar (and their — successors and assigns, if any) and shall inure to the benefit of the City, Eckankar and its members, successors and assigns. The Perpetual Easement shall not be exclusive. Eckankar retains the right to use the Perpetual Easement Premises for purposes which do not conflict with nor restrict or inhibit the use — -6- CAMPBELL , KNUTSON , SCOTT & FUCHS , P .A Jul 20 ,92 10 :52 No . 003 P .08 of the Public Facilities including, without limitation, private walkways, trailways and related facilities such as benches, shelters, parking facilities, etc. In the event the City' s future use of the Perpetual Easement Premises requires the removal or destruction of improvements or facilities installed by Eckankar, the City Shall give Eckankar ninety (90) days ' written notice of the proposed removal or destruction so that Eckankar has an opportunity to remove or salvage the facilities. If City provides this notice, City shall not be liable nor responsible to compensate Eckankar therefor, nor to replace or reinstall any such improvements or facilities. _ Eckankar also retains the right to use the Perpetual Easement Premises for such drainage and ponding facilities, including modifications of existing facilities, as are reasonably necessary to serve the drainage and ponding needs of the Property. Eckankar' s right to use the Perpetual Easement Premises for drainage and ponding purposes, and Eckankar's right to modify the existing facilities, are subject to the approval and permit requirements of all governmental agencies and entities having. jurisdiction over the Perpetual Easement Premises at the time such modifications are to be made. Eckankar acknowledges that a portion of the Perpetual Easement Premises is currently classified as protected wetlands and modifications of the ponding area as it now exists, and as it will exist in its expanded status, currently requires the approval of several state and federal governmental agencies and entities. It shall be Eckankar's sole responsibility to obtain and pay for the cost of all necessary approvals and -7- CAMPBELL , KNUTSON , SCOTT & FUCHS , P .A Jul 20 , 92 10 :53 No .003 P .09 permits for any future modifications or future use of the Perpetual Easement Premises by Eckankar. The construction or installation of such facilities by Eckankar shall not proceed until the City has reviewed and approved the plans therefor, which approval shall not be unreasonably denied or delayed.Eckankar, for itself and its successors and assigns, warrants that Eckankar owns a marketable title in and to all of Eckankar's - Property and that it has the sole right to grant and convey the Temporary Easement and Perpetual Easement to the City. DAMAGES AND COMPENSATION 1. The parties will immediately proceed with scheduling and participation in the Commissioners ' hearings in this eminent domain proceeding affecting the Parcel. Each party will proceed to gather and present evidence to the Commissioners in whatever manner they , deem appropriate and at their own cost and expense provided, — however, that the Commissioners shall be required to determine damages as if the City were acquiring fee title to the Perpetual Easement Premises. 2 . Upon receiving the decision of the Commissioners regarding damages payable to Eckankar, either the City or Eckankar may appeal the matter to the Carver County District Court for trial as provided by Minn. Stat. §117 .145. -8- — CAMPBELL , KNUTSON , SCOTT & FUCHS , P .R Jul 20 ,92 10 :54 No . 003 P . 10 3. In the event either the City or Eckankar appeals to the Carver County District Court, the City's obligation for partial payment of the Commissioners' award, as required by Minn. Stat. §117 . 155, shall be fulfilled by the City's paying 50% of the amount of the Commissioners' award to Eckankar. Eckankar agrees not to demand payment in excess of r0 of the Commissioners ' award during the pendency of the appeal and agrees not to object to the propriety of any appeal based on noncompliance with Minn. Stat. §117 . 155 so long as the City has made payment of 50% of the amount of the Commissioners' award. 4 . in the event neither the City nor Eckankar appeals from the award of the Commissioners within the time provided by Minn. Stat. §117 . 145, the City shall be obligated to pay Eckankar 66. 67% of the amount of the Commissioners' award, together with interest on that amount from the date of execution of this Stipulation. . J Payment of said amount shall constitute full and final payment of all damages and amounts due to Eckankar as a result of the condemnation proceeding and the City may thereafter file a Final Certificate as is contemplated in Minn. Stat. §117.205. 5. In the event either the City or Eckankar appeals to the District Court, and the matter proceeds to judgment by that court following either a court or jury trial, the City shall be obligated to pay Eckankar 66. 67% of the amount of the judgment, together with interest on that amount and costs and disbursements, if any, as awarded pursuant to Minn. Stat. §117 . 175, less any amounts previously paid. Payment of said amounts shall constitute full and final payment of all damages and costs due to Eckankar as a result -9- CAMPBELL , KNUTSON , SCOTT & FUCHS , P .A Jul 20 , 92 10 :54 No .003 P . 11 of this condemnation proceeding and the City may thereafter file a Final Certificate as is contemplated in Minn. Stat. 0.17 . 205. — 6. The Final Certificate that is filed with the court and recorded with the County Recorder/Registrar of Titles shall incorporate the terms of this Stipulation that describe the Temporary and Perpetual Easements being granted by Eckankar to the City as more fully set forth in that certain Easement Agreement dated of even date herewith and executed by the parties hereto. 7 . For any payment made by the City to Eckankar for damages in this proceeding, whether before, during or after trial by the court or a jury, the City shall be entitled to a credit of $10. 00 as and for the payment made for the Temporary Easement. 8 . The terms of this Stipulation regarding damages and compensation shall not be disclosed by either party hereto, nor by their attorneys, agents or representatives, to either the S _ Commissioners appointed to determine damages and compensation nor to any jury selected to determine damages and compensation herein — nor to any other party other than the District Court of Carver County, Minnesota. This Stipulation shall be disclosed to the District Court upon execution by the parties. Any such disclosure — to the District Court shall be accompanied by a request to the court to keep the terms of this Stipulation confidential since the — parties agree that the disclosure of the terms of this Stipulation may unduly influence any party determining damages. Dated: July , 1992 . -10- CAMPBELL , KNUTSON , SCOTT & FUCHS , P .R Jul 20 , 92 10 :55 No .003 P . 12 CAMPBELL, KNUTSON, SCOTT LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & FUCHS, P.A. & LINDGREN, LTD. By: _ By: GARY G. FUCHS, #32566 JAMES P. LARKIN, #60227 _ Attorneys for Petitioner Attorneys for Respondent Suite #317 1500 Northwestern Financial Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve 7900 Xerxes Avenue South Eagan, MN 55121 Bloomington, MN 55431 Telephone: (612) 452-5000 Telephone: (612) 835-3800 • i • -11- — I CITYOFCHANHASSEN -- 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 Aotlon 6Y CRY Adminlst-en. dndased ► DW A MEMORANDUMd 1�lect• Data TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager c Date svtim�ted to Commtesion FROM: Todd Gerhardt, Assistant City Manager TT Dete Submitted to Council B— I — qZ DATE: August 5, 1992 SUBJ: Change Order No. 2, Chanhassen Senior Center Attached please find the final Change Order No. 2 representing a total increase of $6,022.00 associated with the Chanhassen Senior Center contract. The largest portion of this change order is to replace the existing light fixtures in the Council Chambers, lobby area, and the reception area. By changing these fixtures, the city will save money by using a more efficient light fixture, and also improve the quality of light needed to video tape our commission meetings. The seniors also requested installation of blinds to regulate the sunlight through the southerly windows, similar to what the library has in their facility. The cost to install the blinds is $1,003.00. Two other items included in this change order are adding exit signs, and drywall wrapping of the header holding the folding wall. Both of these items are required by the State Building Code. Staff recommends approval of Change Order No. 2 in the amount of $6,022.00 for the Chanhassen Senior Center project. ATTACHMENTS 1. Change Order No. 2 t PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 42-0-2 901992 16: 09 FROM PAGE ELECTRIC INC "5117 I eir\n-k- el‘cW FAG EC1H1CAL UONTRACTING INC _ 130 ENSLAND LN PLY H u N 447 TEL -0759 FAX 83 MOB TELO 72,-144 — T ' DATi 2/27/92 — TO: ! CITY OF CHANHASSEN f x 937r 5 7.9 HE: CITY HALL 4X4 FIXTURES SUB,; ': FURNISH AND INSTALL 18 NEW 2X4 TROFFERS IN PLACE OF EXISTING 4X4 FIXTURES — A :T CURT • OUR PROPOSAL INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING: INC ' ONS: — SALES TAX 4� ELECTRICAL PERMITS DEMO ISTING 4X4 FIXTURES AND INSTALL 18 NEW 2X4 PARABOLIC TROFFERS _ 1 in FY EXISTING OPENING TO ACCEPT NEW FIXTURES TYPE FIXTURE ATTACHED _ r EXC1 ONS: NONE 1 - l FOR SUM OF: $4, 226. OO WE BE LOOKI" = FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU. — SIN Y, 004, Gar! iae Pre 1.nl -7/ is�rT TER4 ::ont _P y pr.- ,�e6 aym *based on value of material and completed rx. �aI Net thirty days. _ 1 Z0 'd 1tl101 [ . -�C J P 01 ri ParaluMetalUX _ 2" Low Profil- ' COOPER u3NG Precision Cel �- - � - Recessed/A -- pPIY 1 1 . _. . :_• r,� .� • 2x4 • .;, .�,. -� . . Cell - - �. •;.:� _ 18 r' r-y tli LL 1 I . - r SPECIFICATIONS , Illre CONSTRUCTION 4Sri d "M' j1 7171 z a','," Deep, para•contoured one-piece housing. die formed from 11 K�Lx code gauge.prime cold rolled Steel.Full length die formed stiffeners I I ... for added strength. Deep V Center ballast covet. easily removed f - 2311 1 y» without toots.Die formed captive lamphoider bracket fully encloses i! - ";`;, iampholder permiving easy lempholder replacement. Heavy end 1 plates. securely attached with interlocking tabs tend screws assure Catalog Number No. of Lamps Ball Size We-.; fills i accurate row length without build-up. I 2P2GAX•340S36H 18 3G40 Rapid 2x4 I42 — ELECTRICAL t Ballasts CBM/ETL Cless P,positively secured by mounting bolts. Pressure loch tam holders.Electrical Chap ii6 P components and fixtures UL _ — lsted. IBEW labeled. iiipp -G- (5tandartl/lar-inl FINISH' (Example 2P2GAX 136H) Substitute "F" Flange _ Electrostatically applied baked wane polyester powder enamel finish. (Example 2P2FAX- i6H; Mtnumum reflectance 90%. Multistage cleaning code. 'von "C" Concealed ahospnate coating with rust inhibitor. Conveyoraed application and (Example- 2P2CAX ;36Hi :. baking timing accurately unrolled at an etevlted temperature. } f OG New For other IOW*,confis.aattons cation tat LOUVER ii — Formed of semi-specular anodized aluminum. Finish is Anodic oxide coating Accurate parabolic calls are held in place with l interlocking feature.Black reveal around entire perimeter of louver. j Positive cam action spring loaded latches. Safety lode-T-hinges t — allow hinging and latching either I . Louver protected from O construction contaminants by polyethylene cover. ' eectrostsbc POlraster erumke truck sealable le tat k1Wnr tgtta taotatae Sereave F volt avawa&.. — Gonave Factory. Present Ivan a 4ctra:ale ore atonal. ZO'd 6£1SG£6 01 ONI 0Id10313 39tld w0dd 60:91 Z66I,LZ/Z0 tNi ^'>z i s? ?<'> _`>:u,.- NIIAC[NENT CIITIICTIIi CONTRACTING LETTER ' :e ; Kf s 2817 ANTHONY LANE SOUTH MEMO SUITE 304•MINNEAPOLIS,MN 55418 612-789-4066•FAX 612-789-4192 Date: 711-31012 To: �C�s �(ZC 4F Ci L)QS Subject: SC t.L c o Q CELA-- 2 ACT-10 wG !-ram Qc y suEm r Jn P2cct Lts FcQ wog I.C. At Q U 3 1*-111 as FoLww s l TEN\ I c St kJ z)o . C item 2 t .JC l�ALL 'ZsC oD'> ti3 slGiuS Li/C CTE M. 4 Dray wAL 1, w RRP P K,tc Z o. a sub r c1u (09 a cDp PaAcL r O\ 103 , 00 ` 01—AL cif. 7g3, oc� C:_,Vvnt erdtr No • 4 - ❑ Please Reply O No Reply Necessary Signed: ��p MANAGEMENT tNNTNAtTNAN C O N T N A C T 1 N GMEMO e � 817 ANTHONY LANE SOUTH LETTER ° v SUITE 304•MINNEAPOLIS,MN 55418 W 612-789-4066•FAX 612-789-4192 Date: -Vt3/61-- To: C. o s AfLc, -b ( TcrU(2 Subject: 5 E1`.!1 o e CZ"LrrT'2 ATrL,t- w 1C2C RV SUa Nk tT CU CL rjc. Fot wbR (G AS c 5ca r e ti,l 2F R la AS t L 1J C Q31,_ 1 J Ds --r L cY-1 2 .40 .PQR Fr A o VGR-L- A c Q 0, c,o DOTAL 1 03 ,px _ C_ vxcic -e ❑ Please Reply ❑ No Reply Necessary Signed: Aill11111. 1. 1,..00,. _ I C I TY O F • CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Don Ashworth, City Manager DATE: August 5, 1992 SUBJ: Reconfirm Original Low Bidder As can be seen from the attached materials, the original low bidder for the street sweeper can make delivery. This is contrary to information which was presented at our last meeting whereat it appeared that the sweeper could not be finished within a reasonable period, and that assets of the company would be hung up in bankruptcy for an extended period. I see this report and the City Council's action as a correction to our previous action and a reinstatement of the original bidder as the authorized contracting party. The original bid price stays in tact and a local company, Athey Products Corporation, can supply the city with any necessary parts, warranty work, and guarantees. No purchase order, or other forms of commitments have been made to the second bidder and, according to the City Attorney, _ the city is less likely to be sued if we stay with the original bidder than if we would move over to a secondary bidder. This makes the assumption that the original advice to us that the original bidder could not deliver the product and/or such would be a long bankruptcy process turns out to be incorrect. Approval of reconfirming Schuster Equipment as the lower bidder for the sweeper ordered on — April 14, 1992, is recommended. The above being conditioned upon delivery occurring within ten days. �0, PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER CAMPBELL, KNUTSON, SCOTT & FUCHS, PA. Attorneys at Law Thomas J.Camphell 012) 452-5000 Roger N. Knutson Fax(612)452-5550 Thomas t 1.Scott Gary G. Fuchs James R.Walston Elliott R. Knetsch Michael A. Rrohack July 31, 1992 Renac D-Steiner Mr. James E. Carmel Carmel, Baker, & Marcus, Ltd. 180 North LaSalle Street Suite 2630 Chicago, Illinois 60601 -' RE: Schuster Equipment Company (No. 92 B 15536) Your Client: Nathan Yorke My Client: City of Chanhassen, Minnesota Dear Mr. Carmel: I am in receipt of your letter dated July 30, 1992 , confirming the understandings and agreements reached during our recent telephone conversation regarding the purchase by the City of Chanhassen of a certain mobile sweeper. The only detail your letter fails to mention is that the City must receive delivery of the sweeper within 10 working days. Very truly yours, (CAMPBELL, KNU ON, SCOTT & FUCHS, P. . BY: Roger N. Knutson Chanhassen City Attorney RNK:srn Enclosure cc: Don Ashworth, City Manager RECEIVED AUG 4 3 1992 CITY OF CHANHASSEN Suite 317 • Eagandale Office Center • 1380 Corporate Center Curve • Eagan, MN 55121 JUL 30 '92 11:40 113 P02 - LAW OFFICES OF CARMEL, BAKER & MARCUS, LTD. 180 NORTH LASALLE STREET SUITE 2630 CHICAGO, II,LINOIS 60601 (312) 201.808C) FAX (312) 201-8085 July 30, 1992 VIA FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION FIRST CLASS MAIL Mr. Roger Knudson Eagan Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve - 317 Eagan, Minnesota 55121 RE: SCHUSTER EQUIPMENT COMPANY — NO: 92 B 15536 Dear Mr. Knudson:As you know, we represent Nathan Yorke who has been appointed Interim Trustee in the above Bankruptcy case. I am writing to confirm the understandings and agreements we reached during our recent telephone conversations in regard to the purchase by the City of Chanhassen of a certain Mobile Sweeper pursuant to its — purchase order dated April 14, 1992 . The Mobile Sweeper has been completely manufactured, with the exception of final painting, by Athey Products Corporation. We have agreed that Athey Products Corporation will complete the manufacture of the sweeper and will arrange for delivery to the City of Chanhassen. It is my understanding that a certain 1986 — Elgin Sweeper is being traded in by the City of Chanhassen in connection with this transaction. Upon acceptance of the sweeper by the City of Chanhassen, payment will be made in the amount of — $77 , 388 . 00 to the Trustee who will then make payment directly to Athey Products Corporation. Athey will also handle the trade-in. All warrantees in connection with the equipment will be given by — and remain the obligation of Athey Products Corporation. I anticipate being able to obtain a Bankruptcy Court Order authorizing this transaction within the next few days and will send you a copy of that Order immediately upon its entry. If you have any questions in regard to this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you for your cooperation. — Very truly yours, ' L, BAKZ7RCUS, LTD. 1./ James E. Carmel jec/jaf Li:- .., - 08/04/92 City of Chanhassen Page 1 PAYROLL_ CHECK R E G I S T E R AUGUST 7, 1992 Check Emp Gross Check Number Nbr Employee Name Direct _ Pay Amount Deposi 009559 1101 CHMIEL , DONALD J . 300 . 00 256 . 21 *** 009560 1102 WORKMAN, THOMAS M. 200 . 00 183 . 70 _ 009561 1103 DIMLER , URSULA I . 200 . 00 180 . 24 009562 1104 MASON , MICHAEL C 200. 00 183. 70 009563 1106 WING, RICHARD C. 200 . 00 183 . 70 009564 1201 ASHWORTH, DONALD 2, 280 96 1 , 119 79 *** - 009565 1202 ENGELHARDT, KAREN J 1 , 445 . 76 836 . 28 *** 009566 1203 DUMMER , NIKKI 557 . 75 422 . 48 *** 009567 1206 SCHULLER , NORMA L 770 . 56 555 . 22 *** -- 009568 1207 BURMEISTER, GINA 695 . 68 508 . 84 *** 009569 1209 OPHEIM, JANANN 0. 986 . 23 743 . 35 *** 009570 1210 GERHARDT, TODD R . 1 , 757 . 73 973. 78 *** - 009571 1301 MEUWISSEN , MARY JEAN 1 , 729 . 57 781 . 84 *** 009572 1303 CHAFFEE , THOMAS L . 1 , 584 . 50 1 , 211 . 11 *** 009573 1305 EIDAM, ELIZABETH A . 1 , 115 . 20 756 . 22 009574 1701 BREHM, CURTIS 250 . 00 219 . 78 *** - 009575 2102 DUNSMORE , CAROL M. 1 , 146 . 65 738 . 51 *** 009576 2504 KIRCHMAN, STEVE A . 1 , 593 . 60 910 . 75 *** 009577 2505 BARKS, CARL E . 1 , 425 . 60 907 . 51 *** _ 009578 2506 LITTFIN , MARK G. 1 ,420 . 57 1 , 018 . 50 *** 009579 2507 NELSON , STEVEN D . 1 ,408 . 00 969 . 51 *** 009580 2510 HARR , SCOTT 1 , 876 . 61 1 , 087 . 09 *** 009581 2511 DEBNER , RANDY L . 1 , 382 . 40 773 . 52 *** -009582 2513 KOENIG, BETH A . 1 , 006 . 40 727 . 31 009583 2514 TORELL , STEVEN B . 1 , 306 . 40 755 . 68 *** 009584 2602 WINTERS , STEVEN R . 504 . 60 -009585 2604 WINTERS , ZYDOWSKY, ROBERT A . 397 . 46 009586 2606 NORDLUND, ROBERT J . 585 . 60 401 . 92449 . 06 *** 009587 3102 MEUWISSEN , KIM T . 569 . 5388 28 *** 009588 3103 FOLCH, CHARLES D. 868 . 48 428 . 43 *** -009589 3104 BEMENT, WILLIAM R . 1 , 842 . 731 , 215 . 20 1 , 279 . 98850 . 31 *** 009590 3105 STECKLING, JEAN M . 16 009591 3106 REMER , DANIEL R . 354. 248 806 . 3016 . 36 -009592 3107 HEMPEL , DAVID C. 1 , . 60 *** 009593 3108 BIRKLAND, SARA 1 , 473. 60 954 . 76 *** 009594 3201 SCHLENK , GERALD W720 . 00 548 . 85 -309595 3203 OIEN , STEVEN 1 , 602 . 40 880 . 60 *** 009596 3205 WEGLER , MICHAEL632 . 00 531 . 26 09597 3206 PETERS , GARY 1 , 538 . 40 1 , 061 . 00 *** )09598 3207 THEIS , JAMES M. 982 . 40 669 . 92 *** -009599 3208 SAUTER , STEPHEN M. 1 , 384 . 00 826 . *** 009600 3209 ROJINA , ROBERT S . 1 , 147 . 2011 791 . 97 *** )09601 3701 BROSE, HAROLD 1 , 9 . 00 594 . 65981 . 94 *** -)09602 3702 GOETZE , DUANE E . 1 ,312 . 00 9 *** 009603 3703 SIEGLE , CHARLES J. 1 , 9 . 60 788 . 92. 72 *** 109604 3801 GREGORY, DALE J. 1 , 109 . 60 *** 1 ,3 _209605 3802 SCHMIEG, DEAN F . . 0 840 . 970 . 9 *** 1 , 516 009606 3803 SCHMIEG, DARYL . 80 '09607 3804 SCHMIEG, DANA 580 . 00 3738 .. 89 500 . 00 8 09608 3805 EILER , CHARLES A . 42 1 1709609 3807 HAAK , LORI R . , 15 . . 92 211 . 31 18686 . 49 , 08/04/92 City of Chanhassen Page 2 PAYROLL CHECK R E G I S T E R AUGUST 7, 1992 Check Emp Gross Check Direct - Number Nbr Employee Name Pay Amount Deposi 009610 3808 KOTSONAS, NICK C. 480 . 00 359 . 62 009611 3809 FASCHING, JARED M. 336 . 00 275 .46 009612 3810 MIESELER , JASON E . 429 .00 341 . 81 009613 3830 DUMMER, SCOTT D. 725 . 00 552 . 32 009614 4202 HOFFMAN, TODD 1 , 574. 34 928 . 00 *** 009615 4501 RUEGEMER, GERALD G. 1 , 216 . 42 827 . 30 *** 009616 4504 JOHNSON, DEBORAH A . 345 . 00 281 . 88 009617 4505 LEMME, DAWN E . 600 . 00 463. 82 _ 009618 4506 ANDERSON , BRANDON 242 . 50 208 . 73 009619 4507 FARM, JAMES M. 202 . 50 161 . 61 009620 4508 NELSON, MARY B . 354 . 74 270 . 26 009621 4509 FARM, JON C. 245 . 00 191 . 95 - 009622 4510 WARMKA , MARY E . 547 . 75 407 . 97 009623 4511 LAABS, ANGIE K . 310. 74 257 . 43 009624 4602 THORSON, HEATHER S . 547 . 50 426 . 35 - 009625 4604 GAGNER , NANCY L . 50 . 00 46 . 17 009626 4605 LUETGERS, SUSAN K . 59 . 50 54 . 95 009627 5202 OLSEN , JOANN 1 ,070 . 00 484 . 99 *** 009628 5203 CHURCHILL , VICTORIA E . 1 , 156 . 80 717 . 53 *** - 009629 5204 AANENSON, KATHRYN R . 1 ,406 . 15 948 . 66 *** 009630 5206 AL-JAFF , SHARMIN M. 1 , 121 . 76 808 . 36 *** 009631 5210 KRAUSS , PAUL M. 1 , 946 . 76 1 ,463. 09 *** - 009632 5301 STUTELBERG, JONATHAN S . 275 . 00 213 . 35 009639 7201 BOUCHER , GERALD 1 , 752 . 62 1 , 149 . 05 *** 009640 7202 KERBER , ARTHUR M. 1 , 845 . 38 1 , 180 . 20 _ 009641 7203 ZIERMANN, CURTIS 1 , 633. 10 983. 11 009642 7206 CHINOS , CHARLES G. 1 ,411 . 85 923 . 83 *** 009643 7209 SABINSKE, DEAN J. 1 , 197 . 50 843. 61 **** Grand Totals **** 76 , 736 . 57 50 , 685 . 42 I., . . la s s . .. • o 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 -i 4.4 w w (../ w c.) CO CO w LOW w w w (w w w w to LOW w w w w 2 < A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A T m m m Cr) m m m m m m m m m m Cr) m Cr) m o- m m on Cr) m m C) 0 N N N N N N N 0 0 O O Q 0 0 0 7C T m U A W N 0 (D CO -.1 0) U A W N 0 (D CO -.I m U A W N it C) 2 D Z D 2 D -' w CO 3 Co N CO N N U N CO -4 CO V) . - 0 rn 0 CO U U (D 0) N) -4 U N) W N N m W Z O 0 N U m N U m N 0 m (D m -.1 0 --I U ( W 0 U W C o m (o O O U U (D 0 CO U 0 --I O CO U 0 U 0 m to On W U • Z — o O 0 0 w 00 -4 0 m o O 0 0 O 0 0 0 O to 0 m W O 0 O 0 0) 0 0 N N m O O -I 0 O O op O 0 0o A A U 1 D •0 I Z -I 0 f 3 V C V) 0 I Z Co 3 V 2 L < 0 C 3 3 C -I C) C) O m 0 > m C • 1 z Z O O Z D - m 0 m Z - Z • 3 — N 1 33 3 7J z 0 co N > T Z < • -I -n - z C Z H r () 1 as . < 0 f r • -I > 73 -I rn -4 T O D 3 Z < • T. 3 0 2 7 m < m - C) m -I T 2 as C) 3 0 rn r rn > X > 0 D m 0 as N () • I C) T 0 > CO 0 0 r 0 r * Cl) * a, m Co -I 3 Co >E xi m 3 C Un as - a r m C) - C -I n Z 2 C) > m • > rn 0e z 0 3 Z 0 0 a, 71 (n rn Un > m (n r 0 r C) 3 Z 0 z 0 0 I C T 0 -< -4 0 3 Z — A -4 U) m • 0 0 0 0 7( -I '0 C 0 0 7( m T 0 r T -i z - 3 r m > -I T V) () 0 rn C) rn ). -I D r Z 3 0 T 0 r as > -I X m z r O < O -I 0 • -< • -I1 - 7 -I M m 3 N m 3 — z N O T 0 T T -T1 (n m C m m C C) 3 U' z 0 m Z 2 m 0 0 T 0 () < a, Z -I C -I -( Z 0 U) 0 I D 7 T ). Z 0 13 _ 37 -o 0 N 3 > > U' 'D (/) Z Z C) Z O 0 m -0 v Z (f) Cl) 0 C C) 0 C) > ✓ f I U) z F m m I D In 0 C) > C m 0 -I -< O a, -I T v 0 >, 23 C) O a, aJ m • 0 0 > > 3 C) > 0 > > m C) 0 z Z3 0 Z 0 ZZZ 0 0 0 Co — O 0 00 I ) I I r -0 N as T f1 r m 13 0 v 0 0 m T 0 T C m rn In - T 0 -I 1 T m m i T. m m m C) m 0 Z T m Z 0 - T1 m - 2 r- m m m N -I Z - r m C -4 Cl) V) rn (n 3 -I • m 1• • m 0 r m ur m (n C) -4 -I r r rn m > C) -n - - Z - 0 as 23 33 as 0 23 - - C) 0 - - - < as - -0 - a, O — O Un -I - • ao - - • z 1 r 0 - -I -I 2 m m C Un co m N a) > m m z D m co - m 1 Cl) U CA 0 C) m - - 0 en 17 I > m m m 0 C • 0 C C) • 0 m r*1 (n > rn T m z > C T rn z rn < z 2) 33 !p a, z -4 1 0 z (n x z) z z -I N -I 0 U) T >, 0 0 > < < < > - 13 C) - 3 -0 0 < < < < a) 2 0 Om > 0 > 0 Cl) (D r C) C) m C) z < 3 Z < 3 C) > C) 0 0 C) I Z 0 N — rn m rn 0 m rn (n > -0 U) -ID v T < T T T -I Un rn m - X - CO rn - > CD m D - V) r Z X r Z co Cr) T. 1) -4 T X4 T Cl) X) T V) r < 20 - T. as z T > T 13 > m 0 7 Z 0 > Cl) -I -I -I D 1 U) N U) T 1 m - - -C c z 0 z > 0 z O rn Z rn CO Z D z • r z m 0 T 0 C N V) 70 3 0 L L (- re 7 m Co m m C C C C •1 a n () 3 3 - (D CD C ID 7 0 •C •< -< < CD 7 7 N m Z r+(CI m R A A A - -5 rr -4 en 17 Z et rt et r 0 < W C 7• S 7- -.-C X 0 C) (G 7 +I+ 7 7' L V L 7"0. 0 Q 0 C 0 0) re 7 13 Z CO Z (n w r -1 (0 -* - -- m L 0 2 0 0 -1 C n CO C 0 "1 0 < Of •1 CT "I 3 3 0) < 7 0 0) 0 W n 0 3 .1 7 7 m A 0) rr C) 0 A D• CD 01 — �. M m < 0 0 0 1 -3 _5 O C) 7 0 C 0 < 3 i m V — -4 c () 7r 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 C) 1 CO Ca) w ( w ( COW W W () 4) C. CO () (.) W () () () W L W W co I -< A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A m Cr) 0) 0) 0) m CC 0) 0) C) C) 0) m Cr) Cr) 0) m m 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) Cr) 0) C) 0 ‘11 VI A A A A A A A A A A ( (4) C. W W W CO (..) W W N N N 7 m N CO CO -J (7) U' A W N 0 N CO -.I CC CM A C. N O CD CO -d It C) I > z > I D 3 co C) A N -I Co V) - - - 0 m (0 A C7I (D 0 CT VI VI C I VI Cn V1 CJI N N A -J Z A 0 A Cl) 0 (JI N CO N CO CJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 A v -4 O) Cn C A 0 Cr 0 0 -J (n 0 A CD N O 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 A A N z - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 VI O) 0) - 0 0 0 0 0 A 0 0) 0 VI 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 Cr CD 0 -I 1 A 3 73 r CJ 0 3 C C 0 Z C L f Z 3 N 0 L CO f '0 Z 1 3 13 C) 0 Z 0 C m D Z 0 • 0 - A m 2 D 0 z) - > 0 0 z 0 • N Z z m Z Cl) - 1 CD N m r z r Cn Z N C r C X) 0 N r C) -4 0 > -< Z • < -< r C) D n - m C) r r -4 0 N -1 C) 3 D r r m C) m m v - < Z 3 m 71 m - I 1 3 > 0 0 D o0 0 N • z 0 r X 0 > - > r I > N m 0 > > 3 Cl) m 7 0 2 N T r m r 3 0 m L 3 D 70 m 1 N - C 3 -I Z z - 1 0 N C z1 C) (/) m 0 7 z 23 m 1 m C 7a A -I 0 N -I z 3 m 7C 0 - I m 2 Z O Z co m -4 0 C ao Cl) > 1 •n m O N m D C) Z N r 3 m 7 Z Z - -I X) XI > 1 0 m 0 -n 0 Z 0 I Cl, r Co 2) I N) 2 > > 0 m Xi co 3 0 • 71 S 3 0 -< co Cl) 0 N Cl) —I 1 > z N m m A 3 z 0 0 r 0 m m N < 0 X) I C) N N C D m Z 1 Z Z N C 1 m 0 0 1 N z z z) z 7) z Z N 3 m 0 13 m C N 0 1 Z C) m 0 oD D m 1 0 • I > f - > v 0 -4- Imo -< C) 7C 0 N > 0 A O Z co 0 Z Z co 0 0 0 I I I r 3 v z v r -n 0 1 N Cr) -n 1 Cl) m m m m m . m m m z C 3 71 33 N v v 0 m > m m ao c C m m C Cr) N N co co N co co 1 - r C 0 m Z co m 1 z f)) TI > -o m r -0 C) A C) C) C) 0 C) C) m r m m xi co C z 1 -4 0 V) m < VD co m L 23 I Z 23 13 I A S r m x 1 1 > 71 < - - A m r r - m r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 71 - D T D > A 0 - O z r - - 2 - f f f f E E E f -4 C) V X G) CO Z m C C) m N m TRIN 0 m C - m r C m v i C) > > m 0 Qe N N m Z N -0 V 0 •V 1) 13 13 m > O Z N N m - - I m - > > > > > > > > z Cl) z z D 0 0 3 I m < C) 1 < -< -< -< < -< < -< -< A > > > > > 0 13 0 D N CO I m C) 3 > -n 1 0 0 Q) w m co 0o co m co > w n) 1 z m -D - T O m C r r r r r r r r < r m > -13 D. -I Z z - 0 - m m m Cn m m m m > m CO- 0 v z N Z m D 3 r D — v 7 T. C) 3 m m p > N 1 z m < 1 > 0 m z r m N 0 3 N 0 D A D r r r r r r r r I 13 P) < C m 0 ID •S 0 0 Ct PI 0 Ct m Co 0 At 1 0 C* C) Co 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 0) 3 0 7- "I 3 C* "1 C) O. O. O. O. O_ O. CL CC A >- ✓ 0 ID < 0 C* 0 a H 0 Cn $ Co N • • a) * -10 a) -- Or) o n n no n 3 ne -< m -1 0 Ct n co Co 0• 0 a m 0) 0 (O X) 3 U) 9 0 a 0 V 10 L V V V '0 V 33 �. c07 3 A 0 0 S 0 D 3• .... 3• 3 3 3 3 3 n • CT m CO - 3 CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO (O 9 -G 7 0) C• 0 03 0 0 3 C z - z 3 CD V < 7- CT - A 0 < Co .5 3 0 3 3 m < 0 < Pr '< N 3 O 0 C* It 3 0 0• co 3 a 3 O co C* K 3 m m '3 3 A A C) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C) 1 W W W Co W () Co G. W W W (..) W W C.) Co 2 < A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A R) m 0) o) a) m C) m m CO m a) a) a) a) co a) C) 0 a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) co co Co CA Cr Cr (n 7 Ti '�• 0) -1 O U A (0.1 n) O CO CO -4 C7) co A CO a) 43 C) m I D z D I D - 3 (n N -+ W (O a) IV V) cc _ - 0 m -.1W 0 -• eV co A W W (O 0 (O Z - O A CO CA N A CFI Co (J+ N) W eV O N C (..) 01 CO CO 0 0 Cr (n CD 0 v (7) (n (4 • Z _ (...J (n -4 0) 0 C)) 0 0 -4 0 0 0) 0 CO -4 CO0 • 0 A 0 0 0 0 0 Cr 0 0 N 0 -1 A -_ 0 -1 N D (n Z 3 C) 0 3 0) 3 < V) 3 m V) V C G) C) C) O O z 2 D z m m 0 2 - C 1 C • 73 — Z - m C z • -i O D C) Z D CC V) m r () m m -I < C) < (n - 0 73 I 7c 1 r • D C) Z 2 D 7C m O •< 0 m 3 D m m - f) -1 D 0 RI C) m r 7, m - D O - m z 0 • 1 (n m m r 3 0 V) Z r CO 3 f - C (n z m C C) 1 O 0 2 > m • m D 3 -< z 0 • C I I > f - Z 3 Cl) 3 Z — I) C (n 7C C v 0 T r - r 7t v O -i < V) 1 m z 0 I C) I co r r m D -4 m D r -i T 0 C) >< C 0 co 0 0 T I- to C -i m -< r m D m m < Z (n x 3 T 0 z 0 T O f m T 13 0 1 -I D -1 11 D C) m C) m 1 m 0 z -I m < 2 (n 0 -V z T -0 C) T C D m D 3 D — O 0 0 D m -< Z v (n > 3 f I (n D m 2 V) 1 - m 0 C r 0 D C -< C Z Z 13 Z 0 (A •U 73 77 Z m r V) 7J • D m • 0 73 D DDm D 0 C) co 0 Z ZZZ Z C) 0 co O OO O 1 - -11 C C V) 7D m C C)C) 3 m V) T C) T m C) V 0 O z T 1 1 C m Z 0- m D m O m • 0 • m m m C) m - v m m - z 1 V) 1 r- m z 0 - z m T T C m (n r r m (n T 1< C) -i D V) 1 -I • m m - r T - 0 m < z - xi A m m m m z 0 _ r -i -4 - m - 2 0 - • 7J 7J co D 0 - - m C (n 3 m m 0 0 m N Co z D Co D m m -o 1 (n T T m (n m co C D Z > co m C C) • C • O O 1 m CO V) - Z 7J 1 r 1 (A 73 -1 0 1 0 0 < < cr. - 1 z I Q^ < - 3 U - 13 C) C) 1 C) - V O - 02 D - oTD OD 0 0 (n CD O C) 73 C) C) Z 0 f (') Z -< Z < 3 3 N C m 0 m r (n- 1 > m co -1 D CD U V m Z O 0 - z O - D CO - W m m C) 73 1 (n (/) T x r r Z z L - D 2 - • < Cl) X/ m zm (n (n D r 3 - Z C) - T -0 T D D C) Z co Cl) 1 D 1 -1 1 m 3m O x) m 7J D z 0 0 — m D 3 m co m z z 1 Z - • r- - C) m W z m G) V) V) C) 0 T n m V) C C l ) • 7•• C O N O 0 . m m 7--. 7- m C 7 7 m -r to - •< O 0 0 (0 •< . -1 CO 7 (O rr() 3 m - m -7 •t m 13 — 3 0 7 '7 C 13m m O 7 5 m 13 n a 0 a m (-,.C my i < 0'o 0 et m — z 0. m Co a C A o 0 O O O 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 C) 1 A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A 2 -< -1 -1 -1 -) -( -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -( -1 -I -d -I -) -I - v v m V-1 tr. co U) A A A A A A A A A A ( Cc) Lc) C.) (, W (4) 7 T W A) 0 {D CO -1 O) U, A CD N - 0 CO CO -1 0) In A W It C) 2 D Z D I D In A N 3 co _ 0 rn (J) -. U) (4 CO N 0 (1t 0) N (Ti - N Z A O) (D (4) A IV U, N 0 -1 O coC A 10 ID N U) ...I...I0 A A O NI CO0 - 0 0 A 0 0 -+ CO -1 Z U) O A - co U) co CD CO 0 CO 0) 0 Cl) A 0 N 0 U, N Cl) -+ N U1 O) - U1 UI -1 -• 0 CO 0 U, CO 0 N 0 Cl 0 - •-1 D — C) O c) O co CO O CO O 0 A CO O O > 0 > r D D 7c c) C) > > > C C 77 77 X/ O in rn D z C 0 y D 3 > > -4 z 0 (/) 0 < 0 0 < z r- > z f 1 z v z m C) r -< 22- 0 D X X m D n z - 0 D r 0 D m r n o co z m z z z x r O 0 m r m m O > 0 O 0 m 1 - - 0 0 z z - v 0 A 0 D v Z 0 co Z Z Z -1 o z > < D D > - C D - 3 cn r 0 0 0 O co rn cn m 0 23 > > Z Z f z O cn 3 - 0 I I c 0 7C y - 1 N r 0 m m 3 Z 1 C R) 0 X m i C) C m 0 7C U) I r rn ul CO z co D z co = m m 7 C) S X) m X m xs -I -1 (n > 1 C - 0 1 v 2 73 2 1 X y 0 < N 0 - 0 m 0 D Z z- 071 XI- - D Z 4• CAz 0 X) 0 Z Z Z cn — ID -4 1 0 o co to Z co "CI 7O 2 m V Z m) Z 1 < y - - C 1 - D 0 > - C) - cn z 0 cnI C) y m0 22 z r Z 1 cn co C) co1 O coC m D - cn - 0 cn 3 -< - - - Z 1 y - - Z Z z OCl) > D0 D0 > D0 > > > > DD > x > D z z z z z z z z -< z Z z z co 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 III I I I I I r co co to (n X V) V) V)A (n 3 ZI C) U) Cr) m !n Xi N A y T V,(n N 3 V) 3 -II N u) C) ") y C DC DM DC DM D D m r D c r D m D rn m m CDC - D D m D C r r rn y I- '0 ry ry ry r - z m ry m ry r v m m yr -a r r - m ry m m C y my m - my m • mz 1 > my x m • m • (n V) ymy m mz cn my D x r (n r co Qo (n r (n Q. (n 1 D Z (n r co Q• co Q• - - r V, r D V) 1 - (n r Z XI 0 - - - m r - - -o m 1 m 1 3 1 m 13 1 Z - Z 1 rn r- 13 1 3 co (n m 1 m m 1 Z co 1 m z r- y OD V) D (n A D D (n A D D D 0 D V) > D D D D m m V) D N D D m D cn 0 > x- x - x- X - xz r x- z x- x - 22 z - x- xz Xi x- z 0 0 z z C) > Q• Z Z < < C) < Q• I — < 0 < 0 -I 00 01 Om Z 0 < y 01 O1 - - mO < Orn - 0 < y Cl) (O m Zm z • ZT z • z 0 f Zr', n z • z • C) 0 )Zm z C) zm f > N 2 2 I -n I 3 > 2 -< ) I m m C 2 3 m 2 > < R) y - -0 y- y yD Q• (n 0 - > y y - y - yD y - cn D C) CO Cm CO CO C1 1 CO CO C < Cm vco C1 CC) -4 O v I- zr OD vm zr zm CO m 22r r 2om zD 372r 7Jm X) r m r > m n m 0 C C) 0 0 0 v I- OM m C) 2 OC m 0 rn C) z 0 m m 0 — co 2 (n S I 20 2 - o 22 2tn 2 - 2 - z2 cn 2 - 2N O m > Dv D D DD C) m D DC) Dy 1D DD D rn V) (n 3 cn V) Q• (n r co 3 Cl) in r co 3 cn (n r co 3 m mm m m m (n • O m mm mm m m (n m 0 0 V) Z N V) C V) < to (1) V) V) Z co co co < -i Z > 1 > A o r r MEP m r z o j -n z n 0 m (0 v rr v o 0 0 - — 0 7- 1T `< R n o 0 a rr 23 o 7- -I v, 7" co CT 2 7 O re V) 0 CO D co 0 r rr rr n c m a o o co o co 7 cf.o- 1 0 < Z 00 Qo I 0 0 — o v v 0 -< rr 0 co o C C 0 r1 0 7 -I Q• ro R 0 K I- n 7 - co — co CO 7- 0 CO0 a D 7r At (0 7 co n 7 7' CO 0 y R O m (o 3 0 7- C. 0 7 C ( ! ( ( f f t !' 1 C) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C) 1 A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A 2 -< -J -( 4 - -1 -J -4 -4 V -) J -4 -1 v J r -4 ti v -4 -o -( IT 0 -I -1 -) -4 -4 -1 CO 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) CO 0) 0) 0) (T CT (7' (A (7) (7' 7C m a. 47i A (.) N 0 CO CO -r 0) (.n A W N - 0 (O CO -4 0) (' A 3t C) I > Z D I > 3 (n — CA 0 m _ N (0 O N -1 N CO N Z CO -4 CO N) CO CO (D 0 (7) (O A 0 0) () IV (D 0) A () 0) C (D A (D N CO -• 4 0 CP W CO N 0) ()f -1 -4 (T -4 (D - Z p (.) (D 0 0 0 0 0 A . W W 0) O A co () (7) 07 N — o A W (D 0 0 0 0 N Co N () A -• 0 -1 N N -I 0 A Co -I > m w m C) 0 0 0 0 o C) C) C) O L O 0 0 < C) C) 0 c) O C) C m D D 0 0 D m > C C V 0 C 0 r - - S x 2 m O -.1 CO XI z r z r < CO CD > 3 O m C r C) D D > r r C) m 1 1 0 > r 0 - I O 3 -< m 1 r 7 N z z r z < 3 r 2 - 0 - Cn 3 -n C C m C) - 7 C m m -1 > O Z Z C) m S O D > A r m m Z C) m m (n 1 07 Z 0 - 0 r C) G) to D - C r - C D m C 0 0 C) 1- 3 4o > S m N (n m) r 0 7: Z 3 - C co 3 Cl) D 07 - z C C m m 3 Z m > 0 0) m z r e, — 0 0 1 -< r- c 7( x3 — z z 0 — m 3 0 3 0 N z Z -1 0 - r- ) O r z D 1 (n D O 2 C - 1 m 0 z 0 - L 0 S 0 < r m O 7C 7D D z m 0 (1) z •11 Z 0 - - Z CO z m z > 7o C Cr) m - - r r z 1 f () Z (n C) < m D Z Z r O r1 Z -I m C) C) 3 3 m m C 0 -( z 0 m > m m > x z 0 A - a — O r n C) m z a - x O m 1 z D CO -4 - z - r 0 1 z M -( z O Z m 0 Mi m -< 0 o O D a (n > XI D > D > > > a1 > ZZ Z Z Z Z ZZZ Z (n Co 00 0 0 0 0 000 0 ) 1 i I I I I I I I r m m 73 m V - m m CO 0) 73 CA V N 1 21 GO CO N N CO CO 3 m (n CA 10 3 m (n (n 1 V m r m r m z m m c D m D m c z m c D c D C DO r c D m D m D c m m m m z m V N m m V r 17 r V V a V V r V r V r -I m V r o - m r V r- C o x 1 x • Cr) (n gy m • M . - < • V m -0 111"0 m O x 17 m • Z N m 17 m D 120 - - _ r 0 n). (n no r- m RD r (n r (n r (n 77 r CA SP-( - CO r -o 70 0 v r v - - r - m - m - 2 m — Cn r - r 3 0 () (n m 1 3 - 3 m 3 m -1 m -4 m 1 m r m 1 3 z 0 -( m 0 V ) m > > D m m m (n A a D D Cn ao D (n a 0) D N DC > (n a D D m D N Z V z m z - z z z - x - x - - - - x- x- xm z - x- z 7D x- m 0 0 < 0 z r < < Z Z 1 Z r z C) - > • r O C) mZ• Z • 70 D • m Z m Zm z > DZ • C) zD N m 1 -v - ) - m m m I ) 0 - 1 m m 2 Co -< c ) 3 m C m — A 3 > > - m V 0 z - V- V- V a - V > V - CD m Co C Co C)C7 cm V - M C) CO CO Cr m VCm1 cv 0 r Z r -I m XI D MD D Z a m XI m Mr z C r 3 la r m z 3 > m 1 m - r O C C) C 3 0 0 C) Om OM m mC)0M Om 0 r - 2 - 2 - x 2 (n 2 V Z20- Sz m - 1 D V D m 0 > > D - 1 D > D 1 1 < (n 3 (n 3 (n (n (n (n 0 Cn e,r (n < mm mm m m mD m (n m — (n Z (n Z V) (0 (n Z CO D (n 1 1 1 Z (7) H 0 (n T E Cl) m 1 1 C) > (n 0) 0 > -, �a rrt �, X a V C f V 7 Cl- 7 m r+ m CD CD 3 > r* 3 Cr 0) 'I U- a Ef m 0 a 0) 7 A) 7 7 7 C) 7 re-? m 0 3 — a J H mm '1 -) --0 z co m - -I, 3 3 C m 3 (-1'� -1 7 co m Cl- e7+ 0 ✓ 07 V 7 7 7 CD • C C 7" to �.m Id 7 - 7 7 1 7 7 -< Cr V 3 0 Cl. — a 7 a CD co U-Po 0 40 - (0 V rr 0 - w CD 7 7 7 L 3 co L m C -3 m a (I) 7 < 7 0 — a. < C7 m m m o V Ct C co O C) S 7 _ a co 7 C) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C) -4 — A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A I -< -4 -I -I -I -4 -I -d -I -I -I -I -I -I -I -I -I -d V -I -d V -) m C) 0 tD (0 ID ID (D 0 (D (O (D CO (D CO (D 03 CD (A CO m r -1 r �I 7 T -4 0) (T A W N -. 0 (D CO -1 0) (7' A W N 0 (0 CO -I 0) 3i 0 I > — Z > I > 3 (n (n _ _ _ _ - _ O m N W N Nco N Z — W co U) (r A 0 0 -.I N A A W 0 A N O C (T) - U C) O -I N U) Cl) O U 0 -4 -I -I CO -. tD A -1 fJ -I z o O UI A O (n N O 0 O V+ C) O O 0) C) 0) W N o o -- O 0 O O 0 (D 0 0 0 A W O 0 (...1 CO N Cr) (0 -) 0 1 14 D -i r- r v Cn I - - - 0 I I -( L L D O z m T m 7 C) C) = m m > -I 0 0 z Z > 0 0 0 0 r- m > - m N > m z z C m Z (n 1 z < r- r 0 I 3 m z z (n m v z r C) 73 N N r < > 0 - 0 - C) (n I I C 0 > M 70 - - D 73 7C m - 0 -I I XI 0 > Z (n r p - > m - C O CD D Z z 71 - C 0 10 71 C) < m > m 1 r z r I C C z Co 0 m < G) V) -n x - 0 G) z m r- 0 I z m m (n (n C) m m I (n 0 3 m r- T -n z -I -< m (n < (n I 73 C) m z > z r r m m m C) r n -I I xi C) 3 m CA CA r > z 3 m 0 70 70 0 -n I m 0 0 D 0 C < C 7p C) v z 0 > z Cn — 7, r 3 z (n T 1 m m > m 70 --I 73 73 m v -< 1 I z r r - x, 0 1 1 > (n f m r v (n 0 C) 1 -33 I Z 1 > A m Z) m I- I to -( m x) D x3 0 (n - a c 3 m z 0 r Cn c o -< C) 0 7D 7 -I m D > DD DD D n (n > DZ > Z z Z Z Z Z Z z Z z a, O 00 0o 0 0 o 0 o 1 I I I I i I I I I r X1 in in 'r1 T 1(n (n 7p co N (n 70 '71 70 73 '11 -4-1 A xl •m (n (n (n 3 (n C) (n m 7D m DC m r XICC CDC m m m m 73r m DC C D DI Dm r m — m r -o m m D - -o m v r .0 z m TI m m D m m m m r 13 -v - r m r m mm C m 'D (n X < - -o 13 m v -I (n C (n < X (n m -0 -0 Z m 3 rn (n X i1 (n r - m r r T r N r > - z T - m 71 71 - (n r r -I (n - (n- T A 0 v r - - - - r o r 13 - - m C) v m C 1 m (n r m m c m 1 m - (n Cn C (n r C C (n 1 m m z -I D 1 (n Cr- -0 i D (n m > Q.(nCn (nDN m \ IT CaD m n (n Cl) > nr Dm D z x- z z - z - X- m 70 73 Z S z z z 73 X- - z X o x A ZZ 0 0 < 1 O < m < 1 < 0 D 73 m iD Z m - A 3 C) D D () Z T x3 z z 0 > N I m -< - 0-I c I v m D, m - -< m T 0 3 m -< m m - D 20 - - - - 3 C ZD m- C) D - v D c0 m - 7D0 -0c0 m 13 - CD Cc) X/ -I C c m -0 Dr r z > m 3x)r z (n Zr- 72m > m z m r D Im m D3 zim 1 3 Om I 3 I I m m ( ti) D 1 D m D D D D (n in Z in r (n (n m m 1 m in m m N (n (n V) U1 (n (n (n (n co o < C) 0 m (n o c m a m to m (* m< -, o, - c 7 — m 3 I•* m (�( -h 1) o - 7 (D m 0 K 7- Z o O 7 - 0 3 CO Z m v o 0 (n 0 a v (D 3 m 7 C m C) 3 -3 co m 0. V n co C 0 7 71 -ID rt E. 7 — co (D r1• m A R (D - m m C) m C Co (n 0. m S Z 3 3 m co N CD 3 0 3 7 V _5 m rt pI — 7 0 m H 7 0 Z f — m co ( ( I C t t 1 ♦ _ k. s •- C) O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 O 0 0 C) -I A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A 2 < -1 -1 -1 -4 -4 -1 -1 -4 -4 -4 -4 -4 -4 -4 -4 -4 -4 m �( Ps) N N..) N N N N N NI IV NI NI Na N N -+ (7 Q 0 O O 0 O 0 O 0 0 0 (D (D 7 71 A W N -. O co co -1 01 N A. (w1 N 0 (D CO * C) 2 D Z D I — D 01 3 0 0) t0 cn - - 0 m N A. N -I N A IVZ -1 0 01 (P LP (n 0 CO CO N N -4 -• co N C (T N CO CO -4 CO (0 Co CO - O O (T (T (n N 0 Z — G1 (r Co C) (D (o -1 -. 01 co N 0 V1 0 0 01 0 -1 0 co 0 CO CO 01 O O 0) -1 O 01 0 0 0 0 1 D 3 3 x 3 3 3 3 3 x 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 C) 0 — Z - - rn m m m m > I v Z Z Z - r 3 -4 1 73 70 v XI < -I m D z r C) r 72 7) r r r m r CD Cn 0 z C) - 1 0 0 - - - z 0 - 73 CO 1 --C m m D 0 O m • 2 z Z D D D D v CO Z - X (n - - - 3 V1 O m -1 1 D 0 - C X 01 3 D -< cn cn (n () - Z m .m 77 1 — D m N cn z C) co -i -I > 3 z -< O C 1 -1 > D > - 0 1 m -I 1 3 In F m m C) C) C) m 2) 22 22 22 m (n D -i m r - 3 m m m r - VT m Z m - - N 0 y O A D D 1 A Z CD 71 CO 0 2 2 2 C - CD V1 1 m m z D D D 1 Cn C C 0 - 1 Z -I 77 71 O - m 77 Z 71 0 v — Q, Z O 0 O z (n m m z 0 f f X 0 72 72 72 > (n r > D D m I D O 72 S 0 < < -n C) m m m 0 z D D m 0 D 1 3 > D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D C f — Z < 3 Z zz z z z Z z Z z Z Z Z Z Z Z z Z z m > 03 O O 00 00000 0000000 000 0 I I I I IIIII IIIIIII 1 I I I r (n C O TI 7) in 77 7) (n 3 (n N 3 CA O m 70 71 v O V1 CA 3 CO 71 3 - N 3 (n (n VI cn 1 1 3 1 v 2. z C r m D m MD - C C D C D m m m D 0 C D D C D 7D D D C C DC 71 O 0 71 m r - v m 3 r v y r (n v v - .0 r Z v v 0 0 v r - v m - O r - v 03 r v > > -4 D C rn-n v x - m • • mC) vvzvml • • 37vmZv Z - 0Z1 CD my < < 0 <N 1 0 r cn Q^ Qo VI • rrlr vs D Q. Q<+ 0 (n r cnlr 71 1 0Cn -Ir C) vlr m m 7) m 71 O — z v 1 - m - r 1 - m- m D m - z - r r r m 13 m r 13 313 mmzm-1- 33 - Qom1Z m C z 1 -iZm - 1m T1 . 1 D (n (n > 1 D D D D 1 (n (n D (n D D D 0 N D D cn D - D D VI v D (n CA R. C Q. - x - Z 0 x - - xr - - z- Xm - - Zv- xZ- Z z OXZ- 1 X- m 0 o Q° z z (n C) 0 z z D m 0 A Z 0 -I -I r 1 I 0 -a v 0 0 1 1 0 • 0 .0 m m O C - --i 0 0 m m 0 m O m m 0 m 22 22 (n z cn (D Z0 XI D 1 Z • • Z 7171 0Z - • • - -nZ 0 32 D Q° ZD D D D N — r 0 - m372Z DrmC) m71m3 m 71mm3 3 7) 3 Z Z C Z D C) - 3 m > C) C COv 3mm01 OOZ D 073m 71 - 077m CO C) m 0 0 03 0 0 2 Z O 2 - - 1 v - Z 2 - O (n r 2 - z - D 2 - Z m S z 7) m > 0 m D v - Dr D --iD 0 m (n DD1 > r > D1 72 D1 — N 2 N 3 3 fn - r Cl) N Qo (n r r (n (n r Cl) (n C) m C) mm m m m cn m m cn N m (n I m D N - N Z Z cn Cn Cl) L) V1 (n - cnZ m 1 1 z .0 1 -' (n 0 Cl) (n 3 (n CA v - r D (n D f 0 C_ N o C 0 -s E r*f e*ear O > 7 V �.7 m m to V 0. iG co 3 (0 3 7 T m 7 O K — O T T 0 c1• 0 -5 TI-SCn 03 rP 0 v -+•i 7017C rn 0 In CD 7 0 O C c1 O V C C 7 0 7 z 7 -,7 V 0 0 R. m ro V '0 .c J 7- m _ et -S m 01 C* 1 z C 1 -1 T O 10 •1 O (•r (Y O K X 7 0 (A 0 0 41 O X et C 0 3e+ r _ c CO 7 T 0 m o co V O 7 e7 O T 0 o -, 0 T 07 R 7) 0 — O T 7 O 7) * m 0) 7 D f — 01 C) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C) 1 A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A I 1 -) -( -4 -.1 -4 -4 - - -+ -4 N -r r v -1 -4 -4 -4 -( -4 -4 m N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N () 0 W () () W (�) W W N N N N N N N N N N X m O) N A W N - 0 (O CO -) O) (n A W N 0 CO CO ti v) (T it C) I D — Z > I D 3 (o N N W v (7 0 _ _ _ _ _ _ 0 m A -+ N N O W CO A N Z a... -1 N A - Cr W A N CO W CO ti 05 CO (T O) (71 0 (I) -1 CA C CA CO A C7 N O) O) (n (.W W A O N (4 O7 (T CD -1 O - Z O 0 A N CO W Co 0 _ N N 0) -1 (O 0 CO 0 (O 0 CO O 0 -4 A (,.) A O -( Cr — A CA N A O O) O U O (O -I D (I) 73 A 73 D z 17 v v v M D D v 0 L Z Z 7o f 3 3 3 C) C) -i 0 0 m m D C 73 0 0 m m O m D 0 0 0 0 3 0 - z m D -< D 3 m D 3 r 1 00 -4 m > z z C) • 0 Z r A m m 0 z r on r - v m m mom 7 Z -4 1 m 7o Z < 73 M 0 m - 27 - z 73 rC) 1 01 Z I I 13 3 m • D > 0 D 1 13 r- 0 < C) - (n Cn m - o m 1 C I r z m o m m m 0 Cn D L 0 0 1 73 m (n < r - C 0 A (n Co 3 C) on 1 Z z -i• m r > z Z r - - m - 0 0 0 > r- - -I z m (n 1 0 r 0) 0 -< 3 Z CA L C f L C m > m m v D fn O -0 m 0 77 m Z -4 m m m Z m * m n 0 -I- D v Z z -4 0 1 0 F > 1 31 Z - r X 1 1 Z 17 0 - -4 m > r 4e 77 I m D 0 m -< -C to Z r 0 - 0 Z 17 1 C Ile - 0 Z (n 0 - - r Q^ m - N z z I -4 XI m z r > r Z Z X A (n > 0 - - 0 (n 0 (n m m 1 0 C) (0 1 G) < m De r • z zon m z > — 00 v v z -I — A D v C) 0 Co > - z 0 CA m r- r > r 0 m v > z 0 X - 24 m m > Z o C' m I C) -< Z - 0 7C Z C 7 - 0 0 - Z C) C) Z C • Z > A > > D A C) D D • D 1 C) C) D (n D C) z z z z z zz Z (n 0 zm z • co v o 0 o 0 00 0 0 0 I I I r 1 m CA 1 fn (n C m on (n (J) N (A (n m (n 73 T (n (n(n T CA (n C C 3 V) V 3 on 3 m r- > rn DC z m DC D C D C m C m m CDC r DC 1 Z > D m 0 > > m A m r v r m - m r v r v r- v m v z m v r v m r v - - r - 1 r - C < X m • m y m (n m no m y m y Cl) v 1 (n no m 17 X m y r T Z m Z 0 m Z m (/) Q° N r 0 - (n r (n r (n r - r > - r V)r (1)r - 0 1 0 1 13 0 1 72 O r v - an - - - r - v - 1 X m m w r- 1 3 -1 m 3 on 1 m 1 m 1 m on m - on PS 1 m r 1 m - 3 Z 1 Z m 1 Z 17 I 4^ D D D D 0 Cl) m D 0 A N D (n m (n m on D (n > D on m N D D O C D D Z X - X- 7 X- X- X- 7 - m XI - X- Z X- on Z X m XZ 0 0 1 Z (p < < 0 < V. C) > r 0 m v 0 1 Om - Om Om 0 < - m C - 00 v v 00 m OZ 0 Om 0 CO D A Z • Z .O C) C) ZD 2.0 Zm C) 0 - A '71ZX > zm 0 Zo Z N { I C r m C C I m C v m m 0 -< '3 r 3 ae 3 m z > v v - 0 v- v - v - - 3 - m0 > v - 0 > vv vD - a) Cm cm 1 Cm Cm CO v m C) C X W CO 1 1 Cc r c -i v z r Z D ma = Ma A 3 zr 3 z m 13 D r X m I m z m C z m > 0 m C) O Om - 0m om O m m 1 03 m C) - z 0r m 0 v C) I - 2Z z IZ IZ I (n Z I I Z - I - Xl I - m D 0 D 1 C) D 1 D 1 D -{ > > 0 > D N D D on on (n on N (n on 03 r 0 I C) or m m m m m m m 0 m - > m o (n (n o (n (n U) 0 (n Z Z (n 0 -I Co m 0 r 1 L D CO m X CD m (n E R) C no C 7 m S O -3 r* E v w < w 0 -1 0 0 m 7 m K -m 9 0 C a (* 0 m 7 - CT 7- CT v m A m 0 c (t co NO X -1 a go K < (n v ) 0 0 S m 0 co S w la in 0 a 7 -4+ (n O m -I - m m 7 OV v m z c f) C1 3 ID in l 0 0 Co Cr in m me, m - 7 0 Q m '0 K ) 7 (n a a 0 (0 a r cc. O) 0 - Co 7 to X lam 7 1 m -5 co a m - rR a 7 7 - m a rt rr a C) to I 3 m 0 H L m m Z z 0 m C ) -3 S 7 m 0 7 3 xm . N m - m in x ra (1. 0 0. CT 3 0 C C ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( [ e e • a a a ( k. l ♦ . a a C) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o c) -I A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A I < -{ -1 - - -1 -4 -4 �1 -1 J J V -4 N -4 J N v -4 -4 -4 -4 -4 r v m O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N NJ N () 0 -.{ Cn (1i Cn VI Cn CM VT VI CT UI N A A A A A A A A A A W () 4) 7C T D 0 c0 00 -4 T V) A W N 0 c0 CO -4 CT) U) A () N -. 0 ( co ✓ N *t 0 Co = O > T z > I > 3 to cO _ N 0 A CJ 0 m Co --I N r A co A iv -+ - lD N POC1) Z () Cn Cn -4 CO O Cn N -4 CO 0 CO 0 VI C) CO 0 LI1 0 Cn N C = 0 0 0 N Cn -1 -4 0 N CO W 0 0 A 0 Cn A N A 0 (3) m -4 • Z — C) 0 A - C1) N 0 C.4 Cn CO CO 0 W N 0 0 N 0 N to N 0 0 -1 0 7[ 0 () (.0 0 0 0 -4 CO 0 Cn 0 W CO 0 0 to 0 0 OD 0 0 A 0 -I V) A CO 1 D 01 D N N f f f C C C 1 1 Cn C_ C) Cn cn CO Co (/) Cn Co C C/) Co C) 0 D r - > 0 m > Z Co • 70 X) 1 - V v f 73 I I m m rn > 1 r m 0 Z co co - Co - - m 3 > in m 0 > 7o Z D Z • r C) C) N C) 7 7 -I -I T f • > I < - 0 0 Z f 7 < 1 Z C) = C r N m 0 m 0 In x co in -4 0 - C 1 C) 0 - 73 0 = D 0 pi m m 73 z 73 Cn -4 -4 I D 07 > -17 0 < 0 - C C) r 73 - 7 3 3 1 0 C) > 1 m c/ r C Cn Cn m m 0 CO - C 7 7 - 0 X. > V) -< > 1 0 - f 1 70 - m m 3 Cn I - m (.) CO m z 0 CO m Z Cn D 1 07 r > -< 3 Z 70 3 z co - C) CO > C m C) r m o A C) r T Co N - C) 1 Cn E Z 0 m G) z r 0 m V r C) c) Z = > 0 1 1 m - > 1 77 0 3 f in r r • < C r m 0 m Z 7O m m 0 Co to - V m 3 C - - 3 m z V 73 O O 7O I z cn co 1 r71 7J m 3 r N T -4 -4 C CO CO C) A -I Z Z - X. - - 70 01 C) - = 1 m N Q. 1 -4 73 z 0 Qe > r D A V --1 C)z D 1 m z C) - T a) -4 f Cn O C) 1 Cn m z 0 D T. D 0 - = 0 _ Z m < -4 0 Z V O z O > T. z m z> 0 r > D. D z z z w — O O O o 0 0 I I II I m cn 70 01 to cn Z C) C Cn O V m zi T T 0 Z V -17 3 0 0) N 0 T C) Cn XI - '0 CO D m D C C m r Z D 1 70 m m r r m m 73 m > D C D r m r D rn Z m O r v r m co V m r = 0 m 17 m m V Z - m - r v r m rn m r v cn C 13 m • m o Cn • > T m m 3 Cn • X X 0 -I Z Cn Z rn -0m D Cn > m - C O v, to Co r C) Qe Z 0 Co V 0 - see en > -4 - 1 Cn r 0 Z - Z (n CP 70 7O o — 1 3 1 m - 3 z 3 1 m — Co 3 r r 1 r Z Co Z 1 m 1 Z to Z 1 3 z 0 I V D D D Co 0 D. (J co D 0 0 m > > > co C) m > D cn S. (a m C) D D 0 > X - X- -1 - X C Z 70 - Z Z m 70 Z X- X A X - m 0 O < Z Z Qe 4e - D < Z T D > < C) co < co Z - D O -1 O m 1 0 V r - 1 - -o > C Z - rn 0 < 0 - 0 1 Cn (n Co Z • Z D Om • f 0 Z 3 0 • D > -( - O C) Z m Z * 0 E Z • 07 N — r i C I > r m m m 1 -< < D V m 3 I > m > i C m m 'a -0 - 3 Cn 0 13 Z X D D U) 3 13 D T- 'V 0 Cn V - C m C V m C 1 1 C 1 m C 0) Cp r- m C -I C C) C 1 1 C co r T 73 O 23 3 3 1 R1 I 73 m -4 r r m z Co m Z r Z m m 73 r O D C) C C) m Co - - C) z - m m I 1 r 70 0 m O 0 0 - O _ - = Z m r Z Z = Co r 0 - - = cn = V 70 = 0 Z m D V D 1 I - m O D m - - cn D > D m m D 0 — Cn 3 Co cn -1 3 V) 1 C) I r Cn Cn 3 3 Co 0 Cn m m m = < 0 m - z - Cn rn m o 0 m cn Z cn - < Cn cn Z cn cn < < Cn O 1 V > C) > > Z co Cn r r r 0 r f C) T -0 I Cn 0 Cn Cn T T T rD U) - _ 0 CD -- 0 0 CD -.- C 7 7 r* et U) 7 V (0 N -4I 7 -I -I Cr Y) a. (D << co r* to 7 m K -4•m CO C (n S 7 to - CT 0 N Cn -' -1 — n = CS 7 W to Cn U) (D R (-* 3 V CD CO (D fD 0 m 01 f n S 7 C► 7 CD r* let 0 CD 7 < cl. V 0 r* C r O 0 x 3 Oa f) O 7 O r - 3 *CD 7 3 to 0 -I to0 - — ,c 0 e -h z - 3 03 0. n 0_ - re CD n 7 — Cn m m0. V -'• - C) Cn -4. -4. Cp rr co 7 CA S R rt 0 • 1), m CO 1 7 7 R 7 L. _ — Z C C CD 0 CD 7 S N 3 CO < -5 � T * - 4-1- O -.0 - Qe to — n S C) 7 C -I 7 406-- CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING JULY 27, 1992 Mayor Chmiel called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. . The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag. MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Chmiel, Councilwoman Dimler, Councilman Wing, Councilman Workman, and Councilman Mason STAFF PRESENT: Don Ashworth, Charles Folch, Kate Aanenson, Todd Hoffman and Tom Scott , City. Attorney '— APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilman Mason moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to approve the agenda with the following amendments: Mayor Chmiel deleted item 4, pulled item 1(d) on the Consent Agenda per staff for changes; Councilwoman Dimler wanted to discuss Sunrise Hills Non-Conforming Recreational Beachlot ; and Richard Wing wanted to discuss the HRA meeting. All voted in favor of the agenda as amended and the motion carried. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: Joe Scott : Mayor, Councilmembers. Joe Scott , 7091 Pimlico Lane, Chanhassen. '— I'll make this as brief as possible. I wanted to give you all an update of the progress on the 1st Annual Chanhassen Arts Festival. What you see in front of you are, first exhibit which is the Arts Festival map which was in the last Villager. Kind of give you an idea of the siting. Some of the logistics with regard to parking, food and beverages and so forth. As of today we've got 43 exhibitors which is, we expected 30 so we're obviously real excited about the progress there. The second exhibit shows the layout as far as public safety coverage and volunteer coverage and the festival itself opens at 10:00 a.m. on August 8th and it will close right around dusk. I commend Scott Harr and Todd Hoffman and the other folks at the City who have helped us out with this because their attitude was not why can't you do it but how do we make this thing successful. So I really appreciated that personally. So we're going to be having live entertainment from 1:00 until dusk and from looking at the site, we don't believe that because it's primarily commercial and the prevailing wind's usually from the south and the west , that we don't expect any disturbances but you know if we do, obviously the public safety folks will probably keep us informed. Other than that , if you have any questions, I'll be more than happy to answer them now. But the purpose was just to make you aware that things are on schedule and certainly interested in having you come out if you have the time. Mayor Chmiel: Good. We not only are going to be there but we've also volunteered our time. Or at least I have and I'm sure other Councilmembers have done that as well. Joe Scott: Well thank you very much. Mayor Chmiel: Appreciate all the efforts that you've put into this and it's coming closer and closer each week and before you know it, August 8th is going to be here and then pandamonium strikes. 1 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 • Joe Scott : Well hopefully it will be somewhat under control but thank you very much for the time. — Mayor Chmiel: Good, thanks Joe. CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Workman seconded to approve — the following Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations: b. Resolution #92-82: Accept Utility Improvements in Troendle Addition, Project No. 91-3. c. Lake Susan Hills West 8th Addition, Project 91-16: 1) Final Plat Approval 2) Approve Development Contract and Plans and Specifications • d. Ithilien Addition, Project 92-13, as amended by the City Engineer: 1) Final Plat Approval — 2) Approve Development Contract for Site Grading f. Approve Temporary On-Sale Liquor License, August 15, 1992, Chanhassen Fire — Department. g. Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Amend Chapter 20 of the City Code Regarding Allowed Uses in the BH, Highway and Business District , Final Reading i. Approval of Accounts I — j. City Council Minutes dated July 13, 1992 Park and Recreation Commission Minutes dated June 23, 1992 Public Safety Commission Minutes dated July 9, 1992 - k. Resolution #92-83: Authorize Condemnation Proceedings for Easements Needed in Conjunction with the Upper Bluff Creek Trunk Utility, Project 91-17. -- All voted in favor and the motion carried. H. SET PUBLIC HEARING DATE, TRAFFIC SIGNALS WITHIN DOWNTOWN AREA, AUGUST 24. Mayor Chmiel: I only wanted to pull item (h) for the setting of public hearing date for the traffic study within downtown area. I don't think that it 's — required to have a public hearing. I would like to have an informational hearings and I'd like to have two of those. On two different particular dates so if people are not going to be able to be able to come for one, they'll at least be able to come for the second. And I'd also like to make sure that we — send out that information to the people within the public, within the city or within the businesses I should say, and also have some of that input. That was the only reason that I pulled it . Michael, did you have something more to that? Councilman Mason: And we had discussed whether it would be a hearing or an informational meeting and that was. 2 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 — D. ITHILIEN ADDITION, PROJECT 92-13. Mayor Chmiel: Would you also just like to make your comment on the changes that you had there on item 1(d). Charles Folch: Sure. Thank you Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. Two corrections for item 1(d) . First as it relates to item 1(d)(1). If you'll turn to page 7 of that staff report . Under the recommendations, line item number — 4(a) which basically states a drainage easement for the wetland pond establishing an elevation of 1,004 contour. That is incorrect . Staff was informed today that that is not a correct elevation for the 100 year flood. That elevation is currently being recalculated and we should have a number for that tomorrow but I think at this point if we basically change the wording where we eliminate the 1,004 and substitute 100 year flood contour, that should take care of the intended recommendation. Similar as it follows for recommendation — number 14 where it 's establishing a lowest floor elevation for Lots 12 thru 16 and 17. Again I think if we eliminate the last , the 1,006 feet of the sentence and supplement 2 feet above the 100 year flood elevation, that again then — corrects to the intended requirement . And the only other correction as it relates to item 1(d)(2) for the development contract . Inadvertently the breakdown or the administration fees was inadvertently missed from your packets _ so I've passed that out tonight . These corrections that I've made on 1(d)(1) would also carry over as the conditions, corrected conditions for the development contract on 1(d)(2). Mayor Chmiel: Good. Appreciate that. One other item that I just wanted to mention to you too Charles is that on our approval of development contracts for the construction of plans for Lake Susan Hills West 8th Addition. On their blue — line copy, sheet 6 of 13. It was not signed by a PE so if you could have them make sure they do that. Charles Folch: You bet. Thank you. — Councilman Wing: Don before you go off of this item (h). Did you have a second date picked or what was your intent on the second date? — Mayor Chmiel: No I don't have any specific dates. I think those will be chosen. Don Ashworth: Staff would like to do it prior to a Council meeting night so 6:30 to 7:00. We do not have the notices ready for the first meeting in August but probably second meeting in August and first meeting in September. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Does that sound alright? Richard. Councilman Wing: I just was curious what your schedule was. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. We did not go through that date for that. Councilman Mason: Do we need to move approval on that item? Mayor Chmiel: On item (h) . We have a motion and a second. -- 3 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 -- Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Wing seconded to approve setting a Public Information Hearing date for Traffic Signals in Downtown Area for August 24, 1992. All voted in favor and the motion carried. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: PRESENTATION BY THE UNITED WAY OF MINNEAPOLIS AREA, BYRON LAHER. Byron Laher: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, thank you. I guess I should say thanks for the second invitation. I apologize for the scheduling problem that I had last time. The specific request that I had was to address briefly the problems that had occurred at the beginning of the year with United Way of America. What the relationship of your local United Way is to that organization and roughly what we're doing about it and what happens in this community, not only as a result of that situation but as a result of the campaign and the contributions that you and your citizens make annually to the United Way. Let me briefly introduce myself to you. I am Byron Laher. I'm Director of Public Affairs for the United Way and it's a position I've had for just about 16 years. Before that I was a United Way volunteer. I worked for Anoka County and I ran the campaign out there for 4 years. I liked it so much I decided I wanted to join the organization and I've been there since. I have a tendency to get a little bit long winded and I don't want to take up your Council time or your TV time so I'll just kind of skip into this and then if we can address specific questions, I'd be more than happy to do so. The media has reported extensively on the problems at the United Way of America in Alexandria, Virgina. Let me tell you briefly what happened there. What our relationship is with the organization and what were the specific actions that our United Way took as a result of it . And very briefly, there were questions raised about the Executive Director's life style. Some questionable billing of expenses to United Way of America and several corporations which were spun off from United Way of America extensively to benefit charities across the country and people questioned whether the financial transactions involving them were as appropriate as they should be. As a result of that investigation, the Board of United Way of America terminated the Executive Director and he was replaced by a volunteer from IBM. A fellow by the name of Ken Dahm who has been serving without pay, actually IBM agreed to continue his salary between the time he took over as interim President of United Way of America and when he takes over as President of University of, I should remember the name but I forgotten it , at the beginning of September. At the time that this happened, our Board decided that we would have to suspend our payment to United Way of America for services, which we did. And if I can, I'll bridge into what United Way of America is to the rest of the movement. There are about 2,100 independent United Ways across the country. There are about 55 here in Minnesota and as part of my job, I get to work with them. It 's kind of the fun part of my occupation. We purchase services from United Way of America. It 's kind of like a trade association. We all benefit from the name and logo. All of us that use the name United Way benefit from the NFL spots but there are a number of training opportunities, group purchasing, things like that that come from being a part of United Way movement and we pay for those services via what has traditionally been referred to as dues. We suspended those dues payments as did a number of other United Ways across the country when this situation was first brought to our attention and then our Board decided we needed to evaluate whether or not, and we do this every year so it wasn't a big thing, but whether or not a national organization 4 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 with the kind of services that we were getting were what we wanted. And our conclusion was, that in fact we needed a national organization to do a number of things for us. NFL spots just being one example of it . Training opportunities. We get about $50,000.00 a year worth of training opportunities that are tailored to charities and the United Way movement as a result of activities sponsored by United Way of America. Those are the kinds of things we wanted to continue. While this was going on, the United Way of America Board as I said, was taking the option it had taken and hired two outside, independent firms to investigate the charges that had been made against the former President . They issued a 60 page report , which I've now read about 4 times. It is a heavy report to read but included in it was a series of 42 recommendations that they suggested be — taken. It 's the kind of thing, the recommendations that they made were things that we were doing in our United Way. For example, there was a travel policy. One of the accusations against the President was that he traveled expensively — rather than for example on coach fare and stuff like that. We have a policy in Minneapolis that says you don't do that. Their policy simply wasn't applied to the President and they made a number of recommendations, like I say that we had already been doing. They began what we felt was an appropriate clean up of the — situation and our Board decided that we would make an investment of half of the amount of money that we had normally paid in dues to the United Way of America through roughly the first half of the year, which by the way is a little less than 1% of the campaign money that we raise. And with that we said to them, we wanted to be a player at what was clearly going to be a reorganization of that National Association. The President of our Board sits on the, now sits on the Governce Committee of the National which has, at it 's last meeting adopted all 42 of those recommendations and the Executive Director of our local United Way sits on the programs and services committee to address the kinds of programs and services that will remain. We have not made a decision about any future — payments in terms of dues but we are very, very satisfied at the response of the National and the activities of the interim President. One of the things that happened, and I'll just mention this quickly and then move on. United Way — of America held a series of meetings across the country to hear from these 2,100 United Ways, what they wanted in a national organization. What they felt should be done as a result of the problems that had surfaced. The two closest meetings to this area were Kansas City and Chicago and our President called up Ken Dahm and said you know, we'll come to one of those meetings because obviously we have an interest but there are a lot of smaller United Ways. Bemidgi, Princeton, Austin, Fairbault , St . Peter, places like that who don't have the travel budget to go to either Chicago or to Kansas City. We'd like you to come to Minneapolis and we 'd like to host a meeting for the five state area here. And basically he said okay. And at the end of May he came here and we had representatives from — 30 different United Ways from all five states. Have an opportunity to talk to him directly. There is a search going on, as I mentioned. This gentleman has a new commitment beginning in September and he will be leaving the United Way of America and we will have a new President hopefully by the end of August . And like I say, we have been participating rather heavily in how that organization is governed and what services are available to the field as a result of it. As you might imagine, this kind of publicity has cast somewhat of a pall on all — United Ways. We benefit when we have nice NFL spots and other good will that's created by the name and we all suffer a little bit when it gets tarnished. The message that we have for you folks as for anybody else in this community is that our United Way is local. It is totally independent of the National. There are no policies that are set at the national that are topped down. In fact it works 5 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 just the opposite. When we are aware of things that need national attention, we go to them and ask them to make changes. For example, laws governing tax deductibility or something like that as opposed to them saying gee, you've got to write your Congressman. This is a terrible thing and you have to jump on the bandwagon. It just doesn't work that way. The volunteers that work in our community and there are over 1,000 of them who every year review programs, sit on our committees and determine what happens with the money that you and your colleagues contribute to the campaign each year, are the ones that govern what happens in our United Way. I have brought two brochures which I'd like to leave for the Council and I brought some extra copies if there are anybody who are listening on the TV audience that would like to come in later to City Hall to take a look at them. One is a 1991, it 's last year's brochure on services in Scott , Carver, Dakota and Southern Hennepin. The new brochure is supposed to be ▪ back from the printers on Friday and I'll make sure that we get the current copies and then I brought a rather thick document which is a list of all of the programs funded by the 137 agencies here locally. Address, telephone number, • how much money the agency is getting. The programs that we are funding with the United Way dollars and other information about how the local United Way operates. Maybe I should just throw it open for questions. I'm kind of watching your clock here and being mindful of running on. Mayor Chmiel: Tom. ▪ Councilman Workman: Chanhassen kind of falls into a larger group of Minneapolis United Way correct? ▪ Byron Laher: Right . Councilman Workman: Do you currently have efforts that are raising money here and are you spending any money here? Specifically in Chanhassen or are you more at the County level? Byron Laher: It would be difficult for me to answer questions just about the — city of Chanhassen. I could for example go back to our campaigners and find out which company's physically located in the city of Chanhassen we have campaigns at . You run into a problem where you may have a Chanhassen resident who's working in Minneapolis and being solicited at Honeywell for example or maybe even in St . Paul at 3M. We have 79, let me back up. We've grouped for purposes of our looking at service delivery. Our part of Dakota County which is just Burnsville and then Scott County which is essentially Shakopee and Savage and ▪ then Chaska, Chanhassen and Carver here and there are 79 agencies that are either located in that area or are serving a significant number of individuals who reside in those communities. That 's the information in that brochure that — I've got . If that 's responsive to your question. Okay. One of the things we're looking at is service delivery and I mentioned that I used to work for Anoka County and it was coincidental that we did this thing first in Anoka. I had nothing to do with it but we worked for about 2 years with the folks in Anoka because we consider the whole of Anoka County part of our service area versus just parts of Scott and Carver for example. And we asked the community what they needed in terms of service delivery. Part of it came from our ▪ community concerns meeting which I know Councilman Wing was at here. And the message we got from Anoka is that they needed some kind of a facility that would bring both public and private agencies together under one roof so that they 6 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 —' could work together and do a number of things like job training and daycare and family counseling. Those kinds of services. And that they really wanted a building constructed that would do that and last year we completed work on the Anoka Service Center which is a partnership of the United Way, the County, the City of Blaine and a host of both public and private agencies which the — community told us they needed. We are now looking at what we consider the southwestern area of our community which includes you folks, to ask that same question. We may not get that same answer but we are asking that same question. — What can we do to make sure that services are accessible to people who are not both living and working in the inner city. Mayor Chmiel: Any other questions? Ursula. Councilwoman Dimler: I'm just curious. I see how you've divided up the pie. Is that because it meets our local needs or are you taking that from the national? — Byron Laher: We divide up the spending, both by agencies and by program categories as a result of local volunteers telling us what is needed in the — community and the professionals who are working at the agencies who tell us what they see is the needs. Which problems are increasing. Which are decreasing. We look at demographic data for example along with that. Nothing comes down to _ us from the national that tells us how to spend money. One of the things that we do do, and this is part of the service that we get from United Way of America is we look at our spending patterns versus other communities of similar size and configuration. So we look at Seattle a lot , for example, to see how they're — spending their money. We look at again virtually any other major city and not so that we will just do what they're doing but to see if they're doing something differnt from ours and then we call them up and find out why so we can make — better decisions here locally. But all the decisions are local. Councilwoman Dimler : Okay. So you are meeting the local needs, that 's why I was asking. Byron Laher: And one of our local initiatives, Success by 6, as I'm sure most of you have heard of because there's been a lot of press on it. We have — actually marketed to the rest of the country. There are about 26 cities around the country that have Success by 6 programs working in early childhood development as a result of what we've done and in fact one of the services that we valued from the national organization is they have a staff person permanently located in Minneapolis who provides information about early childhood development and putting together Success by 6 initiatives to anybody in the country that calls in and it's all located here. It's been a great service for — us because when we started it, it kind of caught on and we got a lot of phone calls and we were having a trouble getting our real work done because we were answering phone calls from Atlanta and Houston and places like that and now — we've got a resource from the national organization to do that for us. But everything we do is because people in this community say they need it. Councilwoman Dimler: Thank you. — Mayor Chmiel: I have been a contributor for many years. I worked for Northern States Power out of Minneapolis and it's a well worthwhile program to be providing back to the community a lot of those dollars that do come in. But a 7 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 portion of those dollars that come in to the United Way also go right back out . There's a very minimal amount of dollars that are spent for staff time because — of so many volunteers that are provided by a lot of the companies. And therefore, really puts it on the map to do the best they can for those who are in need and it 's really what it boils down to. • Byron Laher: Thank you. You're right. We have about 30,000 volunteers every year, counting everybody that helps us in the campaign and because of that we can keep our administration and fund raising costs under 10 cents and we also • think that with the volunteers actually add something back so it's not like you're losing 10 cents on the dollar. I personally think we gain more than is taken out for administration because of the volunteer help. Mayor Chmiel: Well we thank you for coming in and providing us the information. And if you'll leave those brochures and the other information. We have your new brochures, we'll look forward to getting some of those. Thank you. Byron Laher: Thank you very much. Thank you all. — PUBLIC HEARING: VACATION OF A PORTION OF HOSESHOE CURVE AND BALDER AVENUE RIGHT-OF-WAY LOCATED AT 6605 AND 6607 HORSESHOE CURVE, RON HARVIEUX AND JOHN DANIELSON. Mayor Chmiel called the public hearing to order. Kate Aanenson: In 1990 the City Council gave a vacation of a portion of this - Baldue Avenue. At that time there was concern with the vacation of, if the lots were to split could there be access to that through a private drive. Since that time the City ordinance has been amended to allow for up to 4 private drives. 4 • drives off a private street so that isn't an issue anymore. Therefore the applicants are requesting that Parcel A go with this property and Parcel B go with that property. There is a sewer easement that runs along the southern portion that staff would like to maintain access to and we're recommending that an easement be given allowing us to get down there if we need to maintain that property. It 's really pretty straight forward. The issue as far as the right-of-way on Horseshoe would still remain 30 feet . It just deadends down to — the lake. There really isn't any need, except for an easement that we may have to get down there. Therefore the staff would recommend approval of the vacation on that property with the 4 conditions outlined in the staff report . Mayor Chmiel: . . .is there with that sewer line in that particular location? Kate Aanenson: How wide is the easement? Mayor Chmiel: The easement, no. As far as depth. — Kate Aanenson: I'm not sure on that . Charles. Mayor Chmiel: Charles, do you have any idea? 5, 8, 10. Charles Folch: It 's probably at least 10 feet deep through there. 8 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 — Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Thank you. As I mentioned before this is a public hearing and anyone at this time that would like to address the Council, please come forward and indicate your concerns. And if the applicants are here for that vacation, if they're in agreement with staff's recommendation, I'd like to also hear from them. — Councilman Workman: I'd move to close the public hearing. Mayor Chmiel: We might just have one person that might come up yet . Applicants: We agree with it . — Mayor Chmiel: Okay, good. Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Dialer seconded to close the public — hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. Councilman Workman: I'd move vacation of a portion of Horseshoe Curve and Balder Avenue right-of-way located at 6605 and 6607 Horseshoe Curve, Ron Harvieux and John Danielson. Councilman Wing: I'll second that . Resolution #92-84: Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Wing seconded to — approve Vacation Request 192-5 to vacate a portion of Horseshoe Curve and Balder Avenue as shown on the survey dated June 24, 1992, with the following conditions: 1. A drainage and utility easement shall be reserved over the vacated portion of Balder Avenue and Horseshoe Curve. 2. No clear cutting shall be permitted on Balder Avenue. 3. The applicants shall be responsible for any attorney and recording fees — associated with the vacation. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. AWARD OF BIDS: STREET SWEEPER, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT. Charles Folch: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. Back in April you will — recall that you awarded a street sweeper bid contract to Schuster Equipment for the new street sweeper to be purchased this year. However, we've recently been informed that Schuster, the distributor has filed for bankruptcy. In addition, — they have not met one of the contract stipulations which was a 60 day delivery date on the sweeper itself. Therefore, in talking with Roger. Roger's followed up with a letter to Schuster notifying them that the contract is being terminated and staff has contacted the second low bidder which was MacQueen Equipment and they are willing to honor their previous bid at $77,888.00 if the City so desires to award the street sweeper contract to MacQueen Equipment . Mayor Chmiel: Have you had discussions with them? 9 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 Charles Folch: Yes we have. ▪ Mayor Chmiel: Okay. I would have liked to have brought the point up to them that maybe they'd like to honor Schuster's equipment bid that was $500.00 less. Charles Folch: They continue to, as they have at the time that we were going through the bidding process, to argue that their equipment is a step ahead of the. . .which we originally were going to purchase. ▪ Mayor Chmiel: The only reason I say that is we're paying taxes now on everything that the legislature in their fine moment of decision has done and I thought maybe we should save a few dollars. That 's the only reason. Councilwoman Dimler: And I was wondering too. What the process to reopen bids would, do you think prices are down? Charles Folch: Well at this point I think we've taken out, with Schuster being gone, you've eliminated a key low bidder in the process. A key competitor. ▪ Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, and there aren't that many companies out there doing this? Mayor Chmiel: Right . That 's part of the problem. Councilman Workman: Mr. Mayor, wouldn't it be appropriate, somebody will tell me not but this might be a storm water utility fund item. Mayor Chmiel: I don't think so even though they do sweep the streets to eliminate the, sweep the streets. Say that fast 3 times. Even though they do use that . . .more often than not for that particular purpose. Councilman Workman: This would seem to be one of those hard tangible costs that ▪ people want out of that fund. Don Ashworth: Well, your funding is in place under your motor vehicle replacement fund for the purchase of this piece. By contrast , although you could justify a portion of the cost back over to the storm water fund, it 's got it 's own funding problems. To put this as an additional burden when it 's difficult for it to meet it 's 5 year goals, I think would kind of just push it • over the edge. You'd lose a lot of worthwhile programs. Councilman Wing: Could we dump it on the HRA? Mayor Chmiel: Unfortunately not . Councilman Workman: I'd move approval. Councilman Wing: Second. - Mayor Chmiel: It 's been moved and seconded. Is there any other discussion? Councilman Wing: If I was to vote no just to irritate Harold, how would that go over? 10 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 — Mayor Chmiel: He'd probably puncture both your tires outside. — Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Wing seconded to approve the purchase of the Elgin Sweeper from MacQueen Equipment Inc. in the amount of $77,888.00. All — voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Mayor Chmiel: Let me just make a quick comment . If there's anyone that 's here for the new business, for the Non-Conforming Use Permit for Recreational Beachlot for Sunny Slope Homeowners Association, it 's deleted and won't be, will be back on the agenda in our August meeting. VACATION OF AN EASEMENT LOCATED AT 3931 COUNTRY OAK DRIVE, MARK GRUBE. Kate Aanenson: Thank you Mayor. This is a follow up item. At the last City Council meeting the Council directed staff to write a letter informing the Grube's that they had to put up erosion control. I put copies in those letters. Erosion control is in place. Staff still supports the vacation of the easement with the conditions in the staff report. Mayor Chmiel: Very good. Is there any discussion? Is there anyone wishing to address that issue? Yes ma'am. Would you just state your name and your address — please? Ruth Boylan: I'm Ruth Boylan. I live at 6760 Minnewashta Parkway and the land in question borders my east boundary and as you know, as we were here the last — meeting, they have done a great deal of erosion and destroying of our property because of their drainage and that 's the result of the other damage they did prior to that but the City can't do anything about that . I thank you for -- getting a hold of them for putting up that erosion, whatever fencing or plastic whatever it is. I do believe that Jim and I requested from the City the last time that any correspondence you would send us a copy of which we have not received. I believe we asked, we requested also that in talking to Frank Mastro of Legend Homes that anything he says he will do, that you get it in writing and that we also receive a copy. And then anything that the City says they're going to be doing, if this drainage, if they allow Legend Homes to vacate that 5 feet and we continue to have drainage problems, that the City will then take care and will be responsible for the problems to our property, which has been great. Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. I guess I don't see any problems with providing that kind of correspondence. It 's public information so it should be provided _ accordingly. Any other discussion? Anyone else? Ruth Boylan: I would highly recommend that the City receive something in writing from Legend Homes with what they say they're going to do. I highly recommend it . And by the way, there was something mentioned at the last meeting that we have a dispute with our neighbors. We don't have a dispute with our neighbors Kathryn. We have met with them socially. Our difficulty is not with the neighbors. It 's the difficulty in Legend Homes telling untruths to our neighbors and to ourselves and to the City. Mayor Chmiel: Charles, with the contractual agreement that we have with that — developer, much of that is covered in that agreement . Is it or is it not? 11 . City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 Charles Folch: I'd have to go back and actually check the special conditions that were incorporated in that development contract . In the general provisions of the development contract itself, I don't think there's anything specifically that would cover this but we can certainly check the specials that were added to it as a condition of the approval. - Kate Aanenson: Mayor. That was checked and as a matter of fact there was an erosion control requirements put on that side but they traded a problem so we asked them to put those measures up. So it was a part of the original. It did create a problem by the way the lot was graded. Mayor Chmiel: I just want to make sure that we as a city are not going to pick up any costs that are incurred by that developer. And I'd suggest that we ▪ pursue and look at that to make sure that we're going to be covered fully in relationship to anything that could develop at a later date from that . ▪ Councilman Wing: Are you opening it for Council discussion? Mayor Chmiel: You bet . Councilman Wing: We tabled this last time prior to giving this easement which is probably the proper thing to do but there's a couple questions Charles that I'd have regarding the history of this. First of all they came in and they • filled a lot , put in a substantial amount of fill and as I'm walking over this area now, there you are in the drainage. It's clearly going onto the Boylan property, which I'm not aware it did before. I think that was pretty flat and it was a natural drainage. Whatever the drainage was, it 's been changed. It seems to me this particular lot is now slanted towards and affecting the Boylan property and the west side of their property and I don't know why, and this isn't even in defense of Boylan's. It 's just the simple question of how these things work and why. So it was filled. It was graded. In the process of grading it , they clearly went on the Boylan's property and took down trees and pushed the mud and dirt over on their property which irrespective of value, I • would not tolerate myself. So the builder chose to do that . He chose to fill and put the drainage towards the Boylan property. And then he positions the house wrong. So so far we've got 3 minuses here and then to fix this we give him an easement to fix it . It seems to me he either owes the City or the Boylan's something here and owes them something pretty carefully. He went onto their property. Created some damage. Has taken some of the natural amenities away. Has created some drainage problems. They're going to continue and why? '— How did we get away with this? What went wrong? Mayor Chmiel: I don't have the slightest idea what went wrong other than the ▪ fact of causing a problem. But there again it 's a discussionary thing between the developer and the property owner. We're trying to do all that we can to eliminate those conditions and the problems that are there. And Don, do you have anything? Kate Aanenson: There will be a retaining wall along that segment. ▪ Mayor Chmiel: Yes. Kate Aanenson: Okay. Just for clarification. 12 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 Mayor Chmiel: Right . Ursula. Councilwoman Dimler: I was going to ask also, I see there's a $500.00 landscape escrow here and this is apparently to go to the Grube's. Is that right? Kate Aanenson: Well it 's for the landscaping on the lot and that's part of the letter that we wrote them says that they need to get that taken care of as soon as possible so we're not creating additional problems. Councilwoman Dialler: Okay. And I was wondering if there is, I think we should maybe have some restoration in there to the Boylan property. — Kate Aanenson: We collect at the time the building permit is issued and our leverage is kind of gone. We don't really have that right now. It 's my understanding that occupancy has been granted too so we really, and Roger's aware of the situation and because there has been complaints between the builder of the home and the Boylan's so there's a little bit of history here. Unfortunately Roger isn't here but we have spoken to him about how we're trying to resolve this. Councilwoman Dimler : So the City has no leverage in this? Kate Aanenson: Well at this point I'm not sure. Mayor Chmiel: Maybe, counselor. — Tom Scott : Not knowing the history. . .building permit been issued and certificate of occupancy, yeah. I'd tend to agree with Kate that we don't have — a whole lot of leverage. Mayor Chmiel: Right . And that there's anything to be ensued, then it would be _ the property owners against the individuals as mentioned previously. Yes. Ruth Boylan: Ruth Boylan again for the record. I am also in the building trade and have been for 19 years. You do have a leverage as a city because this — builder wants to continue to build in your city. I, well I won't say what I was just going to say. So you as a city and those who have given this builder a permit to build in our city, you do have a leverage. That they do not — continually cause problems and we are not the first ones they have caused problems to. You might touch base with some of the other new owners in that development . Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. You're right . We do have a certain amount of things we can make sure the next time but unfortunately the damages have occurred already and there's not too much more we can do right now. — Unfortunately. Councilwoman Dicier: And denial of this vacation won't really solve anything — either. Ruth Boylan: Does that mean then the City will own this? That 5 feet . . .? Councilwoman Dicier: No. We're vacating it . 13 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 Mayor Chmiel: That would be their property and the retention of the wall that 's being put up is being put through that particular easement portion, is that correct Kate? Kate Aanenson: Yes. It 's a 10 foot easement . It looks like it was a set up but normally we do a 5 foot . For some reason it got 10 foot on the plat . It 's the ▪ edge of the plat . There's no utilities in this and so it looks like we're trying to correct their problem but normally we would have a 5 foot and we wouldn't be here but for some reason there was a 10 on here and a structure going into it doesn't need vacation except into our easement which does require it . So it 's a series of circumstances that led us to this. Ruth Boylan: But would you, would the city own the east side or the west side of that 10 foot? . . .that borders the west side of our property. Mayor Chmiel: No. Ruth Boylan: You're vacating, aren't you vacating? Mayor Chmiel: The only thing we're going to do is retain and keep an easement on that piece of property for the sewer portion. Ruth Boylan: Right . And that 5 foot easement that the City's going to ▪ maintain, is that not . . .east side of directly bordering my property? Isn't that your. . .? Kate Aanenson: Yes it is. It abuts our property. Ruth Boylan: . . .for the City. • Kate Aanenson: I think we have a misunderstanding of terminology here. They own the property. We just have a right for an easement there. If we had to go on the property. They own the property. We just have a right of easement . Mayor Chmiel: The easement is just granting us the authority to go ahead and put in what those basic needs would be. They will own it but they will give us an easement so we can do that . But they will own the property by fee. Councilman Workman: So the Boylan's are not opposed to the vacation then? ▪ Mayor Chmiel: I can't answer for them. Ruth Boylan: We are opposed to it until we get something in writing from Legend Homes and from the City. . . We cannot just accept their word that. . . Councilman Workman: Isn't that leverage? ▪ Councilwoman Dimier: That 's what I was trying to say. Denial would be leverage. ▪ Tom Scott : As I understand they encroach upon the 10 foot easement they have right now. . . 14 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 Councilman Workman: It doesn't maybe make any difference. Kate Aanenson: They'd be encroaching on our easement . Unless we take action against them for encroaching, we're not going to do anything. _ Tom Scott : Yeah, you'd have to take enforcement action because they're encroaching on that easement . Mayor Chmiel: I'd just as soon not have litigation from the City's standpoint , to spend our dollars for a problem that exists from the builder with a private owner. — Councilman Workman: Right , but we are involved. I mean so if we were to say, then we'd like you to remove your home from our easement or maybe you could _ rectify things with your neighbor there. I know it sounds rather primitive but it sounds rather simple too. Councilman Wing: If we were to hold this vacation and ask Mr. Legend to come in and clarify his position and come to terms with the Boylan's, maybe we'd feel a lot better about simply approving this on a Consent Agenda and going it . I mean if the issue's irrelevant , it 's giving in to Legend Homes when maybe there's a —. problem that still exists. If there is. I mean I'm not saying there is. Tom Scott : Are there some things we'd like Legend Homes to do. . .? Kate Aanenson: Not from our perspective but from the neighbor's there's some things. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, there's some as Mrs. Boylan indicated. There's been some inconveniences that they've had and existing. Maybe you can say it better than I can. — Councilman Mason: Not the least of which is some destruction of their property. Ruth Boylan: Legend Homes has cleared out 1,450 square feet of our property. They have removed four 12 inch trees. They have removed three 8 inch trees. They removed two 6 inch trees and numerous 4 and 2 inch trees. They removed an entire batch, and this may not be of significance to anybody else but my family who has owned that property since the mid 1800's. They totally obliterated a wild blackcap bush area that we have cultivated since 1953. It is gone. It was as long as this is and as deep. It was mentioned at the meeting the last time _ that this was an uninhabited area. I beg to differ. I am back there every day and have been since 1953. It is a part of my property. It 's part of my ancestry. It is a park to me. It 's a refuge. It 's the place I walk. It's the place I meditate and as Dick knows, it 's probably the place where I do a lot of singing and praying. We called Legend Homes after the first damage was done. The first damage was about 900 square feet and then we have an electric fence down there which they also bulldozed into and short circuited and destroyed. We — called. We were told that it was the new homeowner's fault . They pointed the finger at the homeowner. He told us what trees to tear down. They had it surveyed. They went over their own survey line. Mr. Mastro hung up on my _ husband but before he did he told him you'd better have all your ducks in a row. I have been through this before and you will not beat us in court. I went over 15 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 there and talked to him personally. Mr. Mastro. I said I would like to work this out but you have destroyed quite a bit of our property and he apologized and he said my husband's unreasonable. Well my husband is definitely a strong — Irishman but he is not unreasonable. I asked Mr. Mastro to stay off of our property. Much of our trees that were now down were laying there and I said, just leave everything as it is. They then went in no less than 4 more times — unto our property and removed our trees and then proceeded to clear another 550 square feet of our property. We have talked to them again. We put up a rope defining the property line. They took it down and kept going back in. Because _ of this they tore up our iron at that corner so we had to hire a surveyor to come in to replace our iron and from the one point, the one time on May 15, 1992 he had to relocate it from the federal iron or monument , as Jim mentioned to you at the last meeting. He staked it out and then when he came back to replace the — iron, they had been back on our property and suddenly our property was 3 feet higher and they covered over. Removed his stake and covered over the iron again. The one that they had damaged and dug out . So we had to pay for a - resurvey to relocate our iron again. We have talked to our new neighbors. They have told us some very interesting things that Legend Homes and Mastro has said that we have said and what they have told us which are untruths. And then we found out they were telling us stuff about our new neighbors that were untruths — because the 4 of us sat and talked face to face and found much of this out . After they obliterated our trees and because we were concerned about the location of that house and what was going to happen with drainage and such, we — immediately contacted the City. Immediately. Because we did that Legend Homes filed a complaint against us which the City proceeded to cite us for and that was my father, back in '53 dumped some tires and batteries and now that they've • totally destroyed all the trees, they could see this unsightly scene so we got cited. We had to go to court . We pleaded not , oh I know what we did. We called on, we received this citation the 15th of February. We were given 30 days by the City to remove the junk that was back there including the 1956 classic car. We called, I'm not sure if it was you Mr. Ashworth or if it was you Charles. I have all the letters and such. We called and asked for, if we could please have an extension from the City because everything was 3 feet under ▪ snow and frozen in and we were told we could not . We had to have it out in 30 days or we faced a fine and jail. Well we couldn't do it . We tore up our property all the way back to this dump site area, which is you know, it was a _ bad deal. There's no question about that. And we had intentions this spring of clearing it out and then, well. Anyway, we hired a tractor. Tore up our property to go back and were just barely able to get the '56 Chevy out . We could not remove anything else so we didn't . We couldn't do it. Physically — could not do it so we had to go to Court. We pleaded not guilty so we could get an extension. So we did. We had a hearing. A pre-trial hearing by jury set for June 8th so by that time things were dried out so we hired a 30 yard ▪ dumpster. We hauled everything out . We went June 8th. My husband took off another half a days work. Oh and by the way your attorney, not Mr. Knutson but the service that you hired out of Eagan to represent the City sent us a very intimidating letter telling us that they could use photographs. They could use ▪ tape recordings. They could use all sorts of things to prove their case against us. I'm giving you the history. We went to Court on June 8th after taking off of work and both of us are working by the hour. The Judge told us that nobody — showed so the charges were dropped. Of course this is a half a day work that 's gone. We don't get paid for. Our friend, attorney, called your attorneys in Eagan and asked why we weren't informed. Why no one bothered to call us and let 16 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 —' us know that the charges were going to be dropped. Oh, I'm sorry. We forgot . — Okay, after this occurred, then Legend Homes continued to go on our property and when they once again tore up our iron after we had already paid for a survey, we were besides ourselves because the City wasn't helping us. We felt and so my _ husband being very creative went out and bought the most God awful looking dayglo orange construction fence I've ever seen in my life and proceeded to construct it on our property to try to keep Legend Homes off of it . And I think he may have shown you a picture of this gorgeous monument to destruction. — Within 4 days we received a letter, not from the City this time but from the City's Attorneys in Eagan again. Not even a letter from the City which was very interesting to us. Telling us that if we did not remove this fence, it was an — illegal fence and we had no permit for it . If we did not remove this fence within 10 days we faced up to 90 days in jail and a $700.00 fine. This was a real rough thing. I thought, well what happened to the City. Why didn't we get a note from the City or a call from the City saying. You know obviously we knew that fence shouldn't be there but we also felt that Legend Homes shouldn't be destroying our property continuously and we were trying to protect our property which we felt we had a right to do. The City did not once call and ask us what is happening. How can we help or why is that fence up. No, you hired your City's attorney. Not your City Attorney but this attorney in Eagan which of course comes out of our taxpayer money where a phone call might have been nice to find out why it went up all of a sudden. We took it down on the 10th day and because of the quadmire that Legend Homes and this drainage and because they built up our property which used to be like this. Of course it had trees. Used to be like this adjoining the next property. It is now like this. Because of all the problems that caused and the erosion that caused, when Jim went back there with our van to take down our illegal fence so he and I didn't have to go to jail the next day. He rolled it up, put it in the van and got stuck because we couldn't get it out. We've really tried. We tried to be fair. We respect other people's properties. I do believe the City has more say in this and I don't mean litigation. You have strengths. You have the right to deny a building permit again until this Legend Homes clean up their act , and I don't — mean just with us. We are very frustrated. Very honestly, very honestly you know what we feel this is? We feel that Legend Homes is a much, and we know it 's the truth. That they are much larger taxbase than Jim and Ruth and Karen and Tita Boylan so Legend Homes has more worth than a family that 's been out there since 1953. And the other thing we think is, that's pretty sad. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you Ruth. Councilman Workman: Mr. Mayor, I guess to address that . I brought up a point about trying to help them. I guess I didn't expect that I was going to be — accused as being part of the problem. I don't accept that. I'm up here trying to help out the situation and I'm not going to be accused of trying to favor a developer over a homeowner anyday. My original question was as to whether or not we should withhold that and if that were any, Mrs. Boylan points to all these things happening. It sounds to me like she's got an open and shut case for a legal battle against the developer which really has very little to do with _ us I would suspect . My only interjection was whether or not our action tonight helped one party or the other and I don't see any reason to help Legend Homes if in fact they're not helping a family that's lived there since the mid 1800's, let alone 1953. If we can do that , then I'd like to do that. If we can't and it doesn't make any difference, then I guess we need to move on but my intention 17 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 was to help the property owners and I think the Council has a record of helping the property owners who are already there and have been there from damage from what is coming in. I have a home being built right next door to me too. It 's - not pleasant. It 's certainly not as unpleasant as is going on here, I can tell you that . But I think the Council has always tried to help people within their legal bounds with these situations and I don't think this is any different . Can ▪ we do it or can't we? Or does it do anything or not? That 's my only question. Mayor Chmiel: I guess from that standpoint, that 's a legal question. Tom Scott : My understanding is that there's certain steps that have been taken to prevent any further erosion onto the adjoining property. Retaining wall. . . staff's standpoint , we're satisfied with what Legend Homes has promised to do as ▪ far as. . . Kate Aanenson: I'm embarrassed because I didn't know the lengthy history of all of this between I guess this would be public safety but I think as far as our dealings with him. He's been up front. We've told him we've got $500.00 and we'll hold that until the problems corrected and he's aware of that and that was put in the letter that you have in your packet . Tom Scott : The things that are being addressed, and I think Councilman Workman hit it on the head, is really the makings of a civil lawsuit between you and the - developer. I really can't see the City from a legal standpoint . As I understand the vacation of the 5 foot and the 10 foot easement . Typically we would take a 5 foot easement . We approve the location of the house and we're now simply vacating 5 of the 10 foot easement and typically we don't have a 5 foot easement . I don't think we can connect the denial of the vacation and the subsequent enforcement , some sort of enforcement action that they're encroaching on the easement and somehow connect that with somehow settling up with their — neighbors on potential for a lawsuit . I don't think we can hook those two things together. - Ruth Boylan: we're not asking that . Tom Scott : The City certainly has the general kind of leverage that this developer, if he's going to continue to do business in Chanhassen, that they'll ▪ be back before this Council. Mayor Chmiel: Well that 's something that I think I'd like to see done is a letter from the City to Legend Homes indicating some of the concerns that have taken place from Boylan's and indicating that we would hope that they would continue in a different vein of operating than what they previously had done. And rather than encroaching on other people's properties, which occurred and I shouldn't say because I really don't know because I didn't see it, but I think there are things that we could cite in that letter that would call that attention to them. Don Ashworth: Staff will do that . I would also like to comment . From a personal standpoint, I will prepare a report to the City Council. There's been • various allegations in regards to certain actions that we've taken against the Boylan's. I don't know the specific case. We've never talked on the telephone. I have not had contacts with the City Attorney's office. There's been no 18 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 -" instructions let's say from my office that we should somehow prosecute. What — I find difficult is knowing, if we're accused of anything, it 's that we haven't been aggressive enough in cases that we've allowed certain conditions to go on for too long a period of time. I think the Council has seen that as it deals with, I think there's an individual out there in Minnewashta area that has quite a large junk yard and that 's been there for a long time. We've tried to get rid of that but we have not tried to be punitive in that process. So I think the Council and myself deserve to receive a report regarding the allegations that were made here this evening because it just does not fit what we generally do. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. I fully concur. So if we could, let us pursue that and — I'd like to call the question. Councilman Mason: If I could just make a quick comment . There are some pretty serious allegations here towards Legend Homes and I hope the City will look into — that and I also hope that , and I only say if they're true. Not that I don't believe you but , that I think, I agree with what you said Mayor. They need to know that that 's just not an acceptable way of dealing and I made this comment to your husband as he was showing the pictures at the last meeting. We also own some land that has a bunch of trees on it and it 's a ways from our house so people think they can just dump leaves or whatever because it 's not a lawn. And I'm very sensitive to that issue and that 's something I think people and corporations don't take into account and maybe we can help enlighten Legend Homes a little bit on that . Mayor Chmiel : Very good. Any other discussion? If not I'll call a question for that vacation of easement . Councilman Wing: I'll so move. Councilman Mason: Second. Councilwoman Dimler: Are we considering here with getting that in writing as well as she mentioned? The agreement from Legend Homes. Getting in writing what they are going to do. Have we got that in writing? Mayor Chmiel: No I don't , in relationship to what are you talking? Anything in addition? Councilwoman Dimler: It 's like Mrs. Boylan said. Not that this has anything to do with approval of the, but shall we add on to that we get the, whatever they were going to do in writing and not just . — Kate Aanenson: Retaining wall? Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah. Has that been put in writing? Kate Aanenson: We put it in a letter to them that we expect that . That we are _ holding their escrow for that . Councilwoman Dimler: And they have written back and said that they're going to comply? — 19 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 Kate Aanenson: They verbally told me that on the phone. Mayor Chmiel: You can put it in as a condition if you want . Councilman Wing: I would leave it simple as is assuming that the City Manager is going to pursue this and report to the Council. And if it 's necessary at - that point , then I would pursue that separately. Mayor Chmiel: Prior to taking the voting on this though, you may want to put that condition contained in there to make sure that it 's covered. Councilman Wing: Well Ursula, if you wish to add that as a condition. Councilwoman Dimler: I do. I think it 's a good idea. Councilman Workman: That the easement will not be vacated unless? Councilwoman Dimler: Unless the condition is met . Councilman Workman: But again they'll say fine. We're in the easement . Big deal. Mayor Chmiel : From a legal aspect , I don't know if we can really do that. It ▪ might be a good bluff, and I hope they're not watching. But I think that as we have discussed. I don't like what 's happened to Boylan's as well as anyone else up here but I don't think, if Mrs. Boylan indicated and as we've already said, - she has a case and it sounds like, to me like a tight one. You can get restitution for what 's happened to your property from those people. But that again would be a case between yourselves and Legend. I guess I don't want to involve the City because it's going to take money from our aspect and I don't want to spend those dollars because of that . And secondly, it's really not part of what the City is doing. But I don't condone anything that they've done is where I'm coming from. Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. So it 's best not to make it conditional but have that as a separate issue. Mayor Chmiel: No. I think if we get the information back from Don with all that , then we can. • ▪ Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. Just so long as we get something in writing. I think that 's a good idea. - Councilman Wing: That 'd be my preference. I'd like to stay with the original motion because it 's not punitive. It's a separate issue at this point so I will move just the vacation and simply that as recommended by staff. With their conditions existing. Mayor Chmiel: And will the second accept that with the correction as indicated? - Resolution $92-85: Councilman Wing moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve Easement Vacation $92-4 of the westerly 5 feet of the easterly 10 foot side easement for Lot 1, Block 2, Country Oaks with the following condition: 20 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 1. The applicant shall pay for all recording and attorney fees with the — vacation of the easement . All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. — Don Ashworth: Mr. Mayor? Mayor Chmiel: Yes. — Don Ashworth: One additional comment and that would be to really suggest to the Boylan's that they do pursue that lawsuit . It sounds to me as though, if anyone — comes onto your property and destroys that many trees and that much property, puts you in a very strong position to sue them. But secondly, the point was raised that we have a future potential enforcement against this firm which I — would agree with and I think we ran into that a few years ago with a particular builder who wasn't doing a very good job. But the only thing that we could hang our hat on with that particular builder were cases where it was demonstrated that he had done a bad job. Simply the inuendoes that he went onto another — piece of property. He did something, would not have been sufficient for us to stop that builder from building on another property. Where we had specific documentation where it was shown that he had in fact violated State building — laws, we were able to stop him from repeating those things in Chanhassen. Again, I would encourage the Boylan's to go after this individual, which will make our position much easier if he attempts to build in Chanhassen again. Once _ a conviction has been registered with the Court, we've got something to point to and say, no. We don't want you in our community because this is what you've done to one of our residents from before. Mayor Chmiel: Very good. Thanks Don. CONSIDER PETITION FOR NO PARKING ZONE ON CHOCTAW CIRCLE. — Public Present: Name Address Jean Hyak 120 Choctaw Circle Katie Kaaz President , Homeowners Association — Judy Randall 125 Choctaw Circle Charles Folch: Mr . Mayor, members of the Council. As the report explains, staff has received a petition from the Lotus Lake Estates Homeowners Association to establish a No Parking signage on Choctaw Circle adjacent to the beachlot . Staff has reviewed the site and concurs that poor sight lines alone probably merit the request . Staff has also been informed that vehicle parking occurring on this curve is also tending to accentuate the problem. Staff has been contacted by only one resident with some reservations to this proposed restriction. That being the property located at 120 Choctaw. This property — owner expressed concerns with parking at times of entertaining during holidays, special events, etc. . Staff believes that these occasional situations can be handled through special parking permit issuance. The Public Safety Department _ has reviewed this issue and also concurs with the recommendations. Therefore it is recommended that the City Council establish a resolution establishing a no 21 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 parking zone along both sides of the street on Choctaw in front of 120 and 130 Choctaw Circle. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Is there anyone wishing to address that this evening? Would you please come forward and state your name and your address please. Jean Hyak: My name is Jean Hyak and that was my husband who made the complaint. I do reside at 120 Choctaw Circle. Before you vote on this I would like to ask - all of the City Council men and women members, if they've ever been on the street of Choctaw Circle. So then you're aware there is a curve around the corner. When we, when my husband first suggested that it was at the Lotus Lake 1992 annual meeting but he thought it would be the entire curve and not just a portion of it . Basically if you looked at , I think you all have a copy. We have a very large portion that is on the street side. Most of our block is our front . It would be just about, it would be mostly on our house, the no parking zone. The second letter did include that both sides of the street would be included but it isn't very clear. Which houses? This is a copy of the letter. You didn't really say which houses. You just said the opposite street . We have the pie shaped lot and for us to turn, we also have a very difficult driveway so we don't have a lot of parking in our driveway. The most of the parking that we have for guests would be on the street side and when the petition was sent around, it 's very easy for people to sign their name on a petition when they — don't have to give up anything. We probably have to give up the most . We have a very vested interest in this if it does go through. I have a couple questions that I would like to ask. You did mention that we could get permission for but - every time? I mean if somebody stops over at our house. Do we have to get permission every time we have a guest? Charles Folch: That 'd be correct . Any time that you'd want parking to be allowed within the no parking restricted zone, a permit is required. Jean Hyak: But what is the permit? What 's required for us to actually, come down to City Hall, get a written permission? It's very inconvenient. Charles Folch: Actually it can be done verbally over the phone with the Public ▪ Safety Department. They fill out a form and the process is taken through both Public Safety and Engineering for review and it 's a pretty straight forward process but it can be handled over the phone. This was a suggestion brought up _ basically, Dave Hempel my assistant has been in contact with your husband on this matter and from their discussions, Dave had indicated that it seemed like there would only be occasional type guests, family members, relatives, whatever coming over for the holidays and things like that where you'd need to, or - additional parking would be needed so from that instance or from that case, certainly our recommendation was well, we can handle it administratively through the permit process. Now if the parking is going to occur more frequently than that , certainly we don't want to be issuing permits once a week to have someone come over and park in front of your house. So I think then something else, either then the issuance of a permit is not the recommended choice at that point . Jean Hyak: Well I have two teenagers and they have many guests. Not many but I mean they do have guests and it 's not easy to park in our driveway. So would 22 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 the no parking be the entire year or maybe just the summer months when there's more traffic and there's more people walking on the street? That's something that was not considered either. And where would the signs be put? I mean do you put them in our front lawn? I mean and how many and on both sides of the street? How many? Charles Folch: Typically the signs, depending on the distance, you have at least one on each end of the restricted zone which would have arrows facing the — direction towards each other. Depending on length, we'd have to look at it also from a sight line standpoint . If people are going to be able to acknowledge. Can they see the initial sign. Can they see the terminating point. As far as — restricting on a seasonal type basis, if anything wintertime conditions in this type of situation where you have a hill and a curve like that are probably at their worst , particular from a snowplowing standpoint , so a seasonal type restriction would probably not apply in this case. If a parking restriction is — approved, it should be on a year round basis. Jean Hyak: I also am wondering about how this is going to effect the value of our home if we ever try to sell it. That there's no parking in front of our home. This isn't just something that we have to consider today. It 's also later on. Mayor Chmiel: Maybe if I could just interject something. I have no parking signs by my home and I have had for the past 13, maybe 14 years. And I'm not sure how much depth you have for your parking or within your driveway in itself — to accommodate numbers of cars. I know that I can probably park at least 8 cars in the driveway. Never be able to get out of mine but I don't know what your situation is. But anytime that we do have numbers of people coming, I do the — same thing_ I call Public Safety and say, I'm having guests and I'd like to make sure that none of my guests get any tickets for that particular timeframe. And it 's always been accommodated. I don't know if there's, we face this issue so many times over and over again on this no parking situation. — Jean Hyak: I know it 's a real dilemma because everyone wants to have a safe neighborhood and we're not questioning that at all but I know, I think it was — about a year or so we did put a lower speed limit at the bottom of the hill but it was never put on the top and I've seen most people in our neighborhood probably drive a little bit faster than they should coming down the street at _ one time or another and sometimes it 's not just not having the cars there. .It's because they're driving too fast . Mayor Chmiel: It should probably be up at the top of the hill as well as the — bottom. More so at the top because that's where you gain your speed. Jean Hyak: But actually, I would like to see even a bigger portion of the — curve, if it 's going to be no parking, a bigger portion because there is still blind spots that would be excluded from the no parking area. If you're going to put in no parking, put the whole curve in and not just a portion of it. Mayor Chmiel: With that going into a cul-de-sac, you're not going to get a whole lot of people driving it. Secondly, if all the residents within that particular neighborhood would pay attention to those speed limits, then of — course you wouldn't have that problem but they, just like I become lackadaisical 23 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 and they're just not thinking at that particular time. Of driving maybe 30 as opposed to 25. Whatever it might be. But with that beachlot access portion, to have a no parking in and adjacent to all those lots why, there must be some other kind of signage that we could maybe even do. I'm thinking of putting no parking from point to point within that one particular side where the beachlot access is. I think it 's a safety portion right there seeing people coming and going. Or the kids going from that beachlot . Can other signages be put within that area or is this the best way in your opinion that it can be done? Charles Folch: As far as other signage, again I guess it would be, I'm not sure that there is other type of signage but certainly one of the things that we'd have to consider with another alternative such as an advisory type sign, is whether we're going to get conformance or not . No parking is a regulatory type sign. It can be enforced by law. An advisory type such as caution, access. Things like that certainly, we could take a look at putting up but whether it will actually have an impact on a motorist is not known. Initially when we received the petition, we assumed that the request , and maybe incorrectly we assumed that the request was to establish the no parking only on the outside or west side of the curve. We found that not to be the case as when we sent follow _ up letters to the residents. Their specific concern was as it relates to the inside of the curve when a car is coming down, your sight lines are more restricted on the inside of the curve than they are on the outside. Of course your point is very well taken that cars parking on the west side with people, adults, kids coming from the beachlot and getting into cars certainly does present a hazard in itself. From a safety standpoint it does have merits. If we were to establish a no parking attachment to or Exhibit A in your packet shows the revised or current proposed no parking zone scheme which would cover Lots 33, 34, 35, 21 and 22 and 9 and 8. The only other suggestion I would have as it relates to needing to park is there's no restriction in front of Lot 20 which is adjacent to Lot 21 or the property address 120 Choctaw. Parking could certainly occur down there and with a little bit of a walk, could access the property. The feeling, the consensus from a majority of the people was that they were concerned about both sides of the curve in that area. Mayor Chmiel: Yes, I can see that . And of course you're looking at , there's not too many lots that goes in the cul-de-sac. If it was a thoroughfare going straight through, then of course I could see it more so. But it looks like it's a policing, especially for the people who live there themselves to really pay attention to what 's happening and I'm sure that you do get people coming from friends or whoever might come to visit the other people but total numbers is sort of, you sit back and you really wonder whether this is the right way to go and safety is an issue and I don't disagree with that. But is there some other way is I guess what I was saying. Jean Hyak: I have a letter from a neighbor that I would like to read. Oh, well then I'll let her read it herself. Councilman Wing: Before you go. Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah, I have a question too. Councilman Wing: Ursula. 24 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 Councilwoman Dimler: You mentioned you have teenagers. If they're anything like mine, they want their own vehicles and how many vehicles do you have? -' Jean Hyak: We have 3 vehicles and a boat . Councilwoman Dimler: You probably already have double parking in your driveway? Jean Hyak: We have a two car garage and if anybody is on Choctaw Circle, please — look at 120 Choctaw Circle driveway. It is terrible. We cannot get 8 cars. Councilwoman Dimler: So are you able to park all of your own vehicles plus your boat in there now? — Jean Hyak: Well, we get 2 in the garage and one in the driveway, yeah. Our own vehicles but not very many more. — Councilwoman Dimler: If anyone else gets another vehicle then. Jean Hyak: Probably one more in the driveway. It 's not an easy driveway and — I know this is not an easy solution to the problem. I will be the first to admit it . Councilman Mason: I guess what I'm hearing you say Don is that if it was a thru street , this no parking thing is a real legitimate concern. But it's not . And I mean there are a number of names that are on this petition but like you said, — how many people on this petition are affected directly by the no parking? I think that 's maybe a bigger issue here. These folks on Brule Circle, I understand how they might feel but let 's face it , it 's not an issue for them one way or the other. Yeah, sure I don't care. I'll sign it . I'm sympathetic to — what you're saying. Jean Hyak: I wish I did have a solution. . . — Councilman Mason: Sure. Jean Hyak: It is a dead end street . Councilman Mason: Right . Mayor Chmiel : Right . Thank you. I had someone else raise their hand. Katie Kaaz: My name is Katie Kaaz and I'm President of the Homeowners — Association on Choctaw. In regards to a couple of your comments. First off regarding the Brule Circle people. They're very much affected because people are up and down the street constantly. They carpool. They have children play in the street . They play with other people. They play with other children and — it 's not , they're not just isolated to Brule. It 's a very friendly, two streets that do a lot together believe me. The petition went around. You were asking about the addresses and where the signs, where we requested they put the signs.That is on our original petition. I don't know if you have a copy of that or not but if you're wondering where we were requesting the signs, it's on the original request. Okay. That 's all I have. — 25 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 Judy Randall: Hi. I'm Judy Randall and I live at 125 Choctaw. A no parking sign appears to be a simple solution to a dangerous situation, and it is a very dangerous situation. But I feel the long range effects could bring a lot more ▪ aggravation to the neighborhood and not solve the problem of people from both within the neighborhood and outsiders driving too fast around a dangerous curve. My suggestion would be to construct speed bumps, about three of them around that ▪ curve to force people to go 10 mph. You've got , as Katie said, we've got too many children on the street and the beach and people, they go fast around that curve. I can't say who does it or what because I'm kind of isolated but I hear the cars whizzing by and I just would like to make that suggestion. Mayor Chmiel: Could I just interject something with that? Speed bumps I think do control the speed of the vehicles. We have problems with it from a city • standpoint of plowing those particular streets during the winter. Secondly, by putting speed bumps in by the City, we have been liable for any problems that are incurred from a vehicle driving too fast or whatever. So there's some litigation that comes from that particular standpoint where we're liable for any problems that may occur to a vehicle. So speed bumps are, I don't disagree with you at all but it does give us, puts us in a very precarious position. Judy Randall: Just a suggestion. Councilman Wing: Now are you an effected homeowner here? Judy Randall: I believe I am. I have a level driveway so it's not quite the problem but what I see is eventually people having to park farther up and down the street and aggravation. Councilman Wing: But what I need to know in relationship to the first lady who 4 spoke, where's your home? Judy Randall: Diagonally across the street . - Councilman Wing: It intrigues me because there's a very large number of people have signed this petition. Clearly the majority. Judy Randall: Oh yeah, I did too. Councilman Wing: You did too? ▪ Judy Randall: I did too. As I say, it appears to be a real simple solution. Yeah, sure. That would be the thing to do but as thinking about it , I can see where it could be a problem farther on down the road and when you're forcing - people, as they just said, to sue. In the wintertime if people have to walk 2 or 3 houses down to your house, we're on a hill and it 's slippery and even though the City does take good care of our streets, it still is very icy on that street to come down the hill. Councilman Wing: Any signs we put up are then going to put the traffic either to the east or the north. I mean cars are still going to park someplace. If - not in someone else's. . .I'm surprised they're not complaining about pushing the parking to their house. 26 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 Judy Randall: At this point they're not . _ Councilman Wing: The people in Brule Circle are not effected. They are not going to have parking signs in front of their house. They're going to have the benefit of what 's going to occur to these other people. It has nothing to do with children playing in the street . It 's a mechanical sign placed in front of your house that doesn't allow you to park in front of your house. Brule is not going to have that restriction so I would certainly sign this petition. But — Charles what about , I look at Minnewashta Parkway and Linden Circle with that 60 homes going to that beach on the curve. One of the worst spots we've got . Probably worse than this one by far. And we've looked at a stop sign there. — What if this was simply stop signs with a crosswalk there so that traffic had to stop at that beach? Do the neighbors want that? Could we just simply put up a stop sign to slow traffic down and forget trying to cut the parking? Charles Folch: The Minnewashta Parkway crossing, if I remember correctly, there's a crossing that 's proposed near Linden is a specific walkway crossing. There's a trail on the west side of Minnewashta Parkway north of that area which — then would switch us over to the east side of the roadway. That has a specific purpose. Designated crossing. At this location here, there would have to be, if we follow uniform traffic control manual as we are supposed to by law, there would have to be a certain number of pedestrians that would be using a crossing at that location on a given 8 hour or daily interval basis to actually warrant the installation of stop signs. We'd have to check. Off the cuff I really doubt that there'd be that many pedestrians that would be crossing there to make it legally warranted, the installation of a stop sign. Councilman Wing: The other question, how do you feel about parking signs which in fact is going to keep all this beach parking away from your house. It's going to spread it into the neighborhood and you're not going to have to deal with parking? I wanted to ask her about the parking. Is that an advantage to you? Jean Hyak: I think that it 's good and bad. Katie Kaaz: . . .people that go to the beach, they walk. Nobody takes their car, they walk. Couuncilman Wing: I was just curious. I didn't mean to cut you off. Mayor Chmiel: That 's the physical fitness aspect of getting people to utilize it . — Katie Kaaz: . . .beach access there, the beach access. We put that on there as an identifying location. It 's not there's so much traffic, foot traffic in and out . It 's the location and where it is on the street . That 's the issue. Mayor Chmiel: If it 's anything like our's, it 's the same thing. Thank you. _ Little problems become big problems. I know that Public Safety has looked at this and of course I sit on that as well but I wasn't at the last meeting they had discussion of this. Councilman Workman: They have looked at this? I didn't see any report . 27 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 Mayor Chmiel: It's my understanding they did. Charles Folch: Public Safety has reviewed this. Councilman Workman: What did they think? I mean I would think that would be valuable to us. Councilwoman Dimler: Right . Where's the report? Charles Folch: I was not at that meeting also and I don't have Scott here tonight to address that but it was, the verbage from Scott was that the Public Safety Department supported this recommendation. - Councilman Wing: Mr. Mayor, I was at that meeting also and it 's my opinion that no one from the Commission was out and necessarily looked at this. It was discussed casually. Probably with less interest and less intensity than we have • tonight so I'd discount that recommendation on this particular issue. If they had been out there and reviewed this and studied it and looked at options and could give us that information like Planning Commission might have. Mayor Chmiel: That 's our suggestion. Let's put it back to them. Come up with a conclusion as to maybe another way of doing it or if this is what they feel is absolutely necessary, then we may have to do it . Councilman Wing: I think that 's the Commission's job. I think to just sit there and discuss this for 5 minutes and recommend to the Council means nothing to me. I think they deserve to go out and talk to the neighbors and see the neighborhood and in fact give us a reasonable recommendation with options. That 's their job. I think it should be dumped in their lap frankly, not ours. ▪ Councilwoman Dimler: And have they done a speed check there? Like they did on Frontier Trail. ▪ Mayor Chmiel : No, but we can do that . Councilwoman Dimler: I think we need to do that . Mayor Chmiel: We can do that . We can get our radar portions out there with the digital readout making the residents aware of the speeds that they are driving. ▪ Councilman Mason: And I'd like to have our CSO's out there occasionally and getting their input on what kind of problem there really is. - Katie Kaaz: One comment. One thing that I wanted just to clarify. I think there is a speed commission or safety commission report because I think it was mailed to me. I have an envelope there that I didn't get opened today because I _ had company. But when we submitted our original petition for the no parking on either side of the street , and then I heard from Mr. Hempel via letter that they were recommending that they put it only on the, I don't know the east side of the street going up the hill. After going back over it again, the members of ▪ the board and the neighbors talked it over and it really, and it was Mr. Hyak that recommended, he said it really is not going to work to do no parking on one side of the street because if you have a no parking on the east bound, on the 28 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 — east side of the street , you're going up the hill. I think as you're coming down, people that can't park on the east side are going to park on the other side and you're going to have to go around those cars right at the curve. So if people come out , I mean they need to really take a look at different things like that . I mean the only thing that we can see that 's going to work and the only — reason that we're here is because we have almost had some terrible accidents. We're trying to, in a simple way, we're trying to avoid that . But that 's why we think the no parking on either side of the road is really the only viable answer — because of the fact that you cannot see when you're coming around the curve. Councilman Wing: Mr. Mayor. If- I could just make a comment from my years on Public Safety, and I'm sure you'd echo my sentiments. I think the Council intends to move on this and do what 's best but I think it really behooves everyone that we move slowly. Not impulsively and make sure we have all the facts. So I guess I can promise you that something will occur here. You'll -- probably get your no parking signs. I'll just make that assumption but only in point of time. But in the meanwhile, the interim period, I think that as President of the Homeowners Association, it 's your responsibility to alert them to the fact that it 's before the Council. You've identified a crisis situation. A dangerous situation and police yourselves. You know so many times when we do these studies on these roads and the police come out and tag people, they come back and say, if just the neighbors would slow down and just the neighbors would — police themselves, it would resolve the problem. Katie Kaaz: The neighbors on Brule and Choctaw are extremely aware of the problem and we do more policing than you want to know about . Believe me. Councilman Wing: Because that will be the interim fix you know. Councilman Workman: Mr. Mayor, this is kind of a rare situation and maybe Richard's trying to get at it a little bit . We usually have a problem with speed through neighborhoods where somebody lives between a neighborhood and this — neighborhood over here and they're driving through another neighborhood and so this is a little bit different for a cul-de-sac situation to have this problem. Jean Hyak: We have 43 houses with teenagers and their friends. That 's what you've got . . .because it 's a cul-de-sac the kids come in and they make a spin all the way around and you have 40 houses, most of which have teenagers. See so they don't even have that thru access and they just pass on through the — neighborhood. They have to go around for a couple of times. Katie Kaaz: And we suggest that you come out and sit on the curves by yourself — a while and see what happens. The trees also grow out over the street in various places. Councilman Workman: But putting the no parking signs doesn't slow them down. Katie Kaaz: No. No, we're saying when I come around a curve I'm not going to run into a boat , a trailer, a car and I'm not singling any homeowner out by any means. But when you come around that curve, if you're in your lane of traffic and you take your eye off the road for one second, you could very well plow into the back of a car because it 's right there on the curve. — 29 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 Mayor Chmiel: When's the next Public Safety? — Don Ashworth: I'm not sure. Scott is gone. Why don't I make sure that Scott informs the neighborhood of when it will be. It may not give notices out in the packet. He may not be able to do it yet in July. It will probably be August. ▪ Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, it would be in August. It would have to be in August . It 's the last Monday of the month. Yeah. He would probably try to, let 's see we have the first and third which is the 17th of August and then Public Safety — meets after that. I think it 's the 20th. Councilman Wing: I think it's the 13th. ▪ Mayor Chmiel: Is it the 13th or 20th? Councilman Wing: I think it 's the 13th. Mayor Chmiel: I don't have my appointment book here. Okay, so it 's the 13th we could, that would be alright to get it back on the agenda for the 17th of • August . Don Ashworth: You wouldn't have their Minutes. ▪ Councilman Wing: No, but they could certainly be here in person to make their recommendation. — Don Ashworth: I would also be advertising it in advance of them. If, I always worry about this like with the Planning Commission. You do an advertisement in advance of when somebody meets and then for some reason they end up tabling action to research something more. . . .neighborhood then comes to City Council expecting action. You really can't act because Public Safety hasn't acted. Mayor Chmiel: Well those are sometimes the pitfalls of it but I think what we — want to do is make sure what we're going to do is the right decision for the particular neighborhood. — Don Ashworth: That 's what I'm saying. It may be best to have the Public Safety meeting let 's say the 13th or 20th of August with this item reappearing on the first meeting in September. - Mayor Chmiel: Prolonging the issue and it's been there for a long time. Don Ashworth: You could do it the second meeting but again, Public Safety would • have to finish their recommendation and have to verbally present their report . Mayor Chmiel: Are we going to have our September meeting on the 14th of • September because Labor Day falls on the first Monday? Don Ashworth: I'm sure. - Mayor Chmiel: Okay, so it would be then on the 14th of September. 30 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 — Councilman Workman: While we're thinking, can I ask a question? Maybe I can ask Mrs. Kaaz. Does your neighborhood have enforceable covenants? Your association. In other words, if you live in this neighborhood you've got to have all natural siding or you've got to have a certain kind of shingle. You _ don't have any kind of a covenant system there? Katie Kaaz: We have covenants yes, but not that . . . Councilman Workman: I mean is there any way that the same people who signed the petition might say, I lived in a neighborhood where absolutely nobody, it was a townhome situation where nobody can park, leave their cars in the driveway. They all have to be in the garage. No parking anywhere. It was really nice. Is that something that? Katie Kaaz: We have looked into changing a number of things possibly in our. . . and we have been speaking with lawyers and we realize that . . .and we really can't dictate to people after they've moved in what they can and cannot do. What is not covered in the original covenants. I mean if we want to hire a lawyer to — redo our whole thing, we have to take people as they move in. You can't redo it after they've already moved in. At least that 's our opinion. And you keep saying most the people. Most , the only reason that everybody on Choctaw and _ Brule and isn't on that petition is that I didn't get to them. I mean they were all going to sign it and. Councilman Workman: No, I'm not questioning the petition. Katie Kaaz: . . .point I wanted to make. . . .covenants really aren't that restrictive. _ Councilman Workman: Where I lived they were. Katie Kaaz: I know there are a lot of areas. We looked into a lot of — By-laws. . . Councilman Workman: Yeah, no. You're point about doing it after the fact — probably would not make, or grandfathering. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, I'd like to make that motion that we refer this back to _ Public Safety with review and bring it back to Council on or before September the 14th meeting. Katie Kaaz: Can I just make one more point? I'm pretty sure there is already a safety report or a report by the Safety Commission. If you don't have it in your hands but I think it's been done. Mayor Chmiel: Yes. Richard has indicated but it didn't take very much decision making to look at it . They didn't go out and look. And that may be the problem, and I'm not sure whether that was or wasn't. Katie Kaaz: I was under the impression they had been out . Mayor Chmiel: But with that , I think this is basically what we should do so we — have the right decision there or if there's another way of eliminating the 31 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 problem that exists now. I'd like to go with that too, whatever it might be and I don't have the foggiest idea. • Katie Kaaz: We invite you out . Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. We'll probably be there. Okay, so with that , is ▪ there a second? Councilwoman Dimler: Second. Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to table the peti tion for a No Parking Zone on Choctaw Circle until on or before the City Council meeting on September 14, 1992 and refer it back to the Public Safety Commission for further — review. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. NORTH HIGHWAY 5 FRONTAGE ROAD CONSTRUCTION, COUNTY ROAD 17 TO HIGHWAY 41, JOINT — POWERS AGREEMENT WITH STATE OF MINNESOTA. Don Ashworth: This item, number one acknowledges the work that has been _ completed by Bill Morrish through the University and working back with Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council and even with Planning Commission in looking at how we are going to accommodate traffic and what is going to happen to our community as a result of widening of Highway 5 from 17 to 41. That -- segment of roadway will be built by MnDot. What the vision or plan calls for are frontage roads on both the south side of Highway 5 as well as the north side. The south side of Highway 5 will be, the frontage roads will be some • distance back from the main lane highway. 500 to 600 feet and it's reasonable to assume that those will be built and can be built as requirements back on the developers of those individual pieces, whether it be Ryan, Opus, or any pieces from 17 to 41. Of concern has been how frontage road construction could occur on the north side of Highway 5. How we could incorporate into that the landscaped areas that had been called for in the Morrish plan. How again that that could in fact be paid for. The community will have a real problem in terms — of trying to get access to and from Lake Ann Park. Especially the expansion of Highway 5 and righted roadway. We've carried out a lot of discussions with MnDot . They are at the point that if the City would ask them to carry out the — construction of that north frontage road as a part of the main line construction, they have looked at it from the standpoint of congestion relief as a part of Highway S construction itself. Insuring that Highway 5 is not overburdened by what I'll call local trips. In Eden Prairie it's very difficult ' — to get from one part of the community to the other unless you go out to Highway 5. The vision for either the frontage roads on the north or the south is to insure that local residents living in the 41 area do not have to take and take — Highway 5 to make a trip back into downtown but in fact would have a frontage road bringing them directly into the community. Again, under the new Federal legislation, what 's referred to as Ice Tea dollars could be made available for _ the construction of that roadway and again MnDot would do it as a part of the Highway 5 construction itself. What they have requested is that we place, send a letter to them acknowledging our request to have them include that north frontage road as a part of the mainline construction. We literally would be — funding the initial design portion. They are very concerned that, the only thing that they're apprehensive about, there's two areas that they're apprehensive about . Number one is construction of that frontage road through 32 _ City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 — Lake Ann Park. That was funded by Federal dollars and you get into separate — Federal agencies and if you attempted to have the State carry out the constructin of that north frontage road through the park property, it would assuredly delay the main lane construction by 2 to 3 years. They would propose construction of the north frontage road from Audubon to 41 and ask that the City of Chanhassen actually carry out the north frontage road construction from 17 to Audubon. If we were to be in control of that segment , they would do it as a joint powers agreement where their contractor would literally do the work but they would not be interceding any Ice Tea dollars then as a part of that portion of the project . Those would come under local control. Number two. To date the bridge construction and the Morrish and even our own comprehensive plan showed a _ pedestrian crossing under Highway 5 at the new location for a school. That would be approximately in the area of CR 117. . . We had originally proposed that they construct a bridge in that location. Bridges are very expensive. One to two million dollars each. They have come back and stated a lot of concern with — bridges because of their standards for maintenance of the decking as well as the structure itself holding up the bridge. They would propose instead, and I'm unaware where they have done this anywhere else. Modification of their typical — design where they would install two, and understand that is going to be a divided roadway so you have westbound traffic, a space inbetween and you have eastbound Highway 5. So you in fact would have two bridges or in this case a _ culvert but it will look just like a bridge. It will be 12 foot in height and 34 foot across. Instead of simply sloping away from the culvert like you might have with just a culvert going underneath the roadway, they would actually build an embankment . A concrete section that would go that entire length so you would look at that and it would look as though it 's a bridge. No one would really know that this is not a bridge. Again, in a letter to them they would ask that we request that type of construction and they have assured us they will agree to that . The third area that would be different from the discussions that have occurred to date would be that they would like to see Park Place, Park Road. The roadway currently going into the business park and the proposed access, that one of the access points or the only access right now for Lake Ann Park be a right in, right out . That would recognize that the new construction would include then the frontage road and so that those people living within the community, if they wanted to take Highway 5 from the main portion of town, they — would have a free right coming into Lake Ann but on their return, they would take the frontage road back to the main portion. Those people living to the west would, and there'd be signals at Audubon, would get onto the north frontage road, go into Lake Ann that way. If they wanted to go home using the free right out at Park Road, they would. This item was also presented to the HRA recognizing that they'll be a major funding source associated with what would be the local share for the north frontage road from CR 17 to Audubon and also for — design costs. They very much favored the desire to see a north frontage road constructed but also are concerned or were concerned that each of the neighbors who may not have been involved with the work that's been completed by the — Planning Commission, Council and HRA during the past two years, may not be fully aware of what is encompassed by this, either the north or south frontage roads or the entire design concept that has been looked at during these last 2 years. We have a separate committee, citizens committee which is similarly starting, will be starting a series of meetings with those same residents to show them the same set of plans. But the HRA's action was, even in advance of the other citizens committee starting the meetings, that staff should notify each of those — owners of the proposed design, invite them into a series of meetings and that 33 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 the letter being referred to here not be sent until after that series of meetings occurred. I would recommend that the City Council take a similar action to the HRA hopefully agreeing that you support the concept of MnDot being the lead agency and actually constructing what is referred to as the north frontage road. But secondly, not formalizing the concept that MnDot would actual construct until after we've had an opportunity to present this concept to • the specific landowners. The HRA was not as concerned with the Opus' , the Ryan's. They were concerned with the smaller owner. The Mr. Kerber, Leander Kerber, Mr. Pryzmus, Mr. Geisch. I see in the audience tonight Mr. Gorra. ▪ Those were the people they had identified. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Ursula. Councilwoman Dimler: Mr. Mayor, I do have a few questions. I have not had the advantage of going to the HRA meetings and being really involved in this and I guess one of the concerns I have, you said at one point the north frontage road ▪ was only going to go from Audubon west and all of a sudden you're talking about a segment that 's going from CR 17 to the park. Did I misunderstand that? ▪ Mayor Chmiel: CR 17 to Audubon. With the initial phases. Councilwoman Dimler: Oh, it goes from CR 17 so you will be crossing Eckankar property as well. Plus you said something about having, the funding would have ▪ to come from the City across the park because of the Federal funds. Don Ashworth: Right . Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, so you are planning it from CR 17 all the way out to TH 41? Don Ashworth: And it would be the same contractor. That the State would agree that the contract documents would be let by them. The inspection would be completed by them. But because of, again what is referred to as the. . .Rules, • they would want to see the funding for that segment, being from Audubon to. Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah, I understand that . Also, it was my understanding — that the original proposal with MnDot did include a frontage road on the south side so that 's all taken care of. _ Don Ashworth: No. MnDot has always shied away from the south side. Two reasons. One, it 's incongruous nature, meaning that it 's not. A number of the roads you're kind of circling back and forth. That would not meet their standards for what we're funding for a frontage road. And they secondarily — understand and see the City's point that that series of frontage roads can be required as a part of developer agreements where we would request an Opus or Ryan to carry out that construction. Councilwoman Dimler: Okay but now, on one of the points here it said that MnDot was going to build, currently in the current plan was going to build a frontage road. Can you tell me where that was then if it wasn't on the south side? Was • it on the north? 34 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 Don Ashworth: You're referring to the letter from Barton-Aschman, and I think back to myself. There was some smaller frontage road constructions that had been proposed. If there is no frontage road at all, somehow you need to get into the Leander Kerber property and I think there's like 2 or 3 parcels that are there together. So they would actually build an access from Audubon back westerly to pick up the driveways of Leander Kerber and what was the Natural Green property and potentially Mr. Gorra's. I'm not sure about that. Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, so that was in the original proposal? Don Ashworth: That would be, if there would be no north frontage road, the — State would have to do that . Very similar to what they did. Councilwoman Dimler: I guess one of the concerns I have that 's holding this whole project up for 3 to 5 years, if we go with this proposal, it 's likely to do that isn't it? Don Ashworth: No. By our agreement that we would construct the, or provide the — funding for the frontage road through the park property, we eliminate the necessity for the State to modify the existing environmental assessment worksheets and eliminate the necessity for them to have to go back to LAWCON and the parent , I sorry I don't recall but the other Federal agency. Anyway, we will not delay the project . If we would tell them that they have to construct . Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, so I understand. Now the proposals that you have — here, I read them to be about $2.4 million is it without MnDot assistance? Don Ashwcrth: Correct . — Councilwoman Dimler: Does that include the cost of the purpose of land for easements and businesses that we might have to purchase that are on the north — side? Don Ashworth: I don't see any construction, grading base, storm, city. I don't see any cost in here. Note, all right-of-way costs. No, that 'd be a city expense. Councilwoman Dimler: So we would be paying right-of-way costs that are not — included in that $2.4 million? So that 's not really an accurate reflection of the total cost? Don Ashworth: The only area that we would look to city would be through that first segment . But that's a good question. I should verify that . But my discussions with them have them paying the full cost. The only exception would be if we would decide that we wanted to see watermain included in the frontage road construction. If we wanted to see street lighting. If we wanted things that would typically not be a part of like a MnDot frontage road construction. Councilwoman Dimler: Which I would assume might be the case. Wouldn't it? Don Ashworth: I would anticipate that we would look to a higher level. I'm not sure about the watermain. We would have additional costs as it would deal with the street lights. I would discount either water or sewer because one way or 35 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 another we're going to have to get water and sewer out there. If this made a good location, it would just make it that much cheaper for us to get the water and sewer out there. Councilwoman Dimler: But also you'd have to be purchasing some easements? — Don Ashworth: Yes. Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, so that's not reflected in this? Don Ashworth: It does not appear as though it 's reflected in here but the discussions that I had with MnDot were that they would pay the cost of land acquisition, especially from Audubon to TH 41. We would have the land ▪ acquisition costs and the construction costs from Audubon to CR 17. Councilwoman Dimler: Now, could I ask just one more question and that is, why ▪ wasn't this in the original proposal? Was this an after thought? Don Ashworth: I think that 's the best way to describe it, yes. I mean the impetus arose from Councilman Richard Wing I think had brought up the real concern of what is going to happen to this community with the construction of Highway 5 and I think his statement was, I, as a Councilmember do not want to take and see the west half of Highway 5 look like I see the easterly portion of — Highway 5. That was the impetus. It's going back to both the Planning Commission and for a study committee process. It finally came back with the report from Bill Morrish that did a number of things. One, it introduced the • frontage road concept as a means by which local traffic could move to and from our downtown without having to go to a highway. It introduced a landscaping area, a buffer area with 150 to 200 feet along the roadway to insure that the highway wasn't just a naked black beast that was kind of going through the community. That would offer some amenities along with it . Councilwoman Dimler : And a lot of those points I agree with but I'm just — wondering why we didn't have that proposal in there to begin with. Also now you're saying that the south side will not have frontage road at all then, which I think it should. Don Ashworth: Well yes. The plan calls for that. It 's just a question of who's going to construct it and I think my recommendation to you would be, you can insure that the construction of that roadway can occur as a requirement back on the developers of those properties as they develop. I think you're going to have a very difficult time in using that same concept as it would deal with the north side. And I see that there's a representative of Eckankar here this — evening but I would guess that Eckankar does not wish to participate in the funding for that north frontage road and would see it as an intrusion of their property. I would anticipate that it would pretty much take Leander Kerber's property in it 's entirety. There's no way you can assess someone for totally taking his property. Councilwoman Dimler: No, I understand that . Don Ashworth: So I think in that entire stretch trying to assess people on the north side. 36 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 — Councilwoman Dimler: And maybe those were the reasons too why it wasn't in the original proposal. You know because it might be a difficult project to get done. Don Ashworth: I'm not sure. — Councilwoman Dimler: But I whole heartedly agree that we need to have some right away have some hearings on this and let those people voice their concerns. — Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, I don't disagree with that at all and I think what we should do, as Don has mentioned before. I received a call from one of the adjacent property owners with a lot of concern saying I was just told about 30 seconds ago that someone's, the City or someone's going to be taking my property. And as I explained to him that we're initially in the first phase of this going from CR 17 to Audubon and their concerns are well founded. I think -' what we have to do is still meet with these people. Let them know what we're really thinking and then go from that point and start tying this down with the Highway 5. _ Councilwoman Dimler: Is it my understanding then that the HRA has already accepted this? Mayor Chmiel: Yes. This is a preliminary from basically we're talking at one point of CR 17 to Audubon. Making sure that access goes into the park. That 's what the HRA is going. — Councilwoman Dimler: Oh okay. You didn't talk west of Audubon? Mayor Chmiel: Well, there was some talk about that but potentially when that's all. . .we still are not aware of it . I don't think MnDot has made any kinds of commitements as to a timeframe. Don Ashworth: The primary issue with this document is that their agreement that the frontage road would then become a part of the main lane construction. So when the construction documents would be let , it would be let for the entire — package. The frontage road won't be left as just kind of a. Councilwoman Dimler: And just one more question and it doesn't really have to _ do with it but I don't remember in the original. Is there going to be a traffic signal at CR 117? I understand there's been several accidents and some of them have been fatal. If that isn't in there, I would highly suggest that we take a look at it . Don Ashworth: What MnDot will tell you is that they'll look at warrants and as of this point in time they don't know if the construction will include a signal — or won't . Mayor Chmiel: I think what Don was saying beforehand, and correct me if I'm _ wrong. You were saying that potentially if that access to either side of the highway would be over at Audubon where a stop and go light would be, so anybody that would be going across, that road would not cross the highway. CR 117. You'd have to come down this way or go up the other direction in order to get across. 37 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 Don Ashworth: If the north frontage road were to become a reality, and would be constructed, you would meet the warrants for a signal at Audubon. I can almost assure you of that . Councilwoman Dimler: I'm talking at 117. That 's Galpin. Now there have been just recently I think a fatal accident there and I know of several others that ▪ maybe didn't include any fatalities but they are serious. At least have it checked into. Thank you Don. Mayor Chmiel: I just want to throw it open to the floor for anyone who would like to come forward and indicate some of your concerns or at least your thoughts. Please step forward and state your name and your address. If not , always an opportunity. Mike Gorra: My name is Mike Gorra. I live at 1680 Arboretum. Part of the property you're talking about is adjacent to this frontage road. First of all • I'd like to ask a question. Where would this north frontage road be? How close to Highway 5 or would it have a setback? Don Ashworth: It would move back and forth. Generally, it would be within 150 to 200 feet of Highway 5. It would move further away at major intersections to allow for stacking distance away from that intersection so for example at CR 117 or even at Audubon, it would move to the north approximately 300 feet . Mike Gorra: How about right west of the park? Do you have a plan of that or a slide or something we can see what you've got planned? Don Ashworth: I'll run upstairs and grab a copy. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, there has been some discussion on that for way before our ▪ time that they proposed the road coming off from 78th Street to go on Charlie James' property. How far back I can't tell you. But you can probably see pretty much the cut that 's there. And that was going to extend from that point across to Lake Ann Park. So the accessibility was there so people didn't have to go out on TH 5 to come back into the park. Mike Gorra: And that would extend west of 41? Mayor Chmiel: Then it would eventually extend to 41 at some given time. ▪ Mike Gorra: I guess what I would like to know is how far back, how much into my property I've got . • Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, that we don't know. Mike Gorra: Well, doesn't Don have a plan? Mayor Chmiel: Right. I don't think we have anything that really shows from Audubon beyond that particular point . • Councilman Mason: Yeah, this is just in the planning. 38 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 — Mayor Chmiel: This is strictly planning. Nothing has been formalized or put in — place by MnDot or the City as yet . Mike Gorra: Well that's good. That 's why I'm here because I'd like to get my say now before we do formalize something. i Mayor Chmiel: And that 's why, that 's one of the things we're going to do as well is to have two informational hearings on this. Or not only informational but public hearings so everybody would be more than well aware as to what 's going to take place. Mike Gorra: That 's a good idea but I guess I would like the City to be aware what I've got planned there. I've got 150 acres there and my neighbor, Lars has 50 acres and what we have tentatively planned is a golf course. In fact , I can't think of anything that would look better for the City of Chanhassen than — to have a long stretch of golf course or green fairway on TH 5 other than what else, whatever else could be built there. Homes, apartments, whatever. But anyway, together we have close to 200 acres and we're going to need just about all of that to do the proper job. There is other golf courses being built , maybe not real close to this Chanhassen area but in the general vicinity. To be competitive you want to do a good and proper job and to do that you want as much land as possible. We've got 200 acres which should be enough but it 's not going to be an over amount . And if this frontage road cuts into both our properties, it 's going to make it a little bit tougher to do the job that we want to do there. Not only that , it 's quite a stretch from Lake Ann Park to CR 117 and if there is a golf course there, which looks like there very well might be, there really isn't going to be a need for a service road for that entire area except for maybe one driveway, the golf course. So it 's something to think about now — while it 's still in the planning stage. Councilman Workman: Mr. Mayor, while they're discussing things. That 's why, and I got the same call you did tonight. I wasn't happy with the call and the caller wasn't happy and I don't know, maybe that 's just the way we both are. But that 's why I wonder if in fact we didn't get some sort of a cart before the horse on all this by bringing it up. We have no real plan and I know that — because of LAWCON we have to try and jump the gun because of all the time constraints and everything else but there are some property owners who maybe own a large tract , if they weren't building a golf course, that a frontage road _ might help. But for a smaller landowner who happens to own a driving range, a frontage road could ruin his business you know. Mayor Chmiel: It wouldn't ruin it , it 'd take it out completely. Councilman Workman: That 's what I mean. And so you know for that gentleman who has an intention to stay in business, that's not happy news and we haven't had — happy times with Mr. Pryzmus before. So that 's why, and you know for him yeah, to find out and then for me to try and explain, well it 's really in a conceptual stage and I'm excited to hear that we might have another golf course in town.we have a long way to go and I guess we need to explain that to him and to everybody else because I don't like some of the feedback that I've gotten that it 's the old ram rod theory of city government . That we're trying to throw. 39 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 Mayor Chmiel: Put it in, forget about it and don't tell anybody and I corrected him. Councilman Workman: Yeah. Absolutely, I did too and I think we've done a good job. I don't want to give Mr. Gorra the impression that we're trying to pull something on his property or other. I think we've done a good job. I just wonder because of the State and the LAWCON and the park and everything, if we haven't kind of gotten something ahead of us and I'd be interested to know when these design meetings and studies are going to take place because it 's going to get hot out there. Don Ashworth: I think you bring out some good points. Mike and I have talked about the potential golf course in the area. I can understand the concern for taking of any of that property. One of the things that I would ask you to think about Mike is, if you were to have a golf course like that , the current MnDot plans, when we're talking about this little frontage road. All they're talking about is just an access road to get through the Kerber property and get through the Natural Green property and on over to your own. I really question whether or not you might be able to get customers to, you know people who wanted to play _ golf, with that kind of minimal of a design. I mean if a person had gone by, they'd have to go down to CR 117, turn around, come back the road the other way. The frontage road can reasonably assure the individual that if they have gone by it , they can turn at CR 117, come up to the frontage road and drive right back to your front door. Or right into the facility. You can assure that you've got reasonable stacking distances rather than just a little service road that 's going to go in front of Leander Kerber's property and leave Leander's house there, which I don't think would probably be in the best interest of the long range planning for that property. Anyway, I agree with the Council and I agree with Mr. Gorra. We really need to sit down with those people and talk about all the pros and cons and then make a decision. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, I'd like to find out too what right-of-way needs are going to be there for that as well. 60 feet or are we looking at more. What the setbacks there has to be from the highway because I'm sure we're going to have the trail system going through there as well. And so there's a lot of things. How can we accommodate all those things together to make it as compact as we can without that much intrusion? Mike Gorra: That was my main concern is, that was my first question is, where is this going to be built? If it was right next to the Highway 5 right-of-way, then it wouldn't intrude too much on the property and it might very well be good for the golf course or whatever we did put in there. But if it 's set back 200 feet or 300 feet , then I can see where it might be a problem. It might not, I can't see any reason why it should be set back. I can't see any advantage to doing that but I can see where it might create a problem. But not knowing what other design plan they might have as an alternative, maybe it'd be best not to _ have a service road there if a golf course is going to go half a mile from Audubon Road down to CR 117. Maybe they have another alternative that would service the golf course and Kerbers and the range too. I mean I don't know without seeing the plans. I don't know what's going on here. Mayor Chmiel : Well none of us have really seen any plans yet. 40 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 — Mike Gorra: And I guess the only other question I had was, when is all of this — supposed to take place? Just a general timeframe. Does anybody know? Don Ashworth: We're hoping that the main line construction will occur '96? Charles Folch: '96 is the schedule at this point . Councilman Workman: So add 3 years. — Mayor Chmiel: Give some, take some. Anybody else? Councilman Wing: What was the date of the task force meeting? It was August something. I can't remember. Kate Aanenson: Councilman Workman: So are we looking for a motion to say yeah, yeah? Mayor Chmiel: Well I think with all the concerns that we've indicated, that have to be there, all this could just go right down the tubes as well. For instance, if LAWCON says no way. You're not putting any road through the park _ whatsoever, you don't do it . They're very stringent with their requirements. You have to comply with everything they have. They just won't allow that to happen. Councilman Workman: For any bureaucracy to tell us that we can't make getting into that park, which they helped us pay for, safer. Mayor Chmiel: We can do that. Councilman Workman: Believe me. Believe me, we'll do it . Mayor Chmiel : We can do that part of it . . .might be the problem. But our major concern is how do we get the people to and from the City without going out onto TH 5 to keep them on that circle. Councilman Workman: No, that I'm all for. It 's our way of saying well, it 's going to go through some businesses and they're going to have to go. That 's — what I have a problem with in the memo and we don't really know where or Mr. Gorra raises that point . Where is it going to be? How can I decide if I like it if I don't know where it is? And if it's going to take my business or go around it . Mayor Chmiel: I think there's still a lot of questions that still have to be answered and I think we, I don't like to see us throw a hook into this but I think we have to have other answers to questions that have not been given as yet before we proceed to say go. Councilman Workman: Correct . That was my point. I mean if I'm going to say yes to this, what does that number one do. Councilman Wing: You've already said yes to it . — 41 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 Councilman Workman: Right . Councilman Wing: You voted for it at the HRA and all this is is an endorsement of the HRA's action to let staff continue to proceed on this but there's no commitments. It 's theoretical. It 's strictly, what 's the University Don? It 's _ a theoretical approach. Very conceptual plan to some options. All we've said is we'd like to do something a little better than Fridley has but no more. But there has to be some okay for staff to get moving and come up with things. Plus we have an enormous task force of very talented people that's meeting the first part of August to start on this very issue. Councilman Workman: Well I read this memo as something more than that . A potential joint powers agreement with the State of Minnesota and it doesn't sound like I'm telling just Don Ashworth, think more about it . Councilwoman Dimler: Right . Exactly. It's more involved. Councilman Workman: That 's my problem and maybe Don can help me to answer that . I mean we are talking about taking property. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, my reasoning for sitting on the HRA to move this forward to Council was for this discussion that we have right now. And I didnt want to hold it up at that particular time with HRA because I did want it to be coming right here. I think that 's something that we have to look at . If we indicate right now to say proceed with the Highway Department with all natural plans of whatever we're going to do, we don't have the answers really yet to make that — decision. Councilman Workman: But they're not going to move ahead are they Don Ashworth unless we say, yes to all of this? They're not going to really design a frontage road for us. _ Mayor Chmiel: We have to do that EAW portion on it number one because that has not been done by MnDot . So that 's what that $10,000.00 basically is for. Is for the EAW, Environmental Assessment Worksheet which is a very simple thing. • Councilman Workman: Is that just for Audubon? Don Ashworth: No. That will actually be for the entire distance. Mayor Chmiel: To 41? Don Ashworth: Yeah, for the EA. They cannot . Mayor Chmiel: . . .enough money. ▪ Don Ashworth: I was going to say, the numbers. As I read the HRA's action, they're basically supporting what I'll call the funding component of this to get us through all of the study phases that include back with citizens and everything else. Eventually you will end up with a joint powers agreement back between the City and MnDot . Mayor Chmiel: Okay, who's going to be the RGU in this? MnDot? 42 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 — Don Ashworth: MnDot will sign off. We'll be. — Mayor Chmiel: Regulating Governmental Unit . Don Ashworth: Right . But that's for that length that would be from, actually from Audubon over to TH 41. Because this segment would now come under the City of Chanhassen and you're going to need to do the EA when you're involved with the Federal process. If we would be looking at modifiations we did through the — park back with the State LAWCON office and we would only be doing a EAW at that point in time. So we'd have lesser standards associated with that whole process. But as I read the HRA action, it was one of basically recognizing that we would have these additional study costs. As long as the State would be the regional, or the primary, I keep forgetting the words along with the acronyms but . Mayor Chmiel: Maybe our continuance from Audubon to TH 41, that would be figured in and with that EAW would be, the assessment that MnDot would do. But my interpretation was for the $10,000.00 would be from CR 17 to Audubon. — Don Ashworth: Probably $10,000.00 is a reasonable figure for an EAW for that stretch but what we were really looking at was, HRA had initially said don't _ spend more than $10,000.00 unless we can get the State to agree that they will act as the RGU. Okay, which now the State basically has agreed to do. And then they would therefore modify the, or do the EA from Audubon to TH 41 to insure that if this does become a part of the project , that we have gone through all of those steps to actually add it in. Mayor Chmiel: Well that 's logical because that 's where it should go really. — Councilwoman Dimler: I just had a question. If we do the EA, does that assume the project will be done? Normally. Mayor Chmiel: No. It 's just seeing what the assessment is. Councilwoman Dimler: . . . first phase of the project in that or can we still say no after the EA? Don Ashworth: You can still say no after the EA but you're going to be upwards — of a year to complete that process. Councilwoman Dimler: So we're delaying the whole highway construction? Don Ashworth: No. No. Because the earliest we're looking at the construction is again. Councilwoman Dimler: '96. Don Ashworth: '96. Mayor Chmiel; '96. Four years down the line. Or plus 3 as Tom has said. Depending upon how much appropriations there are. 43 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 Councilwoman Dimler: I don't in any way want to delay them because it took us so long to get them out here to get it on their books to get it going and anything that would delay that I would absolutely be against . Mayor Chmiel: See I'm hearing two different things of concerns. One, should we proceed with what we're doing. And the other end is saying, we shouldn't delay ▪ anything. We should continue to proceed. Councilman Workman: Can we afford to wait? No, we can't afford to wait? Don Ashworth: One of the reasons that we moved ahead with the whole EA and authorized the initial design for TH 5, which is being jointly shared by the TH 5 entities. Three cities and the two counties, is to insure that we maintain ▪ that priority position for TH 5 so by now for the inclusion of the frontage road as a potential design element , it needs to kind of catch up with the work that we've done on the main portion of the highway itself. And at stake is one of, if a decision is made not to include that as a part of a later contract approval, you may very well have lost the $100,000.00 that it would have cost to do that work during that next 1 year period of time. Councilman Wing: More important than that to me is that the whole concept of the corridor study, the frontage road, development , all these conceptual plans go out the window and we're back down to basics where MnDot puts their road in and good luck and let the developers come in piecemeal and away we go. If that 's the approach we're going to take, then let 's shell this corridor study once and for all. Councilwoman Dimler: Well, I don't think so though Richard because we're still going to proceed with the citizens committee and they're still going to do the buffer zone and all that . The only thing that we're taking out right now is whether we're going to consider this frontage road or not . Where that 's not part of that committee. - Councilman Wing: It really is. Major part of the committee. Frontage road is one of the major issues of this whole conceptual plan. Councilwoman Dimler: Although I thought he says in here that they don't have. It 's beyond the reach of the citizen committee. Councilman Wing: The conceptual plan is what they're working on. Don Ashworth: Can't we accomplish both tasks? I mean if it takes one year period of time to do this work, which I think kind of the HRA was agreeing to. ▪ Maybe we have to relook at those. And we're saying we're going to spend a one year period of time to meet with our citizens and decide if this is a good idea. I mean it sounds like we've got the better of two worlds with the one potential _ loss and that is, the money that we may have spent during the year to insure that we stay on line. Right now that is an eligible cost for the HRA. I don't think any of us want to waste money but like Nick points out , if we wait a year to take and start that process, maybe it's going to be too late. Councilwoman Dimler: Well I'm saying that we should start right now meeting with the neighbors but without approving an EA. Can we do that? Get their 44 - City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 input first and then go ahead? If they are agreeable to it , then we go ahead with an EA and then start the process but that would maybe, we can have the meetings schedule them for September and October you know. Mayor Chmiel: That 's now what the EAW that we're going to put in. That is only, I still think, from CR 17 to Audubon which is not an issue, I don't think. Because it has to get done. Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah, Mr. Gorra's property would be there and Kerber's property and you know, some of the others down the line. Don Ashworth: . . .at least in Don's description, he was saying from Audubon to CR 17. Councilwoman Dimler: Oh, okay. You're only talking to Audubon? Mayor Chmiel: Yes. Councilwoman Dimler: But I think we need to talk to those people too. If you start with one segment of it , obviously you're going to try to go along. Mayor Chmiel: But the EAW does take a period of time. The quickest you can get one through would be 6 months, depending upon what backlog they have. I just completed one not too long ago. And it took me 6 months. At the place that I worked, wherever it was. — Councilwoman Dimler: Because nobody is saying that we would go ahead just to Audubon and then drop it from there on. I mean that would be kind of stupid. — Councilman Workman: Well we have to look at the whole picture. Mayor Chmiel : Well yeah we have to. And that 's why the committee is going to come up with some of those specific suggestions as to what should be. Nothing is cut and dry in this whole thing. Councilwoman Dimler: Right . But I'm saying that that's why we should include the people west of Audubon immediately in this. Mayor Chmiel : Oh yeah. Oh certainly. You bet . All the way to TH 41 as far as I'm concerned. Councilman Wing: I think that 's what HRA stated. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. That was part of the point . Councilman Mason: Also the point that Don made was we have a year to get this done essentially and in that time we'll be holding those meetings and do that up front stuff. — Councilman Wing: A minor concern is as we discuss the private sector, is what are we going to tell them? Clearly you have nothing to tell them. Here's Highway 5 being built and here's the conceptual plan. This is the ideal. The — round robin frontage road and here we're going to put the businesses here with 45 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 the parking here and it 's going to give us access here. It's conceptual. It 's so conceptual, there's almost very little to tell. I mean you have to come up with something before you can have a public meeting to share your thoughts and we're almost short of that point right now. Councilwoman Dimler: You can get their emotional feedback on it . Councilman Mason: I think you've got to let them know what 's in the hopper. Mayor Chmiel: I think some of that was done when we did the comprehensive plan. We talked about that . Councilwoman Dimler: Before we knew the details. Mayor Chmiel: How it was going to go all the way to TH 41. Councilman Workman: The problem with concepts and especially when you're dealing with a bureaucracy is that we're standing here with a concept about the size of a snowball and we're going to throw it now. And it gets bigger and rolls and bigger and kills people and then makes a diversion and everything else. Mayor Chmiel: So with that , I think we're just. Councilman Workman: Well my point is, I want to find out what everybody thinks and we can't find out what everybody things if we don't have a plan so I would move approval of this. Councilman Wing: Well I'm going to second that . Mayor Chmiel: Any additional discussion? Councilwoman Dimler: Are you saying approval of the joint powers agreement with the State? Is that what you're approving? Councilman Wing: Endorsement to make those commitments and direct staff to place those into a letter to MnDot . Mayor Chmiel: Once that commitment is done with the State, you can't pull back away from that . Councilwoman Dimler: No. I wouldn't want to. Councilman Workman: But they're not going to do an EA and they're not going to do everything. Councilwoman Dimler: No, but I would just at this point, my preference is to just get the feedback from those people involved on the north side before we ever go to forming the snowball so to speak. Councilman Workman: So if we make the commitment tonight , yeah if we throw the snowball tonight , then we're done? I mean that 's it? 46 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 — Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah. — Councilman Workman: We've got a frontage road? Councilwoman Dimler: Sounds like it to me. Mayor Chmiel: We'd be giving authorization. Councilman Workman: I'd like to wait . Councilwoman Dimler: I would too. — Councilman Mason: Well we've got to have a frontage road one way or the other. Don Ashworth: I think it 'd be more difficult to hold back. I think there may an alternative. This is what I was hearing from the HRA and that is, is go ahead and hold the hearings and kind of report back to us at that next meeting. But I also got the impression that the HRA was willing to spend the monies — associated with the EA if the State would be the RGU for that application which then buys the time so you don't have to enter into the joint powers agreement . Simply get their agreement that they will conduct the EA. That they will act as — the RGU for the project and once that has been complete, a one year period of time, then you enter into the contract that basically says, yes. The State of Minnesota, build Highway 5 including the frontage road as it 's been studied through the EA. — Mayor Chmiel: Okay, with that as indicated, I guess I wouldn't have that much concern because there are some protective measures in there. — Councilman Wing: We're still in control and it gives us a little more to go to the public with. Here's what 's kind of proposed rather than just this, I don't — know if we talked about it . There's a motion and a second. Mayor Chmiel: There's a motion on the floor with a second but I would like them also to accept the addition as which was explained by Mr. Ashworth in regards to this proposal . Would you accept that as a friendly amendment to the motion? Is that acceptable? Councilman Workman: Can I hear you repeat the amendment. • Mayor Chmiel: As to what Don had said in covering the issues that we were concerned about . Councilman Workman: So we're not committing ourselves? Mayor Chmiel: Well we are to a point , yes. But there are some conditions contained in there that does give us that opportunity to back away from it if we so choose. Prior to the final commitement with MnDot as they indicated. Councilman Workman: As long as we have that assurance, then I don't have a problem. 47 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Wing seconded to authorize staff to place each of the detailed points presented in the Barton Aschman letter of July 14, 1992 in a letter to MnDot as commitments of the HRA/City if they would agree to the same conditions and would include the north frontage road construction in the main line Highway 5 construction project and that MnDot would be willing to be the RGU for the application. All voted in favor except Councilwoman Disler who opposed and the motion carried with a vote of 4 to 1. Councilwoman Disler: Do you want me to explain? Mayor Chmiel: I think you did. Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. I see it as a hooker. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS: Councilwoman Dimler: I would have, I know that we talked about this last time and the time before on the Sunrise Hills beachlot where we talked about 12 cars and obviously Kate and I went down there and there's room for many more. I don't know what the numbers should be but we both agreed that on holidays and family reunions and other special occasions, it could be more than 12. I trust everyone up here but I'm not going to be on the Council and the Council will be changing and I really would like to get that in the record. Kate Aanenson: It 's written in on the permit . The non-conforming permit . That 's the way it 's written. That language. Councilwoman Disler: It is already written in there? Kate Aanenson: That was my understanding. Councilwoman Dimler: Oh okay. Did we do that properly? Do we have to reconsider? Kate Aanenson: I wasn't at that meeting unfortunately. Paul covered that item. Councilwoman Dimler: Somebody has to move it to reconsider and then make it official or is this the official record then? _ Mayor Chmiel: Whoever voted in the positive could have that opportunity to entertain to make that change. Councilwoman Disler: Exactly. Is what we've done legal though is what I'm asking or do we have to reconsider it and vote on it? Mayor Chmiel: I think what we did before was legal. Don Ashworth: And the permit has now been written in the fashion. Kate Aanenson: It's my understanding the motion said that if it could be accommodated to hold more cars, we'd write it in that way. Then we went out and inspected it and felt it was that way and that 's why it 's written in. 48 City Council Meeting - July 27, 1992 Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, so did you stipulate a number in the way it's — written? Kate Aanenson: I put more than 12 cars could be handled on special occasions.Not to exceed more than, what 'd we talk about? Like 5-6 times a year or something like that . Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. So it's all taken care of? Thanks. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Richard. HRA. Councilman Wing: I just , having sat through the meetings really enjoyed the one the other night because a lot of things happened with monuments stepping in. I think the frustration of the time with the HRA showed and primarily their — decision to tackle the downtown. I really felt, what's the word I'm trying to find. A nice political word. I was impressed with their actions at the last meeting and I'm really pleased that they have, I just wanted to get it on the _ Council Minutes that the HRA has made some big moves for the City. Be it Highway 5 or downtown development or whatever. I think they're very positive moves for the City. Much needed and they're showing some very progressive attitudes and I really am thankful that the HRA is moving, particularly on the — downtown area and the Dinner Theatre complex. That 's really got some potential. Mayor Chmiel: For those of you who were not at the HRA meeting from Council, — Jeff Farmakes came up with some ideas and concepts as to monuments and different ideas for the library as well. As I mentioned at the HRA, he called me up and said he'd like to sit down and talk about this a little bit and it was Sunday afternoon that he wanted to talk. I said come on over and we looked at it. -" What he had there I liked so I wanted to bring him back to the HRA and put that on the agenda. And he's donating his time and his services and there's no cost involved and I think he's done a commendable job with coming up with some of the — ideas that he had. And so consequently if you've not seen them, and I don't know who has those, Don? Don Ashworth: I have those. Mayor Chmiel: You can stop and see Don and take a look see. It 's really got some innovative thinking into what he's done. He really has. Councilman Wing: Just to piggy back on Jeff Farmakes. You'll see the Fire Department Dance posters all over the city. Yellow and black and I think they're extremely artistic and clever and Jeff did those for us. Mayor Chmiel: So with that , I would ask for a motion to adjourn. Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Workman seconded to adjourn. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 10:20 p.m. . Submitted by Don Ashworth City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim 49 CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING JULY 15, 1992 Acting Chairwoman Ahrens called the meeting to order at 7 : 40 p .m . . MEMBERS PRESENT: Matt Ledvina , Steve Emmings , Joan Ahrens and Jeff Farmakes MEMBERS ABSENT: Tim Erhart , Ladd Conrad and Brian Batzli STAFF PRESENT: Paul Krauss , Planning Director and Kate Aanenson , Planner II PUBLIC HEARING: NON-CONFORMING USE PERMIT FOR A RECREATIONAL BEACHLOT FOR SUNNY SLOPE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION . Public Present: Name Address Dick Nelson 360 Deerfoot Trail Jeff Nelson 300 Deerfoot Trail Alan Dirks 9203 Lake Riley Blvd . Kyle Tidstrom 340 Deerfoot Trail Ken Wolter 341 Deerfoot Trail Joy Tanner 9243 Lake Riley Blvd . Eunice Kottke 9421 Lake Riley Blvd . Kate Aanenson presented the staff report on this item . Ahrens: Does anyone have any questions of staff before we get started with the public hearing? Ledvina : I do . Kate , has anything changes since 1988 when , that was the - last time that the Association requested a variance and they were turned down . Has anything changed? Aanenson : As far as the level of use? Ledvina: Well , in terms of any of the issues that surround this request . - Aanenson: Not to my knowledge . The Association may have some other information but to my knowledge , no . - Ledvina : So there 's no new information or? Ahrens: Okay . Is the applicant here to address the Commission? Ken Wolter : My name is Ken Wolter . I reside at 341 Deerfoot Trail in Chanhassen . I 'm the current President of the Association and there are a number of things in the report that I 'd like to bring attention or call attention to in response . The application I did fill out at the time did state , you know when I confirmed what was in 1981 , does state that there was a dock there . I didn 't state in here that it was out on the water . At Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 2 the time in 1981 there was only one person , one house in the association of 12 . And there 's a letter also attached , if that was read by the Planning Commission , from a Mr . Steve Burke . And he is no longer a member of the - association . He lives on the other side of the lake and he wrote a letter for us stating that there was a dock there on the land . He never put it out at the time that he was there because of the fact that he didn 't have a boat at the time . But the reason he did purchase the property there and build was because there was the opportunity . Also should be in the same package , showing how Sunny Slope Association was being represented and being sold in the city of Chanhassen as to having beach rights , dock - rights , and all the normal boating rights that any other association would have . If that letter , if you 'd like to have me read it for the public? Ahrens: I think that 's okay . We all have copies in our packets so we 've read the letter . Ken Wolter : Okay . But I just wanted to clarify to that point that the application I did fill out for what was back in 1981 does show that there was a dock as per the letter from Mr . Burke . Also on the Court Finding by the District Court , one thing I 'd like to also bring up , there was significant information that we wanted to bring into the court system and I have to say , back at that time we had some problems with a person we had representing us . And he told us we could just hold off until the time of Court date . And with that information it was representing what was happening in the city at the time . As to who had docks on smaller lakeshore lots than us , and obviously that 's what this whole process was for now that you 're going through with all the associations that are non- - conforming but we still as an association feel we have the right to a dock because there was a dock there . We feel there is no additional burden to the lake or should cause no problem . We have our plans in effect to have a dock there and 3 boats is what we 'd like to have . That 's all we 're asking for . We 're not trying to overuse anything . We currently do pass through the Eden Prairie park when we do launch our boats so useage on the lake , we are already using it in that manner . We 're just looking for the final , what we feel is the right of the association as how it was represented throughout the entire life of the association . Farmakes: Can I ask a question? Ken Wolter : Sure . Farmakes: Mr . Burke 's letter says that they were the only family in the association . Does that mean in the association or does that mean in the development? Ken Wolter : In the development . He was the only house there at that time . Farmakes: So I add 2 1/2 years onto June of 1981 , is that correct? Ken Wolter : Approximately that , yes . I was not there at the time . This - is the information that I gathered from what I could from Steve Burke and any documentation in the association that I have . That I currently have . Ahrens: Are there any boats in the water now? Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 3 Ken Wolter : No . No , we 've been trying to abide with it but when the City sent the letter for non-conforming beachlots we felt this was our — opportunity to bring the evidence that we tried to bring into court and basically the court decision was through default because we couldn 't submit the information . We feel that the court sided on the city because the information was not there so it was a default . Ahrens: Did you appeal the decision? Ken Wolter : The lawyer that we had at that time didn 't want to do it and basically we were told it wouldn't do any good at that time . Unless we go through the whole process of going to the City Council and the Planning Commission and the whole avenue like that and basically , from what I was told , the Judge didn 't even want to hear about it until it went through all of that procedure again . Us to introduce it into the . Farmakes: Why wasn 't the builder aware at that time of the issue that was before the City on non-conforming beachlots? How much before '81 was this development? In the planning stage . — Ken Wolter : Well , I believe the association was approved in 1977 . At some point here he did buy the lot as a lakeshore lot . Farmakes : Correct me if I 'm wrong but you said that there wasn 't anybody living in the development until June of 1981 , is that correct? Ken Wolter : Steve Burke , no . He bought . . . Emmings : Late 70 's you mean? Kyle Tidstrom: Late 1980 . Emmings : Oh , 1980? Oh , okay . — Kyle Tidstrom : August or September of 1980 was when the house went up . When Steve moved in , I don 't know . — Ahrens: Excuse me . Could you give your name . Kyle Tidstrom: Kyle Tidstrom . I live at 340 Deerfoot Trail . . . Farmakes: In the second paragraph of his letter he says , we bought the house at 340 Deerfoot Trail , Sunny Slope Association . So I 'm confusing I _ guess the issue of lakeshore association with the development itself . Is that just an error that he made or should that have been development instead of association or what? Ken Wolter : I guess it should be development . Sunny Slope development is 12 homes and are associated property , that 's a commons area for that _ association . Farmakes: How could you be an association if there wasn 't anybody in the development? That 's what I 'm asking , in '77? Wasn 't there somebody living in the development? Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 4 — Ahrens: The association is created at the time of the development and it 's usually a creation in the By-laws . Farmakes: Okay , so it 's in the By-laws but there 's nobody actually in the association except for the owners . Ken Wolter : The owners and the developer of the property, correct . Ahrens: Anything further? Ken Wolter : I think I have covered everything . Is there anything you wanted to ask Al? It 's just the recap of what I 've stated and wanted to present here . What we feel is stuff , information that should be brought and if there 's any questions about it , we feel that that should be taken into consideration . Ahrens: Okay . We may have some questions later but we 'll address those - when they arrive . Would anyone else like to address the Commission at this time? Step up to the podium please and give your name and address for the record . Alan Dirks: My name is Alan Dirks and I used to live , I was the second home that came in there . Steve Burke 's home was actually , now I live just on Shore Acres there across the street but just to give a little insight . I was the first home to actually come to Alan Gray , who was the developer at the time , because Steve Burke 's house was the actual model home which was going to be a retirement thing I think was the original By-laws . It was - going to be a development for retirement and it kind of went the other direction when we came in and Steve there . Steve had a young family and I did as well and Alan Gray definitely protrayed that this was a completely useable beachlot to us and had docking rights and boating rights . So then at the time I did call the City when I went to make application and just said , is this a useable lot . . .? And I think part of the problem with this whole set-up is that it 's become a real emotional issue . I 've worked with Kate on a few things and I think she 's a terrific gal and she 's tried to get some insight on what she can dig up on this whole thing and there 's been some misinformation along the way and I don 't think a lot of. it is , the rules were in place . Did it go into place actually in '81? Aanenson: The beachlot ordinance was adopted in 1982 . January . Alan Dirks: Because when I first started building in '83 . We completed in '84 and this was in the spring of '83 when I called the City and at the time they still were saying to us , go ahead and make . . .use of the lot . - Then when in '88 when the Court issue actually came up . When the Court issue actually came up , I was still living there and at the time there was a lot of interest in keeping the reduction on the use of Lake Riley . And on the Eden Prairie side of Lake Riley where they have the boat access , they had a limited number of stalls that you could park your boats at and it was all really confined. And I think that was part of the emotional side of keeping the boats off of this and the dockage off of this lot . But since then Eden Prairie 's found that that was illegal in essence to restrict the number of boats they could launch over there as well . So I think the time that this actually went to Court , there was a lot of emotion Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 5 running high about Lake Riley . And I 'd just like to say that as a lakeshore owner now , I think that you 're not going to , I think there 's a — lot of inconsistency to go ahead and not allow these 12 homes that , especially in the early development stages , were not allowed or were told that they 'd be able to have a boat and have dockage and have rights and then come back at this late stage , open up the east side of the lake with — the Eden Prairie side and let all the boat access go onto the lake from people that aren 't on or contributing in any way to the lake . Whereas these folks are certainly lakeshore owners and paying their taxes and — contributing to those lake associations . Farmakes: Can I ask you a question? Alan Dirks : Sure . Go ahead . Farmakes: Will you define for me at the time that you bought your house , — what you believed at the time is full use of the property? Alan Dirks : There was no question in my mind that , I mean at the time I — couldn 't afford lakeshore and so it was the best option for me at the time and that , they said that we could launch boats across as well as have a dock and storage overnight . And so that was our full intent . Farmakes: Did the City say that or the developer did? Alan Dirks : Well the developer said that and I called the City to confirm — it but I never got it in writing or anything because all the stuff that he was handing out , you know I guess maybe I should have gone further with it but at the time there was no question in my mind that I 'd be able to use it_ as a , actually we knew that there 'd be some restrictions and that we might have to rotate as more homes came in . Because I believe he was telling us there were 4 boats could be had at the time . Now Ken said 3 . That was news to me but at the time Alan Gray was saying 4 . Well I was just the — second house so that wasn 't a problem . Farmakes : So at that time you contacted the City . That was '84? 83? — Alan Dirks : It would have been the spring of '83 . Farmakes : Thanks . Ahrens : You know this is a tough situation for us too . We 're not trying to create any hardship for anyone . I think the problem is a lot of people — may have , you 're not the only association that we 've seen this happen to . I think there are probably a lot of causes of action out there against developers who told people they had rights that they didn't have and the — City now is not trying to take away any rights from anyone . We 're just . trying to establish what rights people did have . What rights the Associations had back in 1981 and enforce those rights . Alan Dirks : I think you hit the pivotal thing in here is that in 1981 it seems to me there was a timeframe where , whether there was a dock actually in the water or not . And it seems to me that whether or not the dock was — Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 6 in the water shouldn 't have that much bearing . It should be what the rights the people had in 1981 . Ahrens: Right but as far as we know , there were no rights for your association because we certainly don 't have anything documented . And what we 're trying to establish is the use of the lake , not whether or not there _ was a dock in the water . Whether or not there were boats in the water is what 's important to us . Alan Dirks: Kate , how did they determine that again in '81 though? As far - as whether or not it was being used as a full boat dockage . Aanenson: I wasn 't here . It 's my understanding the staff person who did it went out and took , documented the length of the dock and then that there was canoe racks , the number of boats and that was all documented . For this beachlot the notation said , no dock in water . No boats . No canoe racks . Alan Dirks: So that was the criteria that she went by , or they went by at the time? Aanenson: Whoever did it , yes . Alan Dirks: Was whether or not it was in the water? It seems to me it should be more the issue of what the intent of the lot was . Just thought I 'd . Ahrens : Thank you for your comments . Does anyone else have anything? - Would you like to step up please . Joy Tanner : I 'm Joy Tanner . I live at 9243 Lake Riley Blvd . and I 'm - directly , I have Lots 38 and 39 , Shore Acres . There 's some clarification I could make on some of these issues because I 've been here longer than any of them . Ahrens: When did you move in? Joy Tanner : My home was built in the summer and fall of '79 and actually I - bought my lot , started the initial investigation , say with the City before the lot was bought in early '78 . Okay at that time Alan Gray had , as you see from your records , had applied for a conditional use permit and so forth for the development . Due to the negative response in the neighborhood , he withdrew the petition at that time . The request . That was kind of the start of things and every few years , not for a while but every few years we 've gone through this same thing . They didn 't show in case summary but I think I was probably , I can 't tell you how many times this has been before the Planning Commission . It was withdrawn each time , probably until when was it that the City turned it down? Aanenson: '86 . Joy Tanner : '86? Okay , whatever . There was a dock on the land . That 's for sure when we moved in in December of '79 . Sometime . Ahrens: Was the dock on the land? Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 7 Joy Tanner : There was a dock laying in the grass until '84 when I was separated , my husband mowed that grass in the summer because the lot was — there and the weeds were growing . Sometime , either late in '81 or during the summer of '82 , the person living in the , the tacky cabin on Lot 36 , picked the dock up , took it over to his house and nailed it on the house _ for a deck . So the dock was gone . I mean there was no dock you know at that point in time . It stayed there until Paul Olson bought the property and at that point when we was tearing down the cabin to rebuild , that was the point that Steve Burke did give Paul the dock . Okay , he didn 't give it— to him to put into the lake so it was kind of a round about thing . Things haven 't changed . The Sunny Slope families have been using it as a swimming beach and maintaining it and they 're nice neighbors for swimming . I would — not like to see a dock and 12 families with water skiing and all the intense use . I don 't dislike people . People are fine . It 's a difficult situation but nothing truly has changed much . I guess that 's it . I can 't think of what else . Ahrens: Thank you Mrs . Tanner . Anyone else like to speak on this issue? Kyle Tidstrom : My name is Kyle Tidstrom . I do live at 340 Deerfoot Trail now and I guess I 'd just like to say that we do ski and we won 't be skiing in the bay . You can 't ski in the bay . And we pull in there and sit during the day and that isn 't going to change by having a dock . I appreciate Joy mentioning that that dock was laying on the land because it seems like the decision on this was all made on was there a dock there and was there intent to have a dock there and there was and I 'd just like people to look — at that and make a decision based on that information that wasn 't in the Court case that came up due to one reason or another . Ahrens : Alright , thank you . Anyone else like to address the Commission? Emmings moved, Ledvina seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in _ favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. Ledvina : Well I 've taken a look at the information that 's been provided and I don 't see that anything has really substantially changed in the last — 4 years since this issue was brought before the City Council when. the variance request was denied . And I don 't see any reason at this point to allow this site to be grandfathered in . That 's it for my comments . I — think that the continued use of a swimming beach is fine . That seems to be an acceptable practice for this outlot . That 's it . Ahrens: Okay , Jeff . — Farmakes: We 've heard several associations here and we keep on hearing the same thing over and over again . I wish there was some sort of Truth in — Housing I guess type Act in regards to this type of thing . It seems to me that there 's something inherently wrong when people are out selling things that they don 't necessarily have the right to sell to people and using it _ as an enticement to sell property . If you look at when the ordinance was going in and when this met , they sort of just , they 're by the edge . One is , if you take a cut off date , one is on one side of the cut off and one is on the other and I can understand your frustration . But they have to — pick a date and the date that they picked was '82 . January and it seems to Planning Commission Meeting — July 15 , 1992 - Page 8 — me , if I look at Mr . Burke 's letter , that he is the only person in the development and he doesn 't , he didn 't use the dock . He didn 't have a boat in the water and if you 're going to use that as a cut off date in the — ordinance for grandfathering , you missed the boat . Not to make a pun but that 's what 's happened . It seems to me that I have really no choice here but to go along with the staff 's recommendation because to do so , to make an exception for this would be to undermine the ordinance inrelationship to — all these other people who have been in here . It would be nice to pull something out of a hat and say it 's okay but again , with ordinances , you have a real problem doing that because if you make an exception for one , — then they all come and then the ordinance really serves no purpose . Ahrens: Thanks Jeff . Steve . Emmings : I think the prior , I basically agree with the comments that have been made so far . I think that the Findings by the City Council in '88 and the subsequent Court case , the Findings in that are determined upon this issue because if they had rights that existed prior to the beachlot ordinance being enacted , they would have grandfather rights and those would have been a defense in a Court case . So I think those things are - determinative and we have to go with what was actually there in '81 which we 're using as a baseline and in '81 they didn 't have a dock and they weren 't docking boats and I don 't see how we can give it to them . Ahrens: Okay . I agree also with the comments that have been made . This is , to repeat myself . This is tough for us to make these decisions . We 've been listening to the applications from several associations for the last — couple of months and we 're trying to be consistent . We 're trying to follow any information whatsoever we have to support a decision to follow the 1981 baseline and in this case , some of the best documentation we have is from a — next door neighbor who says there was no dock in the lake in 1981 . In fact , the dock was used as a deck for at least a couple years after that . I 'm going to have to go along with the staff recommendation on this . Again , the City Council will be considering this after we make our recommendation and I suggest that , when will that come up? Aanenson: August 10th . Ahrens : August 10th . I suggest you follow it if you care to do so . Do we have a motion? Emmings: I 'll move the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that the non-conforming recreational beachlot permit application for Sunny Slope be denied . Ahrens: Is there a second? — Ledvina: Second . Emmings moved, Ledvina seconded that the Planning Commission recommend denial of the Non-conforming Recreational Beachlot Permit application for — Sunny Slope Homeowners Association. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 9 Krauss : Excuse me Chairman . We just noticed that , we were just made aware that there was an erroneous publication put in the paper on Minnewashta _ Heights Homeowners Association to install a chemical toilet . , Are we familiar enough with it? Aanenson: Yeah , we can do it . That 's fine . — Krauss : There are a number of people apparently here who came out on this information . I don 't know, was mail notice sent out too? No? Possibly , _ it 's kind of unusual but maybe you can get some input from the folks here so they don 't waste their evening . Emmings : Well , would it have to come up on another agenda? — Ahrens: Yeah . Krauss: You would have to make , not take an action on it but we could log in the comments for the record I suppose . Ahrens : But we 'd have to have another public hearing on it . Lauren Huntington: It was in the paper . I mean it was in the paper . That 's the reason . Farmakes: We don 't have any information on it . Aanenson: Minnewashta Heights , you just heard that beachiot recently . I think it was the last one you did . Emmings: It 's the one near my house and they 've had a chemical toilet down— there for several years . Lauren Huntington : . . .unless we can get a condition to put one in while , — until you discuss it next . Ahrens: It would be on the agenda until November probably . I 'm just kidding . Lauren Huntington: Little cold . Krauss : Well I mean this is kind of unusual . I don 't have a great answer for you but I thought that this one was kind of straight forward . Emmings : If you put it on another agenda , you 've got to advertise it again because it will be a public hearing . Krauss: Right . Lauren Huntington: So what else is needed besides this? I mean like . Emmings : We don 't have any information in our packets . We don 't have the application . Wouldn 't there have to be mailed notice to the neighbors and things too? — Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 10 Krauss : Well possible we could start proceeding with the apartment project and if you ' ll hold tight , I just want to check . Sharmin Al-Jaff I think was working on this and I think she 's meeting with the Senior Commission next door . Emmings: Well what do you want to do? Krauss: I don 't know . If you 're uncomfortable dealing with it , I guess we 'll have to . Ahrens: It 's not that I think we 're so uncomfortable . It 's just do we have to have another public hearing after this? I 'd hate to devote two meetings to the chemical toilet . Lauren Huntington: For us it 's two nights . We have babysitters and I mean . Ahrens: Yeah , I don 't know why it wasn 't included in our packet but we don 't have any information on this at all . . .public hearing , I think we should wait . Krauss: Well , I mean legal notice apparently has been published . Emmings : Yeah but we don 't have any , taking information on something when we don 't know any of the background doesn 't seem to make sense and we can 't ask the people questions . We don 't know what the issues are . I don 't think it makes sense to do it . Krauss: I have to apologize for this and we 'll get it on the next meeting . Ahrens: I think that they 're sitting behind you . Krauss: We have to apologize for this . Lauren Huntington : So when is the next meeting? Aanenson: It 's August 4th . Lauren Huntington: I mean we can only have the chemical toilet until . . . Emmings : Let me ask Paul . Do you have sufficient power to do this administratively pending approval? _ Lauren Huntington: And if we put one in and then if it 's not approved , we 'll take it right out? Krauss: I guess given the circumstances , I think we ought to do this on an interim basis at least . Ahrens: I think that 's a good idea . Sorry about that . Lauren Huntington : That 's okay . I know the neighbors on both sides won 't have a problem . Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 11 Krauss : Sure . We 'll acknowledge that . Emmings: If the neighbors don 't have a problem with it on either side , if they would . If they don 't come in and complain , that 's great . Even better if they sign something that says they don 't have any complaints . Ahrens: The City may want a contact number and call them . Emmings: That 's real persuasive to us . Lauren Huntington: Okay . So it 's okay to go ahead and put one in and then take it out if it . Emmings : Talk to him about that . Ahrens: Arrange that with Paul or Sharmin . Emmings : It 'd get something in writing too you know from him . Krauss : Well this being government , I 'm going on vacation tomorrow morning . I ' ll have her take care of it . Lauren Huntington: Okay , so we can go or do I need to stay? Aanenson: Yeah , that 's fine . Lauren Huntington: Okay . My name 's on that paper . Aanenson: Yep , we 'll call you in the morning . — Ahrens: Anybody else who 's here for the Minnewashta Homeowners , is it the Homeowners Association? Aanenson: Heights . Ahrens : We 're not discussing it . Okay , staff report on the Oak Hills . PUBLIC HEARING: — CONCEPT REVIEW OF A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR 3 ( 16 UNITS EACH RENTAL) BUILDINGS . 9 ( 8 UNIT OWNER OCCUPIED) BUILDINGS AND A CLUBHOUSE/OFFICE ON 25 .29 ACRES AND REZONING OF PROPERTY ZONED R-12, HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL — TO PUD AND LOCATED NORTH OF WEST 78TH STREET, BETWEEN KERBER AND POWERS BOULEVARD . OAK PONDS/OAK HILL, LOTUS REALTY/OAKS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. Public Present: — Name Address Brad Johnson Lotus Realty Arvid Ellness Arvid Ellness Architects Kirk Willette Arvid Ellness Architects _ Mike & Mary Henke 7560 Canyon Curve Randy Swatfager 7511 Canyon Curve Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 12 Name Address - Mark Schallock 7501 Canyon Curve Joe Perttu 790 Santa Vera Drive Greg & Cindy Hromatka 7580 Canyon Curve Randy & Michelle Erickson 7491 Canyon Curve Gregg & Shelly Geske 7530 Canyon Curve Karen Bramow 7490 Canyon Curve Dave & Jane Callister 7540 Canyon Curve Jack Thien 7570 Canyon Curve Christy Kuckler 7550 Canyon Curve Tim & Mary Anderson 7550 Canyon Curve Bob & K . Dianne Bohara 7510 Canyon Curve Doug Kunin Temple of Eck Michael Lindelien 7610 Canyon Curve James A . Russ 7521 Canyon Curve Terry Wooymeerten 7461 Canyon Curve Lynn Lord 7531 Canyon Curve John Linforth 7471 Canyon Curve Kate Aanenson presented the staff report on this item . Ahrens: Okay , thanks Kate . Before we get started , maybe you could explain to the folks here the stage we 're at in the review of this proposal . Tonight we are reviewing the , what we call the conceptual site plan . Maybe you could explain how that fits into the review of this whole development . The stage we 're at . - Krauss : If I could possibly respond to that . As a PUD , it goes through three steps . There 's the concept plan , a preliminary plat , a final development stage . The concept plan basically says , this is as far as it 's _ been taken now . Give us the issues to work with and we raised a lot of issues . We expect the neighbors to raise some and you to raise some and the City Council . They 're then asked to go back and refine those issues . Come through with a formal public hearing on that and then come through - with the final development stage . This is more of a fact finding process I suppose at this point . As I say , we 've raised a number of questions in our staff report . We think that these things are normal and can generally be addressed but we pointed the direction for things that need to be resolved . So this is an informal point in the process . Ahrens: Okay . Does anybody have any questions of the staff before we get going? No . Would the applicant like to address the Commission at this point? - Brad Johnson: Madam Chairman , members of the Planning Commission . My name is Brad Johnson . I live at 7425 Frontier Trail . I represent Lotus Realty Services who is the managing partner of this particular project . I have with me two representatives of Arvid Ellness Architects who will be speaking as part of my presentation. One of the reasons I wanted to be involved in this project was that I , when we did Market Square I was the one after this one and so I was going home around 4:00 every morning if you Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 13 recall when this was going through the first time around . And I sat through and listened to all the things that I perceived just done wrong as — part of the project . I do run through that area in the mornings and I 've gotten to know the land fairly well and so the issues that I perceive that we , as developers of this particular site had to address , first of all is — the past . And then secondly was the things that are probably priority . One is , when this went through originally there was no neighborhood to look at it . We now have a neighborhood . The homes have been built up on the north side but previously they were not there . So we had to deal with that— issue and try to conceal as much as we could the project itself . Thus we went to a smaller builder than originally planned . We were concerned about the TH 5 corridor because I sit through those meetings also and I think you— guys just went through one and we know that this particular stand of oak trees is important to that particular corridor . As to what the project will ultimately look like from the TH 5 when the whole thing is built and — that type of thing . We were concerned about the trees and trying to preserve as many trees as we could and by using the unit style that we have and the mix that we have , I think we 've done that and then in addition to that , we added a park like type of thing in the middle of the project to — save the stand that happens to be in the middle . And so it worked out quite nice as far as the project is concerned . As far as grading is concerned , we had a number of proposals which would have just about leveler_ the whole site . We now have buildings that we can move up and down and use as walkouts and so basically we don 't perceive that we 'll have to do an extreme amount of grading on the site . There was a concern that we 're just going to have to carry it all the way and put it down Charlie James' and — over to Mr . Burdick 's site but I don 't think we have to do that . So those are the 4 things that we have been trying to be sensitive to and try to meet the particular needs of the neighborhood , the TH 5 corridor , — preserving the trees and providing minimum amount of grading and we 've worked with the staff . To that we 've also introduced a couple of new types of rental units that are not currently being built here but built largely — on the East Coast that take care of that type of site . I 'd like then to introduce Arvid Ellness from Arvid Ellness Associates . We 've brought aboard a firm that 's done 15 ,000 housing units and we perceive they know and are sensitive to both neighborhood and community needs as well as — planning and so Arvid will come up . Introduce part of the project from his point of view and then also Kirk Willette who is the project manager for this will address some of the concerns that we 've heard already from the — neighbors . As we say , as we pick these concerns up , we 're trying to make the changes that are necessary to make it a good project for everybody . Thank you . Arvid . Arvid Ellness: Okay , we will introduce some new information. Some new sketches . Two new perspectives of the for sale unit and a conceptual sketch for the rental unit as well as a site plan that has been revised to — reflect some of the comments of the staff . Brad , in asking me to speak tonight , hoped that I would mention some of my experiences with Chanhassen . We were the architects of the conceptual development of downtown . In the — years past here we did the Park Square building and the Heritage Apartments there and also the professional building , but not the intersection in front of it . The other projects that we 've done throughout the city and other communities have been of all varieties and certainly we 're familiar with — this building type . All Trammel Crow residential communities and the Gates - Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 14 at Carlson Park and Chasewood and Devonshire as well as many other communities . We 're working in about a dozen , 15 communities today . Our work is housing and so we 'd like to invite the input of not only the Planning Commission but the residents and for reasons that we 're at that conceptual stage . Now I 'm going to , if I understand the technology of this room , I ' ll put these two sketches up here . If the camera can find those and focus in on them we 'll give you a little better indication if you watch the monitor . Otherwise I can sort of turn them around too . The idea on the for sale unit is that this is a model that 's basically been a very popular one through the whole metro area . It 's sold real well . It 's patterned after developments that I 've seen in Roseville and many communities and something even somewhat similar down TH 5 here east of Chanhassen . It 's a for sale unit that seems to fit the best on flat site - which gaves us a great deal of difficulty when we tried to consider the possibility of placing on the embankment side of the site . It seems to blend and fit very comfortably on the high end of the site where the topography is relatively even and offers an end view of the highway corridor to the south . They 're relatively attractive from the highway side or the end view and that particular rendering is much more developed and more of a fix in the minds of the developer at this point as to what the product will be . The one that we 're working with as architects and in order to design to fit the topography and to fit this particular site is the rental units and that particular perspective is less developed at this - point but it does reflect an idea that we 're trying to do a unit type in which the , where we can park and keep all the cars on the protected side or internal side of the site and to do what we can do is essentially a split building where there 's a walkout on the downhill side and an approach from the uphill side . Then conceal all the parking within the internal areas of the site . And when we use that type of a unit , which is actually a smaller mass than the for sale unit , we 're able to sort of snake it through the site taking into account that there 's ravines and existing trees and blend it and coordinate it into the site topography much easier and we think very successfully . With the standing trees that exist along the embankment there , we think that that will not only provide a certain amount of shielding to the existing neighborhood but also allow the community to sort of co-exist you might say with the surrounding area . The wetlands that you 've shown up there are primarily on the property of the developer . - Caution and care will be taken to preserve those and work with those as appropriate . The community center is central to the whole community and we hope it will be used not only by the rental community but by the for sale buyers as well . The materials that we 've talked about using on the building will be year round permanent materials . We 've talked about different types of siding from vinyl to metal siding and most of the units _ in fact , probably all of the units have balconies overlooking the ravine for what is visible through the trees . The revisions to the plan which we 'll bring up next , most the work in accommodating the comments that we 've heard so far have been coordinated on this plan that we 're now going to present and Kirk Willette from my office has been working in detail . And they include such things as the alignment of the road and the reduction of the mass of some of the buildings into smaller components as well as actually eliminating 8 of the units that we have shown previously to the staff in order to accommodate the required parking that was brought up in that report . So we 're in the process of evolving this development and this Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 15 plan and we 're trying to take into account the sensitivity that we understand to date . So with that I 'll bring Kirk up . — Ahrens: Which one did you eliminate? Arvid Ellness: We eliminated that upper building . If you could point to it on the overhead , and the new site plan will address it . Yes , that one . We didn't eliminate it . We actually made it two small buildings . I 'll just let Kirk make that adjustment and explanation . — Ahrens : This is your new site plan? Kirk Willette: This is the new site plan , yes . After having some discussion with the staff and then taking the report and understanding some of the comments that the neighbors have from the site , we started working _ with the site and with the individual buildings . The first comment that we had heard about , in speaking with staff was the concern about we have two large buildings . One here and one sitting here . Each 16 units and so we broke those down to 8 unit buildings here and curving around with the trees and topography and then a 12 unit building here . The other thing that that did , that changed the building that sat over here between how this pushed the parking and how the buildings were reconfigured and also the — amount of parking that we , our original parking was 2 to 1 and after our staff meeting , we found that we needed additional guest parking . And so that added approximately 40 cars that we needed to provide . So on all , _ between the parking and reconfiguring this part of the site , we went from 168 units to 160 units of rental . Ahrens : So you just have , it looks like just one building left with 16 — units in it? Kirk Willette: We have one 16 unit building and that 's back on this side . — The other comments that we 've looked at , we did show a trail along Powers on this side . The recommendation was a 60 foot easement instead of 50 feet with the sidewalk on both sides and we can accommodate that along the dedicated street . We 're maintaining all of this area the plan is , the natural curve of the topography and the trees on the south side of the trees , is to maintain that tree line and not do anything north of that tree line other than this trail . So that 's the whole idea of how the whole site— design was originally laid out . Was to keep the tree line and to follow the natural grades on the site . I think that 's it . Ahrens: Okay , do you want to turn that around so people can see it . Kirk Willette : Oh , I 'm sorry . We realigned this road from that original plan so that it . . . Resident: Did you say there was only one 16 unit building? . . .there 's still one way up in the corner like two 16 unit buildings . . . Right there . — Kirk Willette: Those are 12 unit buildings . Ahrens : The only 16 unit building is the one , he 's pointing to it right now . The other ones are 12 units . Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 16 - Kirk Willette : There 's one comment , the 40 foot height that was mentioned . That is the very peak of the roof . The building on the back side would actually be the same as a 3 story house with a walkout . So the height on the back is no different than a two story building . Or two story house that has a walkout . Ahrens: Would anyone else like to address? Brad Johnson: Perhaps you might point out how far the buildings are from the houses to the north . Kirk Willette: From the lot line to any point , this is the nearest point . This is 200 feet from the property line to this point here . Resident: But how close are your buildings actually to the tree line itself? How tight are you bunching yourself into the trees? - Kirk Willette: We 're not going beyond the drip line of the trees . That 's what this represents is the drip line of the trees . So we 're staying outside of that drip line . Resident : By how far is what I 'm asking . Kirk Willette : In some cases in here , we would be up to the drip line . In here we would be up to the drip line . These are pulled back slightly . Resident : And you can do your grading and everything like that without - taking out any of those trees or damaging those trees? Kirk Willette: As long as we stay outside of that drip line . Resident : What 's the drip line? Kirk Willette: That 's how far the trees extend out . Resident : So you 're saying an oak tree of that age , it 's roots would not go out beyond where the drip line is? Kirk Willette: Generally yes . Resident: Generally or they will? Kirk Willette : That 's what landscape architects and landscape designers go by is the drip line . They stay outside of the drip line . Resident: Because I would think trees of that age would have a root system rooting out , especially having . . . Ahrens : Do you want to , we 'll ask for questions . We 'll open this up for a public hearing and if the applicant doesn 't have any more presentation. Do you have any further presentation to make? ( There was a tape change at this point in the discussion . ) Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 17 Randy Swatfager : . . .an apartment that 's got a rental sign up already . Do we need it? That 's the whole thing . And before I get into more questions ,_ we should address that . Ahrens: Okay . I can 't answer that . I don 't know what the rental market is right now in Chanhassen . Brad Johnson: Right now the rental market is zero vacancy . . . Right now a normal city has about 20% to 25% of their units rented . — Randy Swatfager : The units right next to yours have a rental sign that 's been up there for months . Brad Johnson: We have a sign up there at all times . In general . . . Randy Swatfager : But is the other one full? The one you 're going to be — building next to? Brad Johnson couldn 't be heard from the back of the room . Randy Swatfager : So you 're going to draw a population , is not going to be drawn from the Chanhassen population . It 's going to be drawn from the outside to fill these units then? — Brad Johnson: Yes . Ahrens: Okay , anybody else? Tim Anderson: Hi , my name is Tim Anderson . I also live in the Saddlebrook subdivision . The farthest west pond or the end to the north of this project . I have some concerns on the layout of the project . I still , as I understand in proper land use planning is that you go from the most dense development into gradually going into a more less dense development . — Downtown , 78th Street 's going to be , is commercially zoned . I 've believe the next step would be apartments , then a townhouse type units then the R-4 or the single family residential of Saddlebrook . This development does not follow that . It seems like for the convenience of the developer , they 're saying well , we 'll put these units , the townhouse type units are easier to put in on the south end . It makes more sense to me for them to possibly do some redesign on the owner occupied units and put them on the north end . — I 'd feel more comfortable with non-rental property abutting by property . There 's some pride in ownership . I lived in an apartment for a long time . I 'm not against apartments in general but I don't like them abutting single— family residences . As a definition of a PUD , one of the things that a PUD 's supposed to address is a sensitive transitional areas . I think this project does not address that very well . My second point is the trail on _ the north side of the development adjacent to the wetland areas . If you ask the developer or if you have ever walked along or looked at those oak trees , basically the slope of it , those two ponds are artificial ponds . They were developed by constructing berms across a previous wetland and the— water rose and meets a slope that 's from 20% to 30% and if they 're going tc put an 8 foot trail on there , it 's going to cause a cut into the slope and also construction of the retaining walls to stabilize the slopes . There — are oak trees probably within 20 feet of the pond and if they 're planning Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 18 to put those paths between the oak trees and the pond , I think the oak trees are going to lose from what I 've seen of construction around oak trees and other places . So I 'll put it on the record that I 'm against the trail . And I don 't believe it provides any service to the community because there will be two east/west connections between Kerber and Powers Boulevard . One being Saddlebrook Curve which has a sidewalk and second is the street that 's being constructed as part of this project which , as Kate was saying , will have two 6 foot sidewalks on each side of the road which will provide a transportation corridor for bicyclists and pedestrians between the two boulevards . The second item I 'd like to , or third item I 'd like to address is the storm water management of this area . I 'd request it as a condition that the developer and/or the city develop a comprehensive storm water plan for this drainage area . There really is , as I understand there has not been a plan done for this . There was a small plan included in your packet and in the staff report but it was non-conclusive . It really didn 't say anything . And since they 're going to drain 40% of this project into those two ponds , I think that some reconstruction of , let me back up . First of all the two ponds , as I understand it were designed only for the Saddlebrook development . I 've lived in my house for 2 years and the farthest east pond has had the outlot wash out twice in 2 years . The pond I live on , which is part of the west pond , the outlet has plugged 2 or 3 times and has overtopped the berm . So I think this shows that those ponds need first of all some type of more high quality outlet structures to them and I 'd like to see that done before any more water is put in those ponds . And second of all , I do not wish for those ponds to be enlarged in any way , either by raising the berms or by excavation . There 's no room for excavation . If and when the person does plan to go out there so some careful studies are going to have to be required in this area . Also in storm water drainage . I would like to see any outfalls , storm water outfalls conveyed in storm sewer all the way to the ponds or wetlands . To the normal levels so that no erosion occurs along the slope . And also adequate energy disipation in these storm sewers are in place to mitigate any type of erosion that could occur in the ponds . Any . . .suspension of sediment . Because that slope is very steep where those oak trees are . It 's — at 20% , maybe 30% at some points and the slopes should be preserved by proper management and a lot of thought should be put into it before approval is made of this project on this storm water for this site . That 's - all I have to say . Ahrens: Thanks . You brought up some good issues . Do you want to address any of those storm water concerns he had? Krauss: They echo concerns that we 've raised with the applicant . We don 't ask to have all the is dotted and is crossed at this point . We will ask when they ask for any formal approval to do that . Chanhassen we think has a pretty good reputation in the Twin Cities for first of all being one of the first communities to protect wetlands . We were doing it 8 years before - the rest of the State was . And secondly , we 've adopted water quality protection standards that nobody , well Eagan has but virtually nobody else has to date either which we make the development conform to . We 've got similar concerns with the flood balance on those things . There doesn 't seem to be a whole lot of room . They have to engineer the system . We do not allow overland discharge on sites . . . We haven't done that in my memory and we certainly wouldn 't do it on a hill like that . Plus , when we have Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 19 pipe discharges over a hill like that , we 'll make sure that the pipe is sized in such a way that they don 't take out a corridor of trees to do it which is the other part of . . . So while we have raised all these questions - to the applicant , they 're aware of the concerns . We don 't have any questions yet . I mean we 're pretty confident they can be handled . The City . . .requires mandates that you deal with your water quality and water - storage issues on the site . So they have that obligation . Tim Anderson : And . . .trail itself and an 8 foot trail can be wide . . . Krauss: That is true . I mean we don 't want to sound like we punt on some issues but recreational aspects of the project are really sort of under their purview and they are going to discuss that . Ahrens: They haven 't looked at this proposal yet? Krauss: No . And a lot of trails that they 've been putting in are not necessarily asphalt trails . . . They 're valid concerns certainly and they 're certainly going to be considered by the Park Board and we 'd encourage you to . . . Ahrens: Anyone else like to come up to the podium? Joe Perttu : Hello . My name is Joe Perttu and I live across from the development here on Santa Vera and Kerber at 790 and I 'm concerned about the road that goes from Powers Blvd . over to Kerber and then straight back - to , I believe it 's Laredo . I believe that this is a convenient way for people to cut across . Ahrens: Which road are you talking about? - Joe Perttu : There 's a road that goes . Aanenson: Santa Vera would be this street . Joe Perttu: Yeah , this would be Santa Vera . It goes to Santa Vera and then you can take Santa Vera back to Laredo . Krauss : The north end of the city . . . Joe Perttu : Right . Right . I 'm concerned about the ease of access . While the amount of transportation that can get , conveniently get through this development and then past my house . I 'd like that to be taken into consideration and rerouting that road so that it does not come up to Santa Vera because I 'm concerned about the traffic and ease of getting from Powers Blvd . over to Kerber and then back into the Chanhassen development via Santa Vera . '- Emmings: What would you propose? Joe Perttu: The initial plan talked about putting the road I think down by that 12 unit development . Yeah right there . Emmings: Okay . You 'd prefer that option? - Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 20 Joe Perttu: I would prefer that option . If not , ,some serious speed bumps or something like that so that people can 't be racing through there . Farmakes: If they were going past your place , where would they be going to? Joe Perttu : There 's the , you can take Santa Vera back into Laredo and then from Laredo you can get back to anywhere in Chanhassen and back of Lotus Lake . Farmakes: So you 're saying that 's a shortcut to TH 101 or what? Joe Perttu : Well I 'm saying that there 's plenty of people that live back there and I 'm saying that if they drive this way , they can conveniently pass through this area and back into the back of Chanhassen by and back of Lotus Lake . Farmakes : So are you saying that the people from the development would be driving towards Lotus Lake or people living around Lotus Lake would be driving away from Lotus Lake past your place? Joe Perttu : Both . Ahrens: Well this side is likely to develop some way or another and it 's highly likely that they 'll have increased traffic one way or another by your house . Joe Perttu : Well not if they place the road where they 're intending to right now . Ahrens : But that would impact those oak trees there right? If they put the road down there . Krauss: Yeah . There are some sort of signature oak trees there that , you know maybe there 's a way around it . One of the things that we 've been looking at on this project . Frankly , this is something that didn 't come to mind when we were . . .but we were going to ask the applicant to check in to have the city 's traffic consultant do some detailed design and traffic analysis on the Powers Blvd . curb cut . They 're familiar with the traffic flow in and around Chanhassen and I think they could probably tell us if they feel it 's a concern that 's valid or not . What they do is do an analysis of what 's the quickest way to get . . .would short circuit the neighborhood . Joe Perttu: Well , rather than going down CR 17 or Powers Blvd . and then , or going around it , I think going back into the downtown and then taking Kerber Blvd . back where the intended traffic flow is supposed to be , I think somebody could make a convenient short cut right across this development . Right up Santa Vera and into Laredo . And if I 'm not mistaken , there 's paths back on Santa Vera that go directly to the school . It 's an intended walkway for kids back to the school and it 's going to increase traffic in that area and I think it should be taken into consideration . Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 21 Ahrens: Okay , thank you . Anyone else like to address the Commission at this time? Dave Callister : My name is Dave Callister and I live at 7540 Canyon Curve . I 've got a number of comments and a few questions or clarifications on this particular proposal . The main issue , and a lot of these have been brought — forward but I 'd like to emphasize these again . The concern with the height of the proposal and I guess I want to clarify . In the staff report it says 30 . It says the top or the peak was 40 so what is the real height of that? Aanenson: From the average rate it 'd be 35 feet . That would be the high and the low end . Krauss: If I could clarify that . City ordinance defines building height different than the peak . It 's kind of the mid point on the roof but I think the architect 's indication that from the back it 's no different than — a two story walkout house . Dave Callister : But what we have to look at is 40 feet high? At the — highest part . Krauss: Which you 'd look at with a single . Dave Callister : Which is what the neighborhood would look at? Okay . Obviously screening is going to be something that , as we go along in the process , that 's going to be a concern to many of us . Screening with — regards to the buildings and screening with regards to lighting , car lights, parking lots , that sort of thing . I think those things will have to be addressed on this particular proposal . — Ahrens: That 's in our packet . The city 's concerned about that also . Dave Callister : Also , I want to clear up some , maybe some misconception or— something on the part of some of these drawings here . I don 't know if you can get a good picture . If you take a look at this drawing . There 's a substantial stand of oak trees that is located in green right here . I — don 't think it 's accurately reflected on this map . I 've taken a snap shot right out my back yard and as you 'll see , there 's not a substantial stand of trees there . So that . . .concern and I guess I 'd like to see that updated . — Farmakes: Where would that be on the map? Dave Callister : That would be , my back yard is right here . So it 'd be going this way . Ahrens: I guess I don't understand . You 're saying that they 're showing too many trees? Dave Callister : Well they 're showing a solid block of trees and what I 'm — saying is , they 're not solid black . Ahrens: So this goes back to your concern about screening? — _ Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 22 - Dave Callister : Screening . Adequate screening in that particular area and that should be reflected in the plan . Ahrens: Okay . We can 't see you anymore . Dave Callister : The other one , I just had a question and I know the topography is awful steep on the south side of the site . Has there been any investigation about accessing 78th Street? Krauss: Not specifically with this plan . From time to time that 's been - looked at . There 's a pretty substantial grade change coming down there . We 're also looking at a commercial site . I mean 78th Street is essentially downtown out to Powers Blvd . and the similar concern that you have with , you know or that people have with multi-family traffic or high density traffic coming through a single family neighborhood . We also share the concern of having commercial traffic coming through this neighborhood and we 're concerned that if we did that , that would be the results . There 's also not a real good place to drop down on 78th Street . All that land is privately owned and there 's no way . - Dave Callister : So as of now that does not look like that 's feasible? Krauss: No . We don 't even think so . We looked at it about a year ago . Dave Callister : Okay . Another concern would be the possibility , the project is phased over 4 years and I think a concern of myself as well as other residents in that area is 4 straight years of construction . I know I - hear from my house right now I hear the grocery story and shopping center . I hear the construction equipment from there and that 's quite a ways away . So I guess that would be a concern too and I don 't know what can be done to _ mitigate the dust or the noise but I think that that has to be taken into consideration as well . Ahrens: Paul , did you want to address that? Krauss : Well yeah . It is a valid concern . I don 't think you can do a whole lot about the beeping of the trucks as they back up but we could do things to respond to that in terms of establishing hours of operation that they can work . We could require that they install a little landscaping in the first phase so it is started growing before that phase is built . And _ as far as dust control goes , we can certainly put conditions in there . Require watering of the site and whatever else to keep that . . . Dave Callister : I guess I would be in favor of getting the landscaping in immediately so that could be taken care of . The last concern I have here and it 's been touched on a little bit but I 'd like to touch on it a little bit more . It 's the walking path that leads nowhere . We 've got sidewalks , - two sidewalks on the new road. We 've got , as mentioned before , Saddlebrook Curve that goes across there . We're going to have a walking path on the east side of Powers Blvd . which I have no problem with . I do think trails _ are important but just like everything else , I think they need to be done in moderation . I think that you can 't cross every wetland or every wildlife area with a path because you 're placing an impervious surface there . You 're relocating wildlife because there 's definitely going to be a Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 23 lot of traffic , foot , bike , everything going through there and you 're going to displace a lot of wildlife and it 's just not , I don 't believe we should _ have paths put everywhere . I think as referring to , I think it 's page 6 of the staff memo , under landscaping and tree preservation . The second paragraph beginning with the northern portion . It says the northern portion of the site which includes the storm water ponds and the wetlands — should be left in it 's natural state . I agree 100% with that comment . In addition , on page 8 , under planned unit developments are to encourage the following . Preservation of desireable site characteristics and open space — and protection of sensitive environmental features including steep slopes , mature trees , creeks , wetlands , lakes , and scenic views . I would like to see that the development is looked at in those particular areas . Farmakes : Can I ask a question? Dave Callister : Sure . — Farmakes: Do you own the property that 's adjacent to the pond area or the slope area? Dave Callister : Right . Farmakes: Were you aware when you purchased the home of what the opposing — property was zoned? Dave Callister : Yes . — Ahrens: Thank you . Would anyone else like to address the Commission? Greg Hrometka : My name is Greg Hrometka . I live at 7580 Canyon Curve . It would be the lot at the very top of the proposal there . Not touching the pond but right adjacent with the area . We bump into Kerber as well as Saddlebrook . Or Canyon Curve . What I 'd like to understand is just the — clarification , this natural . What 's the definition of a park? Does that have to be developed with swings or just a natural area? Is that also a park consideration? Aanenson: I 'm not sure what you 're asking . Greg Hrometka : What is the definition of a parkland? — Ahrens: I think what he 's asking is when we identify, and correct me if I 'm wrong . We identified the property as parkland, do we automatically see— that as a developed , ballpark? Aanenson: No . We saw that on Stone Creek . We did a subdivision just recently where we left it natural . There 's a bluff area and passive . Greg Hrometka : Okay . That brings me back then to something I heard in the issue before this . This gentleman over here talked about the truth . I — know when we purchased , we had the understanding that there was land purchased directly to the south of us which involves the trees , the bluff , and that area there that was in the process or was going to be designated as parkland . Land was purchased for the purpose of being park and park as Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 24 I see as a natural habitat . Can be now . So I just want to know that people all bought in this area with that truth being known . That I assume most people did you know that this land to our south was for that . The other thing would be then , and related to that too is the need then of this volume of space and buildings . I guess Mr . Johnson 's figures for the occupancy of rental space needed , I don 't see , I would like to see the need , if it could be scaled down to still incorporate the truth of having - this parkland that was here . There 's an area that 's on the board , the triangle space . . .that encompasses right here you know. That 's the main area of my concern solely all the way through . You know . I mean do they need to put more rental units in that area or they could scale it down . There 's all the factors with the congestion for schools , etc . that you 've heard and are going to hear . That 's the issue thing . And on an emotionally charged thing , we received last week notification from the Lotus Realty that stated the number of units and a map of the area involved . Without being too pointed , I think there 's , this form that you all had . This area , this triangle is not addressed at all . Three 16 - units . Nine 8 unit owner occupied . This just seems like total deception I think in a way of swaying or disswaying the public to showing up and expressing their concerns . That 's all . Do you understand? Resident : I think what he 's trying to say , the realty company did not . . . Aanenson : The staff put that notice out so he had nothing to do with that . - The Planning Department secretary put that out and it was an error . Resident : It doesn 't matter who put it out right? I mean that 's just a - message that . . . Greg Hrometka : I think if it were more clear , you 'd have more people here voicing their disapproval . Resident : It only shows half the units . . . - Aanenson : It gives the total unit count doesn 't it? Greg Hrometka : No . Resident : Three 16 units . That 's 48 . 9 x 8 , that 's 72 . 48 and 72 . Resident : Plus , it . . .third of the property too . Emmings: Well , there will be another public hearing . Aanenson : Yes , there will . Krauss: Certainly this is , again . This is not the official public _ hearing . There 's another notice that goes out when that happens . We also require posting of signs on the property . There 's also notices in the newspaper . We also mail notice to everybody within 500 feet . Obviously it 's not a perfect system and it needs to be refined but we do our best to - notify everybody of everything that 's going on . Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 25 Ahrens: This isn 't the last time we 'll see it either . This is , this plan is going to change 100 times before it 's finalized I 'm sure . Those of you — concerned with the trails and the parks , I suggest that you attend the Park and Rec Commission meetings when they review this proposal . They haven 't looked at any of this yet . — Resident : Will there be a mailer on that? Ahrens: I don 't know . Paul , will there be a mailing on the Park and Rec "- Commission? Aanenson: I can tell you the date right now . It 's July 28th. — Ahrens: July 28th . • Krauss: Actually , I think they . . .doing that about a year ago . When is that? Aanenson: July 28th . — Resident: Can we request a mailing on that? Aanenson: Certainly . Ahrens : It 's also in the Villager . Resident : Yeah but the Villager . . . Krauss : Yeah , we ' ll get the notice out . — Mike Henke : My name is Mike Henke . I live down on Canyon Curve also . The gentleman on the end , when he asked if were we aware what that was zoned on_ the other side of this? I believe yes , we all were but I believe we were all told the wetlands and the hillside would stay as they were with nothing ever happening to them . The only construction that would ever take place is on the other side of these trees . . . — Farmakes: When you 're referring , we were told . Are you talking about the developer? The realty agent who was selling . — Mike Henke: My realtor . . . Farmakes: The City? So you came in and talked to the City . ( There was a tape change at this point in the discussion . ) Ahrens : As Steve 's pointing out , there 's no development except for the possibility of a trail on the other side of the oak trees . Farmakes : So you 're referring to the trail itself? Ahrens : Alright . Would anyone else like to address the Commission? Otherwise we ' ll close the public hearing . . — Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 26 Christy Kuckler : I 'd like to read my letter . Ahrens: I think we have your letter . Are you . Christy Kuckler : Christy Kuckler . Dear Kate Aanenson . My name is Christy Kuckler . I 'm 9 years old and I am writing to you because I am worried about where you 're going to put the apartments . I live right next to the - Oak Hill Ponds . We see deer almost every night and we think they live in the prickles ash bush . There is a doe and a fawn . If you put the apartments there , they will die because you might cut down the food they eat and that might be the last of the food . I do not like where you are going to put them because I don't like other kids on my property unless I know them and I am with them and I think I speak for my neighbors too . Do you know that old farm? Why can't you knock it down and put the apartments - there because there is plenty of room for them to build there . If you were a fawn , I don 't think you would like it if some big giant came and picked up your house and moved it 3 miles away from where you lived so that he could live there and put in a store . Sincerely, Christy Kuckler . Ahrens : Christy . This is a great letter and you did something very important tonight by coming here and telling us all about your concerns . Thank you . Jack Thien: Hi . My name is Jack Thien and I live at 7570 Canyon Curve . One of the things I wanted to bring up was that prior to my wife and I purchasing the land that we now own , we asked around and I did not go to the City itself to ask what was going to be done behind there but I was told by a couple realtors , one of which is my friend , that it was designated as parkland area and that there would not be any building up there on that hill , particularly where that wedge is here . Ahrens : Can I stop you just a second? Jack Thien: Yeah . Ahrens: I don 't think there is going to be any development on that hill . Jack Thien: There isn't? Residents: Three buildings . - Ahrens : Okay . I thought you meant on the north of the oaks . Resident : No . There 's 5 buildings in this triangle section . Jack Thien: Yeah . And my land or my house faces directly in that direction and I 'll have , actually out of my deck I 'll be staring at two large buildings that will be facing there and there will not be any large oak trees to screen those two large buildings . Another thing I could probably bring up right now too is that when I first got this notice , perhaps not unlike some of the other people here , looking at this where it - says Chanhassen Park , it is difficult to see that there 's a little arrow there that points to the park across Kerber . And when I read three 16 unit rental buildings and nine 8 unit owner occupied , I thought well you know Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 27 it 's not any real big deal . I already had plans for another meeting tonight somewhere else but when we got to talking to some of the other — neighbors and some of the agenda that was to follow , I think it is a big deal . That 's why I 'm here tonight . I don 't know if anybody here can address some of these questions I might have but on page 3 , second paragraph where it starts . The second major deviation comes in the area of park dedication . The original Cenvesco proposal did not incorporate public park dedication . However , during the course of the review , the Park and Recreation Commission ultimately determined that park dedication would be — appropriate and additional land was acquired for that particular purpose . And it goes on to say that it covers approximately 3 acres located in the northern edge of the Oak Ponds/Oak Hill project area . A little further — down it says , in lieu of this the City would be perhaps accepting a cash dedication as opposed to that parkland . I personally am opposed to that . I don 't know how other people feel about that in here but I think in the future , in the next meeting you ' ll probably hear more about that . — Aanenson: Can we give some clarification on that issue? Ahrens : Yeah . Could I just also say that , this Commission , we don 't deal with the park dedication . That 's something the Park and Recreation Commission . We 're different unions . Jack Thien: No , I understand that but I 'm saying , that 's my concern is that originally it looked at though this was going to be purchased as park , or was purchased as parkland area and that 's where the assumption that when I , before I moved in here , when I talked to people , that was the assumption that that was going to be left parkland area and there was not going to be any buildings there . Had I known that , I probably would not be here — tonight talking about this or owning that particular piece of property which I paid a great deal of money for . Ahrens: Okay . I think Paul wants to address your concern here . — Krauss : Yeah , I think we need to set the record straight . Three years ago there was a series of proposals by a different developer for what was — frankly a pretty bad project . That project had apartment buildings with drive under garages . Your typical 3 story apartment building. They had buildings that were much larger than this . The ones being proposed here — and it flatten most of the trees on the site . At that time , on that proposal , the City was going to take parkland dedication in the area that you outlined . In fact , we included that in the packet . This project was never approved and we don 't typically buy the property . We get it for free on the platting process . We never got it because the project died . But it was a horrendous project that was , yes . It had park but it trashed the site at the same time . This is a different project . It 's at a lower — density . It 's providing private recreational facilities in terms of a pool and a totlot and a community building that the other one never even thought of . It 's saving all the oak trees on the site which I think is everybody 's_ mutual goal . And you know , if the Park Board agrees to it , it 's going to pump $150 ,000 .00 into the park fund to develop parks that are used by the neighborhoods . This is , whether or not this park here is ultimately the Park Board 's call but they note that this area is in the service area of 5 — city parks . Now the city can always take another park if it so chooses but Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 28 again , it was never approved . We never got the property and it was a horrendous project that it was associated with and I don 't think you would have been any too comfortable with it had that taken place . - Jack Thien: Well and I also probably would not have purchased the land in that case either because that would have been prior to me . Krauss: Right . But when your realtor friend told you about the park , he should have also told you that that was the project it was associated with because that was on the drawing board at that time . Jack Thien: Yeah . Well you know, it 's interesting because some of the things I 've had to work with the city about , talking to some of the staff that I wish I would have gotten a few more things in writing. And there is - one question that arises to me now . Perhaps I can ask Kate . I don't know . I had talked to you yesterday . Called you on the phone about designating or that particular two ponds being part of the wetlands . Can you address that at this time? Aanenson: It 's a really complicated issue . We do have a storm water management committee and we 're relooking at the way we 've classified wetlands in the past . In the past when we 've required that a retention be built , even though it was not historically a wetland , it may take on wetland characteristics . Therefore , we called it a wetland . I think it 's been brought up in the discussion today . Those ponds were created to hold water . Storm retention ponds . It 's my understanding that we 've treated those as wetlands and told people they have to maintain that 75 foot setback and I think I told you that we 're in the process of relooking at how we classify wetlands . We 're rewriting our whole wetland ordinance . And as far as what we call ponds , we may treat differently than what we classify as wetlands and that kind of plays into that . Jack Thien: Okay , so right now it is or isn 't a wetlands? — Krauss : Right now they are . Ahrens: You mean tonight? • - Krauss: Actually , I mean this is the same situation as it is in Curry Farms . What you had there is you have an area that is legitimately a wetland and undoubtedly would be qualified as a wetland under the new City ordinance and under State law . Then you have these two ponds which were constructed in the low areas but they were constructed with a specific purpose of ponding storm water . The fact of the matter is , you pond storm water long enough , cattails grow up and you can interpret that as being a wetland and that 's what the City Council did at that time . Our staff opinion , because that 's all it is right now and the opinion of the committee that 's working on the ordinance , is that puts a pretty severe hit on the property owners in terms of setback requirements and probably is not appropriate . But that is what we 're looking at putting through in the new ordinance which has not been adopted yet . So right now , yes . It is still - defined as a wetland . Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 29 Aanenson: And the reason is , probably for the same reason you maybe have called the City is the people that build next to storm retention ponds have- the problem with the 75 foot setback . When they go to put a deck on or those sort of issues . And some of you may have had that experience so that 's why we 're trying to separate ponds from wetlands . So people that do want to put decks on or swimming pool aren 't faced with that burden of maintaining the 75 foot setback . Jack Thien : Okay . Resident: So it all just depends . . .when you decide to buy land . . . Krauss: This is an ordinance that 's been in place for 8 years and it hasn 't changed during that time . Emmings: But he 's right . Definitions of things do change and have changec and they change pretty dynamically here because we 're a rapidly growing community . But you 're right . Things not only change from day to day but they go back and forth . I 've been here long enough to have seen things go :- be called something this year . Something else next year and go back to this a year later . It 's very dynamic . It may not make sense but that 's the way it 's going . _ Resident: And you can justify that? Emmings: I don 't have to justify that . I 'm telling you that's what it is :- We do the best job we can at the time and we get more information. We get different problems and we could take a position that gee , we made this decision . Let 's stick with it forever . Or we can say , in light of new information , we 've got to change what we did . It was wrong so we change . Jack Thien: Okay , if I can continue . We had a short meeting last night _ and some of the concerns that were brought up , one thing was the increased traffic near the school . And if anybody can explain to me what this TIF is that 's in the proposal? Krauss: Well I can do that . TIF is an acronym for Tax Increment Financing . The city has several tax increment financing districts . It 's a tool that communities use to induce , either induce development to occur or get better_ quality development compared to what we would have gotten otherwise . It allows you to do things like build streets and utilities and absorb some of those costs . The applicant has indicated that he intends to apply to the Housing and Redevelopment Authority. That 's who administers the program - for financing support . Underneath that , there have been no discussions or commitments or anything that 's taken place on that score and frankly the HRA hasn 't seen it yet so that 's something that the applicant 's going to - have to make a pitch for in front of them. It was used on the other apartment project . It is being used on Market Square . It 's being used in the industrial parks . _ Jack Thien: Who does that particular , I 'll say help out or benefit? Krauss : Well it does a couple things . First of all it 's predicated, well I could digress a little bit about what it 's supposed to do . If you have a Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 30 site that 's generating $100 .00 in taxes a year and if you put a development, like development X and it 's going to generate $1 ,000 .00 in taxes a year , you 've got an increment of $900 .00 a year . So the City's getting more tax revenue off the site . The TIF program , as allowed by the State , lets you take the revenue , sell bonds and do improvements . Now the improvements are supposed to, well there 's a whole list of things that you can do with it but you can promote employment . You can promote housing diversity . You can take care of hazardous waste . You can build utilities . Those kinds of things . The City has also been using tax increment financing to demand better quality development than we might otherwise be able to get . I mean our City ordinances establish a lot of minimum criteria and the TIF financing allows the city to demand going the extra mile beyond the ordinance . Again , it 's not in any way a done deal . The HRA doesn 't even know about it yet and we , I mean staff has not talked to them about it . We haven 't had sets of conversation . Ahrens: Just a concept . Krauss : Right . Jack Thien: Another issue that was brought up last night was , if anyone might want to make a comment on the decrease in the property values because of rental units being so close to the Saddlebrook subdivision . Ahrens : I certainly can 't address that tonight and I don 't think anyone can . The County Auditor would have to come in and he wouldn 't have an answer either . Krauss : No , it 's a very , obviously a very emotional subject . I mean I 've seen most of the data that I 've seen says , it doesn 't make any difference in the long run . But you know, it wouldn't be , if this project was built 3 years ago before the homes were built down below, it wouldn 't be an issue . I 'm not sure how to address it . Resident : No . If this would have been done 3 years ago , that would all be parkland there . We 'd still be looking at natural habitat or parkland . We wouldn 't be looking at apartment buildings . . . Krauss: Well depending , I don't know how the site plan would have laid out but you would have been looking at a higher density development . Resident : It wouldn 't be on top of the hill . Krauss: It is up on top of the hill . Resident: No . There are 5 buildings . . . Those are the 5 buildings that . . . Resident : Paul , I 'd like to invite you to my home to look out of that window so you can see exactly what we will be looking at because it 's very . . . Krauss: Well we 'd sure take you up on that . I know that Kate and I are both in the neighborhood a lot and sort of walk back there . Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 31 Emmings: They like cookies so you 've got to offer them that . Resident: Another thing I was going to mention is that these 40 feet tall structures are going to be put on a hill at a rist of at least 30 or 40 feet high so it 's not 30-40 feet . It 's going to be 60 to 80 feet above our property . That 's definitely going to be a wall . — Resident : There 's a big difference between a two story walkout home and . . . Ahrens: If you 'd like to address the Commission , come up to the podium anc give your name . So she can have it for the record . You have the floor , do you want to continue . Jack Thien: One thing I do want to mention about being so close to the twc ponds . I think it was a week and a half or even 2 weeks ago that we had a rather large storm that came through and it rained quite a bit . I just — want to kind of reiterate that when that water does come through , it does not only come through like off the street and into the pond . It also comes from the somewhat impervious surfaces . Whether it 's got grass or weeds or _ whatever might be on there and it filled up that pond in a hurry and it went up above the large outlet pipe . Okay . And in particular it has done that more recently since that one berm that was moved back towards Kerber a little bit closer . There was more water that rushes down through there and— there 's a sizeable gully is starting in my backyard already from that . So I hope that you take that into further consideration also . Ahrens: I think Kate and Paul said earlier that that 's something they 're going to be studying . Jack Thien : I don 't know , I 'd like to invite anybody else that has a comment up here . I mean it 's scarey but come on up . Ahrens : We 're not so scarey . Does anyone have anything different or — additional or that we haven 't discussed yet tonight? Cindy Hrometka : Hi . My name is Cindy Hrometka . I live at 7580 Canyon Curve . I just have one thing I want to point out . In 1989 there. was a proposal on the table and we 've got copies of that too and I know there were a number , a list of major concerns with that proposal and I 'd like to go through a couple of them and kind of address them . The first one was — density . In the old proposal there was , it was going to be 200 units at a density of 9 .6 units per acre . The new proposal is 240 units with a density of 11 .5 units per acre . So the density has increased . It has not — decreased so that concern is still there . If it was a concern then , I wonder why it 's not now . I think it should be . The next one was impervious surface . The old proposal had an impervious surface , average or, whatever , of 35% . The new proposal has an impervious surface of 38% and that 's before you increase the road . Before you add sidewalks . Before you increase the parking so the impervious surface is going to go up more than 38% . So I 'd like to know why , if that was a big concern then and this proposal didn 't go through , it should still be a concern now and I think we should continue to look at it . The other one , the next concern on their list was parkland . And the old proposal did dedicate that 5 acres for — parkland . This proposal doesn 't dedicate any parkland . They do have a Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 32 totlot that 's going to be used by the residents but it doesn 't dedicate any other parkland so I 'm concerned about that . Access points off of their lane , that 's all different so I can 't address that . I don 't know if it 's better or worse . Emergency access , I don 't know if that 's better or worse . The landscaping does appear to be better in this proposal but it 's hard to tell because we don 't know what size those trees are they 're going to be putting in . And the oak stand that they 're talking about , I am concerned about how many of those oaks will survive the construction . You know you say the drip line is going to protect them . As long as you 're outside the drip line but it is a concern that those oak trees will stay there . The - old proposal also , if you 'll notice , did keep that whole oak stand . The dark green oak stand that they have been discussing . The old proposal got rid of most of the oak trees up on top of the hill . So it lost 11 of the trees that this one 's keeping . This is better obviously but the oak stand remained in that old proposal so it 's not like they were going to come in and get rid of everything and then start from scratch . And the concept plans . These look like nice buildings but I can 't compare the concept plan to the old one or the new one . My concern is , I don 't think this proposal is that much better and in many cases it 's worse than the old one . The old one got shot down and there was many comments throughout here that staff didn 't like it and that there 's no reason to give any kind of leeway to the developer because the plan was not good . If that plan wasn 't good , I don 't think this one is either . Ahrens: I think the biggest difference was that the old plan had large apartment buildings of 30 units apiece or something . - Krauss : Well actually , I can 't read my , it was a 60 or 90 unit building so that was , where you see that big green swath over there , that apartment building sat at the bottom of that . Cindy Hrometka : According to the map , I think it showed that the apartment building was going to be up on top and that would come . . . Krauss : No . No . Cindy Hrometka : That 's the one I 'm looking at . The apartment building 's - up here and that was . . . the rest of this was townhome . I don 't think the old one was a good plan either and I 'm not advocating that plan except that that plan did stay up on top of the hill and I think for all the residents of Saddlebrook , as long as the development took place on top of the hill , behind the oak trees we would not have as big a concern . But since it 's coming down the hill right into our backyards , it 's a big concern for us and I 'd like to see some of those things addressed because they were problems then . I think they should be now . I would like to go on the record with the tax increment financing . I know it sounds like you guys don 't address that but I don 't see why we should have to have our real estate taxes paying for land improvements for something that we probably , I don 't think Chanhassen , being the growing community we are , that we need to provide tax increment financing to attract people here . Obviously we 're growing and that 's going to happen . That 's something we can probably address with the HRA but I can 't see why we should be giving tax increment financing for this . It looks like , this will provide , bring in 500 more people is kind of the guidelines that I 've been hearing and what we Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 33 figured . So I am concerned that there 's that many people in such a dense number of people in that small area . Which brings me to a third point here . The school is right across the street from this area and if you have— 500 additional people in this small area , you 're going to have a big increase in traffic and I think some other people did address that but that 's going to be a big concern with our kids walking to and from school . — There 's going to be a big , busy intersection and there 's going to be a lot more traffic and a lot of kids going to and from school . Everybody in this development I 'm sure will walk to school so we 're going to have a problem with getting across Kerber and across this new intersection that they 're — talking about . So I 'm concerned about that and I 'd like to have that on record . That that is, I think will be a problem . I think that 's it . Ahrens: Okay , thank you . Anybody else? Is there a motion to close the public hearing? Diane Bohara : Hi . My name is Diane Bohara . I live at 7510 Canyon Curve and my husband and I have lived in the area , it will be 3 years this fall and our house was built and lived in prior to us living there . But it was touched on the times for building . The time restrictions . Eckankar is — directly behind our house and while it 's a nice area . It 's a very nice building and everything . Nobody knocks on my door . Nobody bothers me now that it 's in . When it was going in , it was a real hassle for us . They — would start with bulldozers , earthmovers at 5: 00 in the morning and while I didn 't mind that so much during the week , it really bothered me on the weekend and being there was no restrictions , the police could not do _ anything the couple weekends I called , until I called and harrassed the city . And I don 't want to have to deal with that again . Ahrens: We do have an ordinance that says that the construction has to take place Monday thru Saturday between the hours of 7:00 and 5:00? Aanenson: I 'm not sure if it 's 6:00 or 7 :00 . _ Ahrens : I 'm living right now across the street from a large construction project and I monitor that very closely . As a matter of fact , this morning there were trucks out there at 6:00 a .m . but that 's something I 'll take up — with the city later . But I agree with you but there is an ordinance on our books that does regulate that . Cindy Hrometka : Okay . Well , thank you . Ahrens : Anyone else? Randy Swatfager : I was the first one up so , if you remember me . I think with all the experience of the Planning Director and the vast experience in the back of the room here , addressing this property values should have , I — mean in your past experience , what has it done to the property values adjoining your developments? Brad Johnson: Property values? Randy Swatfager : Yes . The private homes . Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 34 - Brad Johnson: Historically it 's remained the same . Randy Swatfager : Historically? I mean just lately or? Brad Johnson: Again , I 'm also a realtor . . .significant decrease in any properties . Randy Swatfager : What 's significant? Brad Johnson: 5% . Randy Swatfager : 5% of $150 ,000 .00 home? Brad Johnson: I 'm just saying , I don 't think . . .I can 't say . You 're welcome to look . . .but I 'm just saying . . . Randy Swatfager : Well I 'm just looking for a general . Brad Johnson : . . .any realtor that in general , a well planned project . Your lot , . . .aware from the very beginning that there would be a high density project . . . Randy Swatfager : Would there be a reassessment if , taken into consideration at 5%? Ahrens: He doesn 't have any idea . - Randy Swatfager : I 'm just asking on his past experience with his developments . Ahrens: He wouldn 't have any idea , yeah . You 'd have to call the County Auditor . What 's his name? Aanenson: Assessor? Krauss: Orlin Schafer . - Ahrens: Orlin Schafer . Randy Swatfager : How about the planners? Do they have any past experience with this situation? Krauss: Well again , I mean what Brad 's told you I 've heard throughout the years . That it doesn 't have any substantial effect . I know you 're not going to believe me and I don 't have any data to show you but that 's what I 've heard and that 's over the course of 15 years . Now if you happen to " share an alley with a lousy apartment project in South Minneapolis , yeah . You 've got a serious problem . Randy Swatfager : The only way we 're going to find that out is when we sell our home , is that right? Krauss : There 's an apartment development in downtown Chanhassen that backs up to single family homes . I don 't know that it 's had any impact . I 've Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 35 certainly never heard of any . Randy Swatfager : Will there be study done on that? — Krauss: No . It 's impossible to do one . How can you do a study of something that hasn 't existed yet? I don 't know Brad , if the realtor 's — association has ever done anything like that but I 'm not even aware how you 'd come by the data . Brad Johnson: You 're talking about value and assessed valuation . The assessed valuation is based upon the next sale in the neighborhood . Randy Swatfager : Exactly . So we won 't find out until after these sales . — Brad Johnson: . . .that particular issue . . .when we did all of downtown . You guys probably don 't remember downtown used to look like . Home value have — actually gone up . . .because we did a nice job . . . Randy Swatfager : According to your calcuations and according to you . Brad Johnson: No . . . Randy Swatfager : I guess that 's what we want to maintain here so we 're — just looking for a little foresight from everybody . Brad Johnson: I live here . . . — Randy Swatfager : . . . I 'd just like to invite the Planning Commission . . .and it looks like one up there . Like I said , it 's going to be very emotional and being part of it , it 's going to continue on so I 'd just invite you comE— down and actually take a look at it , if you haven 't . Anybody involved , I 'rt sure they have . I don 't know if the Planning Commission has . Ahrens: I 've seen it . Farmakes : I 've driven by it for maybe 12-13 years . Randy Swatfager : Does it look like that? Farmakes : Does it look like that? — Ahrens: Well that looks like a leech . Farmakes : No , I 'd say the density ground cover is probably a little bit less than what it 's showing there but that 's an artist 's interpretation . It 's probably made from an overhead aerial view which sometimes when they 're shooting the pictures , the shadows on the tree get a little hard tc— discern where the shadow is and where the tree starts . It 's a heavily forested area as far as what the City terms as heavily forested . And a lot of the underlying brush was all beat out at one time . Eat out or whatever — because a farmer used to run cows through there . The cows used to come in before they put all that berming in there and actually come underneath the road there in the culvert pipe and they pretty much , they were like — lawnmowers . Pretty much eat out everything underneath there but it 's kind Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 36 of grown back in the past a little bit and it 's a nice stand of trees . There 's no doubt about it . Randy Swatfager : Okay , thank you . Ahrens: Thanks . Okay , anybody else? - Shelly Geske: My name is Shelly Geske and we 're currently building on 7530 Canyon Curve . We 're not even in our new home yet . My question is , the area that you 're proposing to develop , who now owns that land? Is it privately held? It is . What about on the north side? The big slope and down into the pond . Does the City of Chanhassen own that land or that is also privately held? - Brad Johnson: Take a good look at the map . We own , or the partnership owns all of this . The wetlands , most of the water . . .property that we currently use . . .as they pointed out , because they classified it as - wetlands , the developer who 's involved in the project agreed with the City that this would be a non-developable pond . . . I guess the trail . . .that 's my idea . Because I run through there and I always wanted to run along that creek . I 'm not saying that 's a good idea . . . Shelly Geske : But certainly you can understand our feeling as far as that hill is concerned . I didn 't say that you did have a problem with it . I 'm just pointing this out . Brad Johnson: Right now . . .an issue I don 't think the developer . . . Shelly Geske : How long , since as of what date have you owned that particular property? Brad Johnson: That property there? Shelly Geske : Yeah . Brad Johnson: The group has owned it for 4 years . Shelly Geske: Now I can say that when I bought that lot , we bought it from an older couple that had purchased it several years . Well we actually bought the lot in 1990 from an older gentleman . Farmakes : The lot at your home? Shelly Geske : The lot that we are currently under construction with . And - I did call the City of Chanhassen . In fact I came into City Hall and I believe that I spoke with Kate . I walked into someone 's office and I said , well can you tell me who owns that particular grove of trees and down into _ the wetland areas and it was my understanding that the City of Chanhassen owned that area . Now am I wrong? Ahrens: You 're wrong . Shelly Geske : Okay . Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 37 Ahrens: You may have been given that impression because there wouldn 't be any development in a wetland area . Shelly Geske: Yeah , I mean I was under the impression that the City of Chanhassen owned it . It was dedicated as parkland and okay . ( Brad Johnson was speaking from the back of the room and it was hard to pick up what he was saying on the tape . ) Brad Johnson: Yeah , I can speak to that . . .present it . I 'm not a realtor . Emmings: You are too . Brad Johnson: . . .unbuildable is immediately classified as . . .city owns it . And it was presented I think way back when we started selling homes back there that that was an unbuildable area . — Shelly Geske : Well certainly I can almost quote my realtor saying , yes . The City owns 5 acres of oak trees and it will never be built upon . Ahrens : You 're not alone in this . Resident : That 's what we were told when . . .realtors . — Shelly Geske : And unfortunately it 's their misrepresentation that we 're paying for now . — Brad Johnson : There is 5 acres that will not be built on . Shelly Geske : Right . Okay . — Brad Johnson : . . .the path , like I said is my idea and it doesn 't have to go any farther than that as far as the developer is concerned . — Ahrens: But like we said tonight , this is a conceptual plan . They 're just bringing the idea out for the first time and we 're just hasing over all — these ideas and nothing is written in concrete . That 's for sure .. Brad Johnson : . . .we 're just trying to do a good job . . . One thing we can 't do is not do anything . Ahrens: We have somebody else with the floor up here okay? Shelly Geske : I would just like to say that , you are Mr . Johnson? Brad Johnson: Yeah . Shelly Geske: That obviously you realize why we 're opposing this but you know that it 's not that we 're against you or we 're against this development . But I mean obviously there 's concerns . — Brad Johnson: Planning Commission Meeting - July 15 , 1992 - Page 38 Ahrens: Again , the issue of the trail should be brought up with the Park and Recs . Shelly Geske: With the Parks Department . Alright , thanks . Ahrens: Okay thank you . Anybody else? Bob Bohara : I 'm Bob Bohara . I live at 7510 Canyon Curve . They 're saying that that 's unbuildable land there . Ahrens: Where the wetlands are? Bob Bohara : Where the oak is . Where the wetlands are and you talked earlier that you 're talking about redefining what wetlands are . Does that - mean that this company can come in later then and build on that land if you redefine what a wetland is? Krauss : No . If this project proceeds forward , any project proceeds forward , we treat the area the same way . What we 're going to do is we define a conservation area . Tree conservation area and you can never cut through them so that privately held property , this project would own it but the City would have the authority to make sure that nobody ever goes in there and chops it down . It 's not a buildable area . We do the same thing with all the low wet areas . We take conservation easements over them . - Wetland or not wetland . . .it doesn 't matter . So at that point , what you heard from your realtors would come to pass . That this area would be . . . Aanenson: It would be recorded as part of the development agreement and recorded at the County Recorder 's Office . Resident : Is there currently a conservation easement there? Krauss: If there is , it may be on the back of your properties because that 's the only area that was platted . Bob Bohara : So what does that say? That he can then because there isn 't anything . Right? Aanenson : That area hasn 't been platted so I wouldn 't assume there was . Bob Bohara : So what we 're saying is that that 's not necessarily - unbuildable . At this point tonight . Krauss : No . Aanenson: We 're recommending that it not be built on . That 's part of our . Bob Bohara : I would also recommend that too . Krauss: There 's also a substantial amount of water there . Part of it is , the bigger part is a protected wetlands protected by City Ordinance and - State law . The retention pond , theoretically maybe . While they 're still defined as wetlands , but maybe they could be moved but then the developer Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 39 has the obligation to move the water someplace else on the property and has no place else to put it . So practically it 's necessary . — Emmings: Also , a bulldozer can build anything anywhere . And so yeah , we 're trying to save some features of this property because we know we can 't save the whole thing . Bob Bohara : As I understand the only outlet for those ponds are the wetlands . So if you do anything to the ponds , it will affect the wetlands — because that 's the only outlet . Aanenson: But those ponds are supposed to be pretreating , holding — sedimentation so when water goes into the water is treated . I mean into the wetland is treated . Bob Bohara : Okay . The other concern I have is in the construction of — this . They 've talked repeatedly about the . Ahrens: Would you hold it down back there Brad . — Bob Bohara : The difficulty of building on these and they phased it so that the most difficult part is built last , as I understand . Well , I 'm not _ saying that 's the reason . I 'm just saying that 's the way it turned out in your plan which means what they can do for putting the dirt . What they can do for the construction equipment and stuff , becomes more limited in that area . And then they 're building the largest , highest buildings on the steepest slope . And they 're coming right down to the drip line of the oak trees . Okay . You stop construction right there at the oak trees but that dirt on this high slope isn 't going to stop there . You 're going to lose — some of those oak trees . Probably not then but later . And they haven 't talked about erosion control . A lot of construction . Not at the top of the hill but starting to come down because they 're coming down on that steep slope there . They don 't talk about what they 're going to do to that . That 's going to all run down into the wetlands and into the holding ponds too . So those are my additional concerns . Ahrens: Thank you . Terry Woogmeester : My name is Terry Woogmeester . I live at 7461 Canyon — Curve . My biggest concern , and I understand from listening to you , is the oak trees . May I recommend that maybe we put an incentive or the City place an incentive on , you know you can 't replace it and it 's value is lost but maybe if you put an incentive there , there will be peace so that they — will avoid them because I have watched large equipment , and I don 't believe avoiding from the drip line will stop it because you will crush the roots that move out and it will take a year or two but you 'll lose them . Ahrens: Yeah , I agree with you . Terry Woogmeester : So I think maybe if you put an incentive on the trees so that whoever is doing the development has to pay for the loss of any trees , you might incent them to avoid that and they might do a setback . Planning Commission Meeting - July 15 , 1992 - Page 40 Aanenson: That 's standard in the development contract . That they would have to put a surety up for that . Emmings: They 're also required to fence , put up a fence and I don 't know where the fence goes but to avoid the problem of backing equipment up under that drip line during the construction , we have them fence these trees . - Krauss : And typically it is the drip line . However , we often call on Alan Olson who 's the DNR Forester to come out and walk sites with us and establish where those no cut lines ought to be . Ahrens: Does he come out and check once the construction 's started too to make sure that that 's being maintained? - Krauss: At that point , unless there 's a question that 's arisen , it 's usually our engineering department that 's out there . Terry Woogmeester : But if there 's an economic value tied to it so that it maybe makes the development non-profitable should they take out that nice section of oak trees , you might avoid a disaster before it happens . Ahrens : Okay , thank you . Anybody else? Mary Anderson: I 'd like to speak as a mother . Ahrens: Name . Mary Anderson: My name is Mary Anderson , 7550 Canyon Curve . Aside from all of the technical things , I 'd like to speak as a mother with young children and a lot of young children in the area watching the wildlife and the nature in that area . As you can see , there is a big concern with all the residents of that going away . Those trees go away . The brush goes away . The path near the wetland . Ponds . Wetlands . Whatever you want to call them . I think the core group of residents are very wildlife , nature lovers , if that 's what you want to say and most of the people bought houses in that area because of that . And the threat of that all leaving kind of crushes your dream of what you have in store for your children and yourself and I think that should be a really big consideration . Ahrens : Thank you . Anybody else? No? Going once . Okay , is there a motion to close the public hearing? Emmings moved , Ledvina seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. Farmakes: First of all I want to say that I 'm glad everybody showed up here tonight . That 's what it 's for . This is a preliminary meeting . The concept to help the persons who are developing the property to also understand what your concerns are . We 've certainly heard them here tonight . This is how that process works and in particular with the PUD . We 've been playing with this , the City has for quite some time and I think this is kind of a good example and it 's a good experience for me because I haven 't been on here that long to see how this works . I was not on the Commission when the previous development came in . It seems to me that this Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 41 • is a good use for PUD . It allows some leeway with the developer to make accommodations for some of the property that you 're talking about . The — trees . The wetlands and so on . Going back to a little bit of history intc this property . I happened to be here the night in the early 80 's when former Mayor , Mr . Hamilton and the previous City Council dealt with the rezonement for the farms that your houses are presently on . And at that — night there were people who came in and complained that those farms were going to be developed into houses and there 's sort of a natural process that you see on how these things go . Everybody has their own dream and the- problem with the City , particularly when a lot of people come out in a short period of time , to try and deal with these different dreams . Sometimes it gets a little tough because you have to make a decision one — way or the other . On the property that you have in Saddlebrook is on , on that night , originally it was proposed that that be medium density property . The entire piece because of how Chaparrel was developed . There was a big argument . The single family neighborhoods didn 't want that to be— that way . So there was sort of a horse deal cut that it would be medium density , single family . Sort of like how Chaparral was but the area below the pond would remain to be high density . And that 's the way it stands — today . This was several years before , from what I 'm hearing right , several years before many of you moved out to that particular area . As far as I know , it always has been since then . And they hit a peat bog in the area — where Saddlebrook is and they brought in some buffer area of non-single family homes that border Chaparrel . It went down 20 some feet into the ground so they put in that little lake there . Anyway , originally there was supposed to be , similar to Chaparral , a buffer on that night is how they — sort of described that . There 's supposed to be a buffer there . A buffer . There were some comments made about a buffer between the high density area and the single family homes . Well obviously the economics of the — developer , they sort of figured out well , we can sell . It 's a nice area . It 's a nice trees . Nice ponds . We can get more money for this land . And consequently the buffer didn 't show up . Single family went all the way to — area that abuts the high density property . And consequently you 've got a problem . And we 've got a problem here tonight so what happened years back has now led us up to tonight . I think a lot of the concerns that you made about the issue of the trail , which I don 't think is a big issue here . I — think that 's just a thrown in thing and I don 't think that that particularly benefits this particular development . I think it was thrown in maybe as a part of the trail system that the city has been dealing with because CR 17 and Kerber and considered conduit traffic type roads . On the elevation point , you 're right . The elevation shows that there 's about , maybe a 20 feet drop over the hill . Some of these buildings but . . . And as far as the traffic goes , I don 't think there 's enough information here . I — don 't think it 's been to that point where we can make a determination as tc where that goes but I think it 's a legitimate concern and I think I 'm taking up too much time so I 'll pass on . — Ahrens: Thanks Jeff . Steve . Emmings : I think there were a lot of important comments from the neighbors . I 've just got a few comments and questions of my own here . If the road goes out to Kerber , I think it should definitely line up with , what is it? Santa Vera . I think if the road drops down , I don 't know if — they moved those buildings . It looks like they might have moved those Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 42 buildings down that are up there a little bit and I think that was a good change . The buildings most to the right in the upper part . I think that changing that 16 unit building into two 8 's and then the next one into a 12 is an improvement . Overall , I was here . I think I was here when Saddlebrook was platted and I think I was here , I know I was here when the Cenvesco thing came in . I think it 's a big improvement over what we saw before in the style of the buildings and everything else . I don 't think it 's going to be nearly as objectionable as the other one was . I thought the comment about transition from commercial to single family then to rental . Or not single family but townhouses then to rental and then to single family was a very appropriate comment . We do try to do things the other way around . We do try to go from less intense to more intense and I 'm a little curious about that . On the other hand , it seems to kind of fit the site in a way . I don 't know , I thought that was a good comment . I 'm always troubled by these , I know this is only concept approval but now we have one plan in front of us and we 've got another plan in the back of the room and you 're shooting at a moving target and it 's very hard to get your comments down because things are changing while you 're talking and that 's always a little discomforting to me . I have a couple of questions . Looking at the units that are for sale , they showed us a typical building and that was also up here on the small sheet . And that typical building has 4 garages across the front of it . But I take it that these buildings that are shown on here that would be for sale are smaller than that . Is that right? Kirk Willette: No . . .there are 4 garages . A double car garage here . Two double cars in front . . . Emmings: Okay . Why , on these drawings , I don 't understand this drawing because there seems to be a little street . Look at the area between the second unit , FS2 and the third unit FS3 . Just , let 's use that as an example . You pull in off of the new street and why does it show , what are those little dents in the side of the building there? Kirk Willette : Oh , right in here? These are the entrances . Emmings: So there are two entrances in each side? Kirk Willette : Well actually . . .green space between the garages . The other 's not shown on this plan . There are , this is a private entrance to one unit . There are a pair of entrances . . .and then there 's another entrance . . . Emmings: So what 's drawn here is isn't what it will look like? Kirk Willette: There should be another green space . This driveway . . . Emmings: No , he 's saying there 's 4 garages across there . Kirk Willette : If you look at the rendering , that 's correct . The rendering is correct . Emmings: Okay . And so if somebody in one of these . So there 's 4 garages facing 4 garages across the little street between F52 and FS3 . Is that Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 43 correct? Kirk Willette : Yes . Emmings: And if people have guests over or want to have a party at their house , where do people park? — Kirk Willette: Right now there will be parking in front of the garages . There are some buildings that have . — Emmings: No . I 'm talking about FS2 and FS3 . Kirk Willette : Okay . On those particular ones , there is nothing . There is 2 spaces in front of their garage . Emmings : So assuming I can get both my cars in the garage , I can have 2 — carloads of people over and beyond that , where do folks park? Kirk Willette : It would have to be on the street . _ Emmings: What street? Kirk Willette : On the . . . — Emmings: Alright . Are we going to allow that? Aanenson : No . We recommended , in our meeting with them that they provide more visitor parking . They had it all on the western edge and we recommended that that was inappropriate and they needed a space between the single families because of , that won 't work . Emmings : No . There shouldn 't be parking on the newly dedicated street and I would say that if that probably 2 of those units in the row from FS1 — to FS6 to me shouldn 't be there . I think 2 of those units ought to come out because they need a lot of extra parking . I think they need more space between them . I think they 're too jammed in there . Let 's see . These places don 't have basements any of them do they? This is all built on slab and that goes for the for sale units? Kirk Willette : The for sale . . .basements . — Emmings : Okay , in our packet it says everything was on a slab . I think , what do we have in place that would prevent people from turning a garage — into a living space? Anything? Aanenson: We have an ordinance that says they could do that only if they — had another garage so I don 't think they could do it . Emmings: Alright . So we 've got that covered here . What do we have on the books that would prevent outside storage of any kind , including things like— vehicles and boats and things like that? Aanenson : That 's already in the ordinance but if you want to put something— specifically in the development contract , we could do that too . Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 44 Emmings: You know , if they 're going to develop this site this densely , I think we 've got to have something like that in there because otherwise we 're going to wind up with stuff all over the place and there 's nothing that will make it look trashy faster than stuff stored all over the place . Aanenson: Or recommend they provide an area fenced in for that sort of thing . Emmings: I wouldn 't even do that . I think they ought to store their stuff inside . I even think , we 've never done this before but I know we 've had problems in neighborhoods where people have inadequate storage space . They wind up using their garage for storage space and always leave their cars outside . I 've got some of that in my neighborhood . I know this neighborhood over here behind McDonald 's , there 's been complaints over there about that and I think the potential for it here is enormous . Brad Johnson : The thing is , they 're all the same . Emmings: Well it may be endemic to all development . I don 't know . But I think if , I almost think we ought to have an ordinance . I just thought about with connecting this project . That people be able to demonstrate at all times that they have the ability to park their cars in their garage . If a garage isn 't a garage for the storage of vehicles , I don 't know what it is anymore . And on a project like this , I think it 's particularly important . Let 's see . There are two pieces of property involved in here? Are they all under , are there two different pieces of property? Aanenson : Yes . Emmings : Do they need to replat to get it all into one or don 't we require that if it 's a PUD? Krauss: Well a replat is going to be required to combine the properties to plat the public right-of-way and then I assume they 're going to do - condominization around the for sale units . Emmings : So that will come later? Krauss : Yes . Oh , and by the way in the plat too , that 's where the easements are conveyed over the . . . - Emmings: Yeah . There was a note in here that all units are to be sprinklered and I supposed that again is something that will come later in the . . .design because there wasn't anything in the conditions here . Krauss : It really doesn 't need to be . It trips it in the Building Code . It 's automatic . Emmings: Okay . There was a note in here that Cenvesco , somebody was billed for the reviewing fee on the Cenvesco development of $3 ,171 .76 and that , a bill has been sent on that and it 's never been paid . Now I take it - that , was the owner of the property equally responsible for that bill as Cenvesco , the proposed developer? Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 45 Krauss: They were one and the same on that project . Emmings: They were? Who owed that? Krauss: Dean Johnson . Emmings : Why hasn 't it been paid? Brad Johnson: I did ask him that the other day . He has had . . .work out an _ arrangement with your financial people that he wasn 't going to have to pay it . . . Nobody 's saying that he shouldn 't pay for it . That 's why it wasn 't paid . . .He has said he will pay for it but that 's just why it wasn 't paid . He 'll pay for it when the project , when we can get a project approved . — ( There was a tape change at this point in the discussion . ) Aanenson : . . .forward any further until it is paid . Brad Johnson: My problem with that is , he was told by somebody in the — finance it was an erroneously billed . So at that point I said well , we 'll . . . Emmings: Alright . So I completely agree . This shouldn 't get any more — consideration until that bill is paid to the City . I think that 's all I 've got . Except to say generally that as a concept plan , I don 't think this is a bad one . I agree with a lot of Jeff 's comments . I can 't tell you the — number of times we have a group of people in here like you . I can 't tell you the number of times we 've heard that the developer or the real estate people said that the land across the street would never be developed . It _ was a park . It 's fraud folks you know and you 're getting an education and it 's just too damn bad and I don 't know what to tell you . If you knew , and I guess I learned it coming on here . I didn 't have , fortunately I didn 't have your bad experience but I would never buy a piece of property in the — city without going in . Had you come into the city and looked at the maps , looked at the zoning maps , you would have seen this land zoned as just what it is . For a high density project . It is , I was here when we looked at _ this property . I 've always thought and I still think it 's a real good and appropriate place , just looking at the city in a general way without thinking of who 's looking at it . It 's a real good place for multi building development . The plan 's an improvement . I think they 've got really too many buildings on the south site is my biggest problem right now . The for sale units are just packed in too tight . Ahrens: Are you done Steve? Emmings: Yeah . Ahrens: Kate or Paul , maybe you can answer this . As Jeff and Steve were talking , what are we approving tonight? We can 't approve this conceptual plan because this is not , this has changed a whole lot . And yet there — isn 't one conceptual plan that 's been presented to us that incorporates all the changes that have been discussed tonight . Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 46 Emmings : I think we 'd have to approve this one with conditions that will wind up being . Aanenson: Modified even more than this . Emmings : And then beyond that . Ahrens: Okay . Are you going to make that motion? Emmings : Well I don 't know who 's going to make the motion but I think - that 's the only , that 's the way to handle it is to do it based on what we 're . . . Farmakes: Open ended recommendations? Emmings : See we get to see all this again when the preliminary plat comes in . Aanenson: It will go to Council for a conceptual there too . Ahrens : Okay , let 's keep going here . Matt . Ledvina : Well I just , I don 't want to be redundant . I think there 's been a lot of good issues that have been flushed out by the public and the staff and my fellow commissioners here . But I will say that I think that the trail along the north side of the property should be strongly reconsidered . I know the root systems of those trees are very sensitive and we shouldn 't encroach on that at all if there 's a possibility of some problems there . Other than that I went out to the property today to take a look around up there and it is a beautiful piece of property . I think the developer has been sensitive to many of the site conditions . I wasn 't here when the original proposals came in but I can see that there 's been a strong effort to work with the piece of property as much as possible . But I think that through this process we can hammer out a proposal or a PUD that will be acceptable to all of us . Ahrens : Okay . I agree with most everybody 's comments up here tonight . - And I do want to thank all of you for coming in tonight . This is the way we get good proposals in the city . I think that there were a lot of real valid issues brought up tonight . I would like the developer to rethink or to explain better why the lower density housing is on the south side and the higher density on the north side . And I know there was some reference to it fitting in better and there 'd be less grading required . I 'm not sure that we got a real good answer to that . And I don 't expect you to address it tonight but at some point I think that needs to be revisited . A concern that wasn 't talked about up here yet is , I noticed throughout the staff report the reference to the exteriors of the building and that they look - real nice on the concept plan and they 're going to have vinyl siding and asphalt shingles and gable roofs . How do we assure that? You know a lot of developers come in here and they say , we 've got a great plan . This is going to look terrific and then as soon as the development starts , they say . Whoops , we ran out of money and they 're going to be , they 're going to look a whole lot different from what we ever thought they were going to look like . And all of a sudden our backs are up against the wall because Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 47 we can 't require them to do anything . I mean it 's happened a couple of . times in the city . Krauss: It happened a number of years ago . I know when I came on board 3 years ago there was some questions and developers will try to do what they 'll try to do . There were some questions as I recall about the hotel — where I was asked to approve construction plans that deviated from the plans that were approved . I refused to do that . I guess I also had the foresight to call the Mayor up before they did to let him know that this _ was going to happen and we made them come back through the City Council . The City Council and you . In fact the Planning Commission I think we brought it to . Most of the changes that had been requested were denied and they were required to build the building that way . I should also say too — that , one of the unsung benefits of a PUD is a PUD 's a contract . Either the developer builds exactly what they committed to build or they 're in violation of the contract . Right now we have a site up there that 's zoned — R-12 . Any proposal that meets the R-12 criteria in the zoning ordinance would , I mean if we tried to deny a proposal that met the R-12 criteria , we 'd probably be sued and we 'd probably lose . Emmings : And what would be the maximum potential density in the R-12? Krauss : 12 units an acre . — Emmings: So they could raise it to 12 units per acre . Krauss : You know these zoned properties are a little bit of a loose cannon . You 're never quite sure what 's going to land on it and I have a great deal of preference for the PUD . I mean strictly speaking , contract zoning as such is illegal but PUD zoning which is dependent on a contract — is fully legal . I 'm not the attorney and I can 't explain it but it seems little congruous but that 's the fact . Ahrens : Okay so these people don 't have to worry that once a plan is finalized and they say they 're going to build what they 're going to build design wise , that that 's what they 're going to see . Aanenson: One of the conditions of the PUD is any major change and that would be a major change . It would have to come back through this process and public hearings . — Ahrens: Alright . I don 't have anything else at this time . Why don 't we deal with the rezoning first . Does somebody have a motion on that? Aanenson: What we 're really looking at , we don 't want to rezone it yet until we 've gone through , we really should come with a preliminary so let 's not consider the rezoning . Let 's just look at the conceptual at this point— and we 'll put the rezoning on when we 're ready to approve a preliminary plat . I think that 's premature at this point . Krauss : So any motion should just be for a concept . A PUD concept review . Ahrens: Okay , does anybody have a motion? Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 48 Emmings: I want to ask something . If we recommend approval of the concept , we 're not tying ourselves down to location of buildings , size of buildings or number of buildings as drawn on the plan? Krauss : Well , first of all you have to modify that with your conditions as you wish . Secondly , conceptual reviews are non-binding on either party . It 's not as though you 've approved a preliminary plat and you 're pretty well obligated to approving final plat . Ahrens : What are we obligated to? Krauss: Nothing . Ahrens : Absolutely nothing? Emmings: I like that . - Farmakes: So what are you subtracting there , 16? Two 8 units? Emmings : I didn 't hear any other support for that but . Ahrens: For what? I think the motion should include , I don 't know how you feel about it . - Aanenson: Can I just clarify the PUD? What it says under the concept is that it shall not obligate the city to approve any final plan or to rezone any property within that district . So by approving the concept you 're not binding yourself . Emmings: And if this is done and then the City Council also approved the concept plan , the next time we get to see this is at what point? Krauss: It will come back in for the preliminary plat . Preliminary PUD , rezoning approvals . The official public hearings for those are held before - you . Emmings: And at that point in time , then we do bind ourselves to a plan? Krauss: Yes . Emmings: Okay . So now this is , okay . No , I think I 've got it . Ahrens : So can you be as vague in the motion? You 're not approving the exact location or number of buildings? Emmings: I think we 're just not . Krauss: Well if there 's an intent section that you would care to add in terms of guidance , the whole point of this is to give the developer and staff and whoever else is participating your guidance as to how this should proceed . Emmings: Right . Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 49 Farmakes : Did it list those? Emmings : I 'm going to move the Planning Commission recommend conceptual — approval of Site Plan Review #92-3 as shown on the plans dated June 15 , 1992 subject to all of the conditions contained in the staff report and also subject to consideration by the developer of all the comments made by — the public that was here and Planning Commission members . I think that ought to cover it . If it 's going to be big and broad , let 's make it big and broad . — Ahrens : Is there a second? Farmakes : Second . — Ahrens: Okay , discussion . You said subject to all the conditions in the staff report plus subject to all of the . — Emmings: Subject to , what I 'm saying to the developer is you 'd better reac the Minutes of this meeting . There are verbatim Minutes of this meeting typed up so , maybe you folks don 't know that . And so the developer can see— what everybody had to say and I guess what I 'm saying is , when they come back , we 're going to read the old Minutes and they 'd better be prepared to address the issues that have been raised . — Ahrens : I 'm comfortable with that . Emmings moved, Farmakes seconded that the Planning Commission recommend conceptual approval of Site Plan Review #92-3 as shown on the plans dated June 15 , 1992 subject to consideration by the developer of all the comments made by the public and Planning Commission members, and subject tc— the following conditions: 1 . The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City — and provide the City with the necessary financial securities to guarantee proper installation of the public improvements and compliance with the conditions of approval . 2 . The applicant shall obtain and comply with the appropriate permitting agencies , i .e . Watershed District , MPCA , Health Department , Carver County Public Works . — 3 . The developer shall dedicate and construct the utilities and streets within the public right-of-ways or easements to City standards and dedicate upon completion and acceptance to the City for permanent ownership . The remaining building utilities outside of the easements or right-of-way shall be privately owned and maintained . 4 . Detailed construction plans and specifications including sizing for the utility improvements shall be submitted for approval by the City . As-built mylar plans will also be required upon completion of the — construction . 5 . Appropriate No Parking restrictions shall be placed on the private _ service drives accordingly . Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 50 6 . The final plat shall dedicate 60 feet of right-of-way for the proposed east/west connector street . A 36 foot wide urban street shall be constructed in accordance with the latest edition of the City 's standards . 7 . It is recommended that concrete sidewalks be placed on both sides of the proposed main east/west collector street . The sidewalks should be 6 feet in width . 8 . A detailed erosion control plan shall be incorporated into the grading plan and submitted for approval with the construction plans and specifications . 9 . The applicant shall reimburse the City for all fees incurred with the previous and current review and development of this project . A cash escrow account of $7 ,000 . should be provided by the applicant to insure payment . 10 . Apply for a wetland alteration permit for the location of the trails and possible location of sedimentation pond before preliminary plat approval . 11 . Implement the Parks and Recreation Commission recommendation for parks and trails . 12 . Construction plans for the storm sewers will be required with the construction plans and specifications submittal prior to preliminary approval . 13 . Parking spaces must meet the parking standards as required by the zoning ordinance . 14 . The landscaping plan shall be modified to include streetscape along Powers and Kerber Boulevards . In addition , conifers shall be placed south of the oak trees to provide additional buffering . 15 . The 16 unit rental building , which is oriented to the most northerly portion of the site , should be moved and an 8 unit building put in its place , to minimize the impact to the single family homes to the north . 16 . Fencing shall be placed around the oak trees to minimize impact during construction . All voted in favor and the motion carried. Ahrens: The timing on this , I have no idea . What are we looking at here as far as , well we already know the Park and Rec Commission 's going to look at this July 28th . HRA? Krauss: HRA is not scheduled . Ahrens : Not scheduled , okay . Planning Commission Meeting July 15 , 1992 - Page 51 Krauss: This is slated to go to the Council on August 10th . However , given the range of comments that were raised . Given the fact that the _ design is in a little bit of a state of flux , given the fact that the developers had intended to meet with the neighbors and really hadn 't had a chance to , I 've just spoken to them and I think it would be appropriate for a meeting to be held with the residents and the developer . Try to iron the— kinks out of this thing a little bit more before it goes to Council . Ahrens : Good idea . Krauss: Therefore , we will notify you all of the appropriate City Council meeting . I don 't believe it 's going to be on the 10th because by the time you arrange your meeting and then we get a revised plan back , it would — probably be pretty tough to turn it around . In any case , we will send a mailed notice of the Council meeting . I guess you 'll get some mailed notice from the developer as to when they 'd like to schedule a meeting with— you . Resident : Could we ask that the mailings show the current . . .? Ahrens : Okay , thank you everyone for coming . APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Chairwoman Ahrens noted the Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated July 1 , 1992 as presented . Emmings moved, Ledvina seconded to adjourn the meeting . All voted in favor and the motion carried . The meeting was adjourned at 10:30 p.m. . Submitted by Paul Krauss — Planning Director Prepared by Nann Opheim — C I TY 0 F 1 - � r 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager _ FROM: Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreation Coordinator DATE: August 4, 1992 SUBJ: 1992 Park Acquisition and Development Capital Improvement Program Budget Amendment, Athletic Field Irrigation, Lake Ann Park On July 28, 1992, the Park and Recreation Commission reviewed staff's recommendation to amend the 1992 Park Acquisition and Development CIP to allow for irrigating of the athletic fields at Lake Ann Park (see attached report dated July 23, 1992). The commission unanimously approved the following recommendation be made to the City Council: Commissioner Erickson moved to recommend the City Council authorize an amendment be made to the 1992 Park Acquisition and Development Capital Improvement Program budget to fund the installation of an irrigation system at Lake Ann Park for seven ballfields and spectator areas in an amount not to exceed $60,000. This amount is to include all design and construction contracts. Commissioner Pemrick seconded the motion and all voted in favor. It is important to remember that this amendment does not alter the total dollars expended for park and trail improvements in 1992, but rearranges them to address a critical need. The attached amended 1992 Park Acquisition and Development CIP reflects this rearrangement. RECOMMENDATION _ It is recommended that the Park and Recreation Commission's motion be accepted, and that the City Council authorize the 1992 Park Acquisition and Development Capital Improvement Program budget amendment as previously detailed. Note: The City Council will be presented with the plans for this project conditional on their approval of the budget amendment. Is 4t.0, PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER CITYOF CHANIIASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Park and Recreation Commission FROM: Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreation Coordinator 1 DATE: July 23, 1992 SUBJ: 1992 Park Acquisition and Development Capital Improvement Program Budget Amendment, Athletic Field Irrigation, Lake Ann Park This report is straight to the point. The new ballfields at Lake Ann Park, Fields 4, 5, and 6 and the soccer field, are not in reasonable condition for play. This is the second full year of activities on the fields since they became active. A short chronology of their development follows: 1987- 1988 Referendum passes. Plan for development of fields. 1989 Construction partially complete. Fall seeding of fields occur (drought year). Winter, 1989 Very little snow cover. All seed and a high volume of soil is blown from fields. Spring, 1990 Erosion occurs. Summer, 1990 Fields are re-graded and seeded. Drought conditions experienced and germination does not occur. Fall, 1990 Fields are seeded for a third time. Spring, 1991 to Present Play begins on all fields. All comments received on field conditions have been negative. Over the past two years is was very evident that the new fields were not acceptable for recreational play. Home and visiting players have been forced to play on the fields as there are no alternatives. The complaint level has been extreme. Coaches and players routinely call or stop by the department to discuss the situation. Efforts through over-seeding and slit seeding, fertilization and aerification have been undertaken in an attempt to remedy the situation. During Is �0, PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER Park and Recreation Commission July 23, 1992 Page 2 this time period, the fields have had the benefit of two years of very good growing conditions, but have not responded. Dale Gregory, Park Foreman, and I upon completing these efforts which included three re-seeding operations since the spring of 1990, realized the situation needed expert attention. Two individual turf professionals were summoned to evaluate the field conditions. Both reports are attached for your review. Mr. Belkengren of Turf Supply Company advocated irrigation the first minute he stepped onto the fields. When informed that irrigation was not being considered at the time, he formulated the recommendation detailed in his report. The annual cost of this program, excluding of fertilizer, is $7,578.00. As noted in the report, this program provides no guarantee without an irrigation system. Mr. John Hopko of Professional Turf Specialists and Renovation was more direct. Without irrigation, he will not recommend any other action as, in his opinion, the efforts would prove fruitless. Mr. Hopko's reasons for this stance are documented in his report. Mr. Hopko's credentials are very thorough, and was recommended to me as one of the top turf management professionals in the state. As Park and Recreation Commissioners, you may be hearing rumblings about the playing conditions of the new fields at Lake Ann Park. As a staff member, I hear from coaches, players, parents, and spectators on a weekly basis. Entire soccer teams and their parents plotted to call me, or stop by the office on a single day, and most carried through with their plan. The Soccer Association and other individuals involved in sporting activities have volunteered to help in any way in an attempt to improve field conditions. As coordinator of the Park and Recreation Department, I am disappointed that the initial construction process did not go better, disappointed that we must now force teams to play on unfit fields, embarrassed because of this, and worried about our liability. I have not arranged for the Council Chambers to be filled with players, coaches, parents, spectators, turf specialists, and attorneys from which you could receive testimonials. However, I encourage all of you to visit the fields and talk to people you know that use them. This report may come as a shock, but of the alternatives available, irrigation is the only viable one and the only one with a guarantee. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend that the City Council authorize a 1992 Park Acquisition and Development Capital Improvement Program budget amendment to fund the installation of an irrigation system at Lake Ann Park for seven ballfields and spectator areas in an amount not to exceed $60,000.00. This amount is to include all design and construction contracts. Note: The possibility of irrigating the ballfields is only now available due to the installation of the water line servicing the park shelter. It is hoped that the timing of this amendment would allow for fall construction. The attached current expenditure predictions for the 1992 CIP demonstrate that this project can be carried out under the current year's CIP. I, too, as some commissioners might agree, would prefer to invest this money in other ways. But I'm left with no alternatives other than to make this recommendation. Turf SUPPIY Com an Dale Gregory City of Chanhassen Parks 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 June 12 , 1992 Dear Dale, Here is a program that I feel you should follow to restore some vigor and relieve some of the compaction at the Lake Ann Athletic complex. Until I can look at the soil reports, I will not make any recommendations as to a fertilizer program. As you are probably aware of, there is a lot of concern for the safety of the people using park property. Hard, compacted and uneven playing surfaces are hazardous to players, and can result in all sorts of legal problems. I have dealt with many problems such as yours, and have had good success when the program is followed. The first application that should be made is with Noburn Soil Wetting agent. This product should be applied at an initial rate of 12 oz . per 1000 sq. ft. , and should be followed up in 30 to 45 day intervals with an application of 6 oz . per 1000 sq. ft. to the complete complex. The wetting agent will help to relieve surface tension in the soil profile, and allow water to penetrate deeper into the soil and promote deeper rooting. The Noburn can be used as often as necessary, whenever the soil does not seem to be taking water, and to make more efficient use of the water that is available. Iron Roots should also be applied at the rate of 1 gallon per acre, three times this year, approximately on 30 - 40 day intervals. Iron Roots will help establish a more fibrous and deep root system, plus help give the plants better color. Iron Roots will give you greater stress tolerance from drought and heat. These applications should be followed up each year as per the tech sheet enclosed. After the first good rain, a good core tine aerification should be done taking at least 25 plugs per square foot. The complete field should then be top dressed with Turface soil amendment. Turface will not compact, and will help to eliminate some of the compaction and help to interface the top soil and clay base. Turface should be put down at minimum, 4 tons per acre as a top dress, and drug into the aerification holes. Turface is available in bulk truckload quantities of approximately 25 tons or on pallets of 40 bags or 1 ton each. Bulk orders will be shipped direct and are cheaper than the bagged product. This should be followed up each of the next 3 or 4 years with about 2 tons per acre after core aerifying. When we get your soil reports back, we can then design a fertilizer program that will benefit the turf by putting down the essential nutrients that promote a good stand of turf. Any program that we establish, would be greatly enhanced with an irrigation program. All fertilizers and control products will work better if they are watered into the soil. I am enclosing sheets that explain the products that I have mentioned. Please take time to read them over and let me know if there are any questions that have not been answered. I look forward to working with you in the future and wish you success in building a better and safer athletic field. SUMMARY OF PRODUCTS NEEDED FOR 6 ACRES OF TURF NoburN @$26. 10/gal. 25 gallons 1st Application 12 . 5 gallons 2nd application 12. 5 gallons 3rd application Total . . . . $1305. 00 Iron Roots @$38 . 00/gal. 6 gallons 1st application 6 gallons 2nd application 6 gallons 3rd application Total . . . . $ 648 . 00 Turface Regular 25 ton Bulk $225. 00 ton Total . . . . $5625. 00 1 ton bagged $260. 00 ton Total . . . . $6500. 00 Please call me if you should have any need for further information or should you want to discuss this program. Thank you for allowing me to help you resolve this problem. I ' ll be happy assist you in any of your other turf related problems. • - fully, • �o :elkengren PTR Professional Turf and Renovation JOHN R. HOPKO Turf Specialist 24144 172nd Street Big Lake, MN 55309 July 21 , 1992 City of Chanhassen Attention: Todd Hoffman Park and Recreation Coordinator 690 Coulter Drive P .O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear Todd: The following report is an analysis of my observations concerning the turf conditions at various park sites . Certain concerns need to be addressed, and hopefully suggestions can become reality. Soil : All good turf and sports turf start with the proper soil conditions . Yours is less than desirable; it tends to be very compacted, hard when dry, marginal at best when it comes to drainage . Clay content in the ground explains these conditions . Ideally, on athletic fields today, we use high sand content soils . This improves drainage and compaction problems are less severe . Your turf becomes a liability when it totally dries out because of hardness , and the field also becomes a liability when it receives excessive moisture . Playability becomes slippery and very damaging to the turf . Soil Nutrition: This situation compounds the soil problem that you have. After reviewing the scil test data you sent me, the lack of phosphorus and potassium was evident, just as we discussed the day I visited. I suspect that when the fields were constructed, subsoil material was used with little topsoil being available or used. Subsoils tend to be very free of nutrients and make growing turf more challenging and expensive. The soil pH is good for the most part, but nutrition is lacking. This problem will have to be corrected by fertilization. It will take a much more aggressive program to help correct this situation. Your current program will have to increase. We can discuss programs based on budget dollars in the future . Irrigation: After soil , watering on a consistent basis is the key to growing good turf for heavy traffic. I cannot emphasize enough how important automatic irrigation is for turf areas that will be exposed tosdeci yED sporting event use . If you ever hope to establish a good dense turf with your soil type, water is a must. Playing fields always su5ip ;j1992 0-y nc v4ANHAbst Phone: (612) 263-2152 Todd Hoffman Page 2 damage from use . Irrigation not only allows us to establish the turf, but also to reestablish the turf by over-seeding when needed. Building athletic fields today without water is like building a home without a foundation. If irrigation cannot be installed in the near future on the soccer sites and other heavily used areas , I , or no one, can offer you any hope of establishing and sustaining quality turf on those sites . Even with irrigation, monitoring use under excessive moisture conditions will be important because of your poorly drained soils . Damage to the turf can be quite severe under these conditions . Aerification and over-seeding become your tools of rejuvenation. Without water, however, this process becomes less successful , and you do not get a good return on your dollar invested. You can pay for a new system on the money you save in reseeding without water, not to mention how much happier the end user is to play on good turf. Turf Grasses : If parks in the future cannot be irrigated or fertilized at the levels they require, we will need to move toward seed mixtures that require less fertilizer . The common types of bluegrass and fine fescue will become the selection of choice. This will develop a turf much like some of your older fields . However, color and traffic, or the ability to withstand traffic, become an issue with these grasses . Watering, mowing, fertility, and weed control practices can all be discussed as the year progresses . Dale will need some new tools to grow the type of turf everyone is looking for. Summary: Todd, this will be blunt. Your soil is very poorly drained, lacks fertility, becomes hard when dry, and is non-irrigated on many sites where organized activity takes place . Modification of the soil would be difficult and very expensive . The only alternative for improved results would be to install irrigation, apply a more complete and aggressive fertilizer program to these newer areas , and monitor use and scheduling of activities on these sites . You and Dale are working with some difficult conditions that need to be improved or else quality will decrease and injury will increase. You now enter the time of year when some of these things we talked about need to occur. I hope you can take advantage of this report and this timing. Yours truly, PROFESSIONAL TURF AND RENOVATION John R. Hopko Turf Specialist JH:db PROPOSED 1992 FUNCTION 410 PARK ACQUISITION AND DEVELOPMENT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGET AUGUST, 1991 Current Estimate Bandimere Community Park Bandimere Heights Park Wood Park Identification Sign $ 250.00 $ 200.00 Bluff Creek Park Carver Beach Park — Play Area Refurbishment 2,200.00 2,200.00 Carver Beach Playground Wood Park Identification Sign 250.00 200.00 Replacement of Swing 950.00 950.00 Addition of Two Spring Animals 1,000.00 1,003.00 Border Wood and Pea Gravel 1,400.00 1,400.00 Chanhassen Estates Mini-Park Wood Park Identification Sign 250.00 200.00 Chanhassen Hills Park Wood Park Identification Sign 250.00 200.00 Construction of a Ballfield 1,500.00 1,500.00 Installation of Trees 800.00 00.00 Chanhassen Pond Park Wood Park Identification Sign for Kerber Blvd. 250.00 200.00 Wheel Chair Accessible Picnic Tabel 500.00 500.00 Picnic Table 450.00 450.00 City Center Park Play Equipment Expansion (50% Share) 10,000.00 00.00 _ New Basketball Poles and Standards 1,200.00 00.00 Curry Farms Park Wood Park Identification Sign 250.00 200.00 Greenwood Shores Park Herman Field Park 1st Phase Play Area with Border Wood/Pea Gravel 13,000.00 1 3,000.00 Superdeck Boardwalk 6,000.00 6.000.00 Picnic Tables and Play Area Bench 1,500.00 1,500.00 Lake Ann Park First Aid Supplies 400.00 00.00 Lifeguard Room Equipment 1,500.00 00.00 Rescue Board 500.00 00.00 Cash Register 750.00 150.00 Freezer 400.00 00.00 - Refrigerator 500.00 00.00 Microwave 300.00 00.00 Menu Boards 300.00 00.00 _ Building Supplies and Equipment 3,000.00 00.00 Row Boats 650.00 00.00 Canoes (2) 1,000.00 00.00 - Paddle Boats (2) 1,650.00 00.00 Life Jackets (20) 500.00 00.00 Canoe Paddles (10) 200.00 00.00 - Play-Aks (6) 1,800.00 00.00 Play-Ak Paddles (8) 200.00 00.00 Outboard Motor 750.00 00.00 - Shelter Landscaping 1,500.00 00.00 Drainage Improvements, Field #6 1,000.00 1,000.00 Supplies for Conversion of Field #2 to - Little League 500.00 500.00 Bituminous Trail Loop 10,500.00 00.00 Basketball Pole 600.00 00.00 - Fencing 2,200.00 2,200.00 Boundary Buoys 1,300.00 00.00 Lake Susan Park Trail Link to Chanhassen Hills 21,000.00 *21,000.00 Archery Range Targets 300.00 300.00 - Aeration System Installation 4,000.00 00.00 Track Ride 00.00 Meadow Green Park Installation of Trees 400.00 400.00 Minnewashta Heights Play Area Expansion 3,000.00 3,000.00 North Lotus Lake Park *This project will require additional funding, with planning/construction spanning both 1992 and 1993. Pheasant Hills Park Engineering, Surveying, Staking, Grading Surfacing and Site Preparation Associated With Initial Phase of Construction 20,000.00 10,000.00 Power Hill Park Prairie Knoll Park Rice Marsh Lake Park Play Area Expansion 6,000.00 4,000.00 Sunset Ridge Park Installation of trees 800.00 800.00 Park Rules Sign 50 Signs 3,500.00 3,500.00 Picnic Tables, Benches, Spectator Seating, Signage 5,500.00 3,030.00 Boy Scout Project 1,000.00 00.00 Tree Farm 200.00 200.00 Contingency 4,500.00 00.00 TOTAL $145,000.00 $79,750.00 DIFFERENCE $65,250.00 C I TY TF0 CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Don Ashworth, City Manager- it DATE: August 10, 1992 SUBJ: Resolution Designating Election Judges and Polling Places for the Primary and General Elections Attached please find a resolution which designates the polling places and election judges for the upcoming primary and general elections. The resolution is self-explanatory and approval is recommended. We would propose that election judge salaries remain the same as in previous years ($6/hr. for judges and $8/hr. for head judges). Also attached is the manual prepared for election judges which outlines the procedures for election day and information about the optical scan voting equipment. I would like to commend Jean Meuwissen for the excellent job she did in preparing this information. tie Oil PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES , MINNESOTA DATE : RESOLUTION NO: MOTION BY : SECONDED BY: A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING POLLING PLACES AND ELECTION JUDGES FOR THE PRIMARY ELECTION ON SEPTEMBER 15 , 1992 AND THE GENERAL ELECTION ON NOVEMBER 3, 1992 WHEREAS , the City of Chanhassen is required by law to set the time and place for the Primary and General Elections and establish Election Judges for such : NOW, THEREFORE , BE IT RESOLVED, that the Primary Election in the City of Chanhassen is hereby set at September 15 , 1992 , and the General Election is hereby set at November 3, 1992 , with voting to be between the hours of 7 : 00 a .m. and 8 : 00 p .m. , on such date , at the following places for precincts as shown : Chanhassen Hennepin County Precinct - Chanhassen Elem. School Precinct 1 - Main Fire Station, 7610 Laredo Drive Precinct 2 - Chanhassen Elementary School , 7600 Laredo Drive Precinct 3 - Chanhassen City Hall , 690 Coulter Drive Precinct 4 - Chanhassen Senior Center , 690 Coulter Drive Precinct 5 - Chanhassen Public Works , 1591 Park Road Precinct 6 - Minnewashta Fire Station , 6400 Minnewashta Parkway FURTHER , BE IT RESOLVED, that the election judges for such Primary and General Elections are as established on the attached Exhibit "A" , which is made a part hereof . Passed and adopted by the Chanhassen City Council this day of , 1992 . ATTEST : Don Ashworth , City Clerk/Manager Donald J . Chmiel , Mayor YES NO ABSENT EXHIBIT A ELECTION JUDGES PRIMARY ELECTION, SEPTEMBER 15 , 1992 AND, GENERAL ELECTION, NOVEMBER 3 , 1992 PRECINCT 1, MAIN FIRE STATION Sue Lacey, 121 Choctaw Circle , Chanhassen Marie Schroeder , 6430 Pleasant View Lane , Chanhassen Sharon Lewison, 6340 Fox Path , Chanhassen — Eldon Degler , 6711 Mohawk Drive , Chanhassen Evelyn Prestemon, 6680 Deerwood Drive , Chanhassen Herbert Kask, 115 Pleasant View Road, Chanhassen — Suzanne Frost, 80 Sandy Hook Road , Chanhassen Leah Lucas , 410 Cimarron Circle , Chanhassen Diane Prentice , 7402 Laredo Drive , Chanhassen — PRECINCT 2 AND HENNEPIN COUNTY, PRECINCT, CHANHASSEN ELEMENTARY SCHC L Joanne Meuwissen, 201 W 77th Street , Chanhassen Vernice Jorissen, 420 Chan View, Chanhassen Sue Downs, 7202 Kiowa Circle , Chanhassen Gladys Hanna, 400 Santa Fe Trail , Chanhassen — Viola Buschkowsky, 206 W 78th Street , Chanhassen Betty Eidam, 501 Laredo Lane , Chanhassen Nancy Robinson, 202 W 77th Street , Chanhassen Sue Anderson, 204 Chan View, Chanhassen Joyce Heuer , 402 Santa Fe Trail , Chanhassen Arlis Bovy, 7339 Frontier Trail , Chanhassen Mary Goetze , 7615 Iroquois , Chanhassen — David Johnson, 511 Laredo Lane , Chanhassen Mary Geving , 7602 Huron , Chanhassen PRECINCT 3 , CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS Liz Haak, 770 Pioneer Trail , Chanhassen Elizabeth Teich , 220 Flying Cloud Drive , Chaska — Betty Teich , 825 Flying Cloud Drive , Chaska Mary Herzog, 1191 Homestead Lane , Chanhassen Robert Eickholt , 9390 Kiowa Trail , Chanhassen — Andy Fiskness , 8033 Cheyenne , Chanhassen Jean Sinnen, 8150 Grandview Road , Chanhassen Helen Thomas , 7231 Pontiac Circle , Chanhassen Pat Donnay, 8109 Dakota Lane , Chanhassen EXHIBIT A CONT . PRECINCT 4, CITY HALL SENIOR CENTER Al Herzog , 1191 Homestead Lane , Chanhassen Richard Nieland , 8510 Great Plains Blvd, Chanhassen Mary Jane Klingelhutz , 8600 Great Plains Blvd , Chanhassen Zeta DeMarais , 6979 Pima Lane , Chanhassen Richard Thomas , 7231 Pontiac Circle , Chanhassen Sherol Howard , 1005 Pontiac Lane , Chanhassen Bernice Billison, 7281 Pontiac Circle , Chanhassen Shirley Robinson, 8502 Great Plains Blvd , Chanhassen PRECINCT 5 , CHANHASSEN PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING Emma St . John, 1621 West 63rd Street , Excelsior Paula Rice , 6950 Tecumseh Lane , Chanhassen Cheryl Hobbs , 8850 Sunset Trail , Chanhassen PRECINCT 6 , MINNEWASHTA FIRE STATION Ivan Underdahl , 7502 West 77th Street , Chaska Zoe Bros , 6631 Minnewashta Parkway, Excelsior Lois Johnson, 8250 Galpin Boulevard , Chanhassen Kathy Oestrich , 6320 Dogwood , Excelsior Dorothy Comer , 3800 Red Cedar Point Road , Excelsior Mabel White , 3351 Shore Drive , Excelsior Julie Terpstra, 6581 Joshua Circle , Excelsior Elaine McRaith , 7028 Red Cedar Cove , Excelsior Judy Scott , 2730 Sandpiper Trail , Excelsior Lee Anderson , 6651 Minnewashta Parkway, Excelsior Mary Allenburg , 6621 Minnewashta Parkway, Excelsior CITYOF CHANHASSEN - i 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 `►� Action by City A.dm nistrator b orsed Txi Riodrfied MEMORANDUM Rejected oetk X `r z TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager Elitesubndted to Corrrnissioit FROM: Paul Krauss, Planning Director Dete subfrated to Couccil DATE: August 6, 1992 SUBJ: Resolution to Authorize Staff Enter Into Subrecipient Agreements for 1992 Community Development Block Grant Program Year XVIII Each year we go through a similar process relative to obtaining our CDBG funding. During spring of this year, the City Council approved funding for a variety of projects for the 1992 fiscal year which begins in July. Included are continued funding for the Senior Coordinator, the H. O. M. E. Program, minor funds for the Sojourn Senior Day Care Center, continued funding for South Shore Senior Center, and funding to undertake a senior housing feasibility study. The second part of this process is entering into what is called a Subrecipient Agreement for the program and this is the request that is currently being made. Hennepin County staff has prepared the standard agreement format for signature by the Mayor and City Manager. Staff is requesting City Council approval so that these agreements may be entered into. You should also be aware that continued funding for the CDBG program in Chanhassen is in jeopardy. As you are probably aware, our ability to function under the Hennepin County program comes about because a portion of our community is located in Hennepin County. Unfortunately, since the last census, the few residents remaining the Hennepin County portion of Chanhassen have been relocated to allow for the construction of Highway 5. The Federal HUD Office is interpreting the rules to mean that having land area in the urban county is insufficient to quality under the block grant entitlement program. It is their opinion that we must have people living there. In the short term, our ability to function for the remaining two years under our written contractual agreement with Hennepin County is somewhat in question. But longer term, we will have to get an exemption written into federal law to allow Chanhassen to continue in what I believe we would all agree to be a program that is of great benefit to our community. The City Manager, Mayor and Planning Director will be working on this matter in the near future and we will keep the Council posted as to progress. Is t PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER RECEIVED DATE: JULY 14, 1992 JUL 1 5 1992 TO: URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COOPERATING-.IJN111804HA S HENNEPIN FROM: HENNEPIN COUNTY OFFICE OF PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SUBJECT: SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENTS FOR 1992 CDBG PROGRAM (YEAR XVIII) The enclosed three copies of the Year XVIII Subrecipient Agreement are presented for execution by the appropriate officials for your community. Please return all three signed copies along with a resolution of the governing body authorizing execution with any necessary official seal imprint to: Hennepin County Office of Planning and Development Development Planning Unit 822 South Third Street, Suite 310 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415 A sample resolution is provided for your convenience. The executed Agreement and resolution should be returned no later than Friday, August 21, 1992. One original copy will be returned to you after the County has signed the Agreement. No disbursement of Year XVIII funds will be made until the Agreement is fully executed by both Hennepin County and your community. In instances where a CDBG activity is to be implemented by a third party, a Third Party Agreement similar to the Subrecipient Agreement must be executed between your community and that party. Third Party Agreements are currently being prepared and will be transmitted for execution in the near future. You will note that the Subrecipient Agreement has a somewhat different appearance this year. This is primarily an improvement in format which provides subject .headings and groups the sections in a more logical, readable order. In addition, a few sections have been added to conform with regulatory or County contract requirements, as follows: 1. A section was added to specifically permit third party agreements. 2. The section on amending agreements has been clarified with a definition of "substantial change. " 3. The Agreement now notes that the insurance liability of local governments is governed by Minn. Stat. Chapter 466. 4. A conflict of interest section was inserted, per regulations. 5. The Suspension and Termination section was rewritten to conform more closely to both the regulatory language and County contract policy. 6. The Reversion of Assets section was revised to reflect a new interim HUD rule that goes into effect on July 17, 1992. Urban Hennepin County Coorperating Units July 14, 1992 Page Two _ 7. The section on Use of Real Property now shows how fair market value is to be determined. 8. Administrative Requirements now includes requirements and guidelines promulgated by Hennepin County, which has always been true in practice. 9. A new section was added to address Non-Discrimination Based on Disability. This includes compliance, when and where applicable, with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, and the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990. 10. The Audit section now notes that the cost of an audit is not reimbursable from CDBG funds. If you have any questions, please contact your County CDBG representative. BC:tf Enclosures RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT WITH HENNEPIN COUNTY FOR THE URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM WHEREAS, the city of has executed a Joint Cooperation Agreement with Hennepin County for the purpose of participating in the 1992 (Year XVIII) Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Program; and • WHEREAS, Hennepin County is the recipient of an annual grant from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development for purposes of the program and the City is a subrecipient under the program and receives a share of the grant; and WHEREAS, program regulations require that the City and County execute a Subrecipient Agreement which sets forth the specific implementation processes for activities to be undertaken with program funds. BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby authorizes and directs the Mayor and City Manager to execute Subre- cipient Agreement, County Contract Number A , on behalf of the City. Adopted this day of , 1992. ATTEST: Mayor City Manager Contract No. A09422 SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM — THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into by and between the COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, STATE OF MINNESOTA, hereinafter referred to as "RECIPIENT," A-2400 Government Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487, and CITY OF CHANHASSEN, hereinafter referred to as "SUBRECIPIENT, " 690 Coulter Drive, Chanhassen, MN 55317 said parties to this Agreement each being governmental units of the State of — Minnesota, and is made pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59: WITNESSETH — WHEREAS, Recipient has received a Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) entitlement allocation under Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act _ of 1974, as amended, to carry out various community development activities in cooperation with Subrecipient, according to the implementing regulations at 24 CFR Part 570; and WHEREAS, $ 40,744.00 from Federal Fiscal Year 1992 CDBG funds has been approved by Recipient for use by Subrecipient for the implementation of eligible and fundable community development activity/ies as included in and a part of the 1992 Statement of Objectives and Projected Use of Funds, Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program and as set forth in the Statement of Work described in Exhibit 1 to this Agreement; and WHEREAS, the Subrecipient agrees to assume certain responsibilities for the implementation of the approved activities described in Exhibit 1, said responsibilities being specified in part in the Joint Cooperation Agreement — effective October 1, 1991, executed between Recipient and Subrecipient on August 20, 1991, and in the 1992 Statement of Objectives and Projected Use of Funds, Urban Hennepin County CDBG program and the Certifications contained therein. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereunto do hereby agree as follows: 1. SCOPE OF SERVICES — A. The Subrecipient shall expend all or any part of its CDBG allocation only on those activities identified in Exhibit 1, "Statement of Work, " — subject to the requirements of this Agreement and the stipulations and requirements set forth in Exhibit 1 to this Agreement. B. The Subrecipient shall take all necessary actions, not only to comply with the stipulations as set out in Exhibit 1, but to comply with any requests by the Recipient in that connection; it being understood that the Recipient is responsible to the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for ensuring compliance with such requirements. The Subrecipient also will promptly notify the Recipient of any changes in the scope or character of the activity/ies which it is implementing. — 2. TERM OF AGREEMENT The effective date of this Agreement is July 1, 1992. The termination date of this Agreement is December 31, 1993, or at such time as the activity/ies constituting part of this Agreement are satisfactorily completed prior thereto. Upon expiration, the Subrecipient shall relinquish to the Recipient all program funds unexpended or uncommitted and all accounts receivable attributable to the use of CDBG funds for the activities described in Exhibit 1. 3. THIRD PARTY AGREEMENTS The Subrecipient may subcontract this Agreement and/or the services to be performed hereunder, whether in whole or in part, only with the prior consent of the Recipient and only through a written Third Party Agreement acceptable to the Recipient. The Subrecipient shall not otherwise assign, transfer, or pledge this Agreement and/or the services to be performed hereunder, whether in whole or in part, without the prior consent of the Recipient. 4. AMENDMENTS TO AGREEMENT Any material alterations, variations, modifications or waivers of provisions of this Agreement which are a substantial change shall only be valid when they have been reduced to writing as an Amendment to this Agreement signed, approved, and properly executed by the authorized representatives of the parties. All Amendments to this Agreement shall be made a part of this Agreement by inclusion as a numbered Exhibit which shall be attached at the time of any Amendment. Substantial change is defined as a change in (1) beneficiary; (2) project location; (3) purpose; or (4) scope, resulting in more than a 50% increase or decrease in the original budget or $10,000, whichever is greater, in any authorized activity. The total budget of multi-community activities will be used in determining substantial change. 5. PAYMENT OF CDBG FUNDS The Recipient agrees to provide the Subrecipient with CDBG funds not to exceed $ 40.744.00 to enable the Subrecipient to carry out its CDBG- eligible activity/ies as described in Exhibit 1. It is understood that the Recipient shall be held accountable to HUD for the lawful expenditure of CDBG funds under this Agreement. The Recipient shall therefore make no payment of CDBG funds to the Subrecipient and draw no funds from HUD/U.S. Treasury on behalf of a Subrecipient activity/ies, prior to having received a proper Hennepin County Warrant Request form from the Subrecipient for the expenses incurred, as well as copies of all documents and records needed to ensure that the Subrecipient has complied with the appropriate regulations and requirements. 6. INDEMNITY AND INSURANCE A. The Subrecipient does hereby agree to release, indemnify, and hold harmless the Recipient from and against all costs, expenses , claims, suits or judgments arising from or growing out of any injuries, loss or damage sustained by any person or corporation, including employees of Subrecipient and property of Subrecipient, which are caused by or sustained in connection with the tasks carried out by the Subrecipient under this Agreement. B. The Subrecipient does further agree that in order to protect itself as well as the Recipient under the indemnity agreement provisions hereinabove set forth it will at all times during the term of this Agreement and any renewal thereof, have and keep in force: a single limit or combined limit or excess umbrella commercial and general — liability insurance policy of an amount of not less than $600,000 for property damage arising from one occurrence, $600,000 for damages arising from death and/or total bodily injuries arising from one occurrence, and $600,000 for total personal injuries arising from one occurrence. Such policy shall also include contractual liability coverage protecting the Recipient, its officers, agents and employees by a certificate acknowledging this Agreement between the Subrecipient — and the Recipient. C. The Subrecipient's liability, however, shall be governed by the — provisions of Minnesota Statutes Chapter 466. 7 . CONFLICT OF INTEREST A. In the procurement of supplies, equipment, construction, and services by the Subrecipient, the conflict of interest provisions in 24 CFR 85. 36 and OMB Circular A-110 shall apply. B. In all other cases, the provisions of 24 CFR 570.611 shall apply. 8. DATA PRIVACY The Subrecipient agrees to abide by the provisions of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act and all other applicable state and federal laws , rules, and regulations relating to data privacy or confidentiality, and as any of the same may be amended. The Subrecipient agrees to defend and hold the Recipient, its officers, agents, and employees harmless from — any claims resulting from the Subrecipient's unlawful disclosure and/or use of such protected data. 9 . SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION A. If the Subrecipient materially fails to comply with any term of this Agreement or so fails to administer the work as to endanger the performance of this Agreement, this shall constitute noncompliance and a default. Unless the Subrecipient's default is excused by the Recipient, the Recipient may take one or more of the actions — prescribed in 24 CFR 85.43, including the option of immediately cancelling this Agreement in its entirety. B. The Recipient's failure to insist upon strict performance of any provision or to exercise any right under this Agreement shall not be deemed a relinquishment or waiver of the same. Such consent shall not constitute a general waiver or relinquishment throughout the entire term of the Agreement. C. This Agreement may be cancelled with or without cause by either party upon thirty (30) days' written notice according to the provisions in 24 CFR 85.44. D. CDBG funds allocated to the Subrecipient under this Agreement may not be obligated or expended by the Subrecipient following such date of termination. Any funds allocated to the Subrecipient under this Agreement which remain unobligated or unspent following such date of termination shall automatically revert to the Recipient. 10. REVERSION OF ASSETS Upon expiration or termination of this Agreement, the Subrecipient shall transfer to the Recipient any CDBG funds on hand or in the accounts receivable attributable to the use of CDBG funds, including CDBG funds provided to the Subrecipient in the form of a loan. Any real property under the control of the Subrecipient that was acquired or improved, in whole or in part, using CDBG funds in excess of $25,000 shall either be: A. Used to meet one of the national objectives in 24 CFR 570.208 and not used for the general conduct of government until: (1) For units of general local government, five years from the date that the unit of general local government is no longer considered by HUD to be a part of Urban Hennepin County; or -- (2) For any other Subrecipient, five years after expiration of this Agreement. Or, B. Not used in accordance with A. above, in which event the Subrecipient shall pay to the Recipient an amount equal to the current market value of the property less any portion of the value attributable to expenditures of non-CDBG funds for acquisition of, or improvement to, the property. The payment is program income to the Recipient. No payment is required after the period of time specified in A. above. 11 . PROCUREMENT The Subrecipient shall be responsible for procurement of all supplies , equipment, services, and construction necessary for implementation of its activity/ies. Procurement shall be carried out in accordance with the "Common Rule" Administrative Requirements in 24 CFR 85 and all provisions of the CDBG Regulations in 24 CFR 570 (the most restrictive of which will take precedence) . The Subrecipient shall prepare, or cause to be prepared, all advertisements, negotiations, notices, and documents; enter into all contracts; and conduct all meetings, conferences, and interviews as necessary to ensure compliance with the above described procurement requirements. The Recipient shall provide advice and staff assistance to the Subrecipient to carry out its CDBG-funded activity/ies . 12. ACQUISITION. RELOCATION, AND DISPLACEMENT A. The Subrecipient shall be responsible for carrying out all — acquisitions of real property necessary for implementation of the activity/ies. The Subrecipient shall conduct all such acquisitions in its name, or in the name of any of its public, governmental, nonprofit — agencies as authorized by its governing body, which shall hold title to all real property purchased. The Subrecipient shall be responsible for preparation of all notices, appraisals, and documentation required in conducting acquisition under the latest applicable regulations of — the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Act of 1970 and of the CDBG Program. The Subrecipient shall also be responsible for providing all relocation notices, counseling, and services required by said regulations. The Recipient shall provide advice and staff assistance to the Subrecipient to carry out its CDBG- funded activity/ies. B. The Subrecipient shall comply with the acquisition and relocation requirements of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 as required under 24 CFR 570.606(a) and HUD implementing regulations at 24 CFR 42; the requirements in 24 CFR 570.606(b) governing the residential antidisplacement and relocation assistance plan under section 104(d) of the Housing and — Community Development Act of 1974 (the Act) ; the relocation requirements of 24 CFR 570.606(c) governing displacement subject to section 104(k) of the Act; and the requirements of 24 CFR 570.606(d) governing optional relocation assistance under section 105(a) (11) of the Act. 13. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW — The Recipient shall determine the level of environmental review required under 24 CFR Part 58 and maintain the environmental review record on all activities. The Subrecipient shall be responsible for providing necessary information, relevant documents, and public notices to the Recipient to accomplish this task. 14. LABOR STANDARDS, EMPLOYMENT, AND CONTRACTING The Recipient shall be responsible for the preparation of all requests for — HUD for wage rate determinations on CDBG activities undertaken by the Subrecipient. The Subrecipient shall notify the Recipient prior to initiating any activity, including advertising for contractual services which will include costs likely to be subject to the provisions on Federal Labor Standards and Equal Employment Opportunity and related implementing regulations. The Recipient will provide technical assistance to the Subrecipient to ensure compliance with these requirements. — 15. PROGRAM INCOME If the Subrecipient generated any program income as . a result of the expenditure of CDBG funds, the provisions of 24 CFR 570.504 shall apply, as well as the following specific stipulations: A. The Subrecipient will notify the Recipient of any program income within ten (10) days of the date such program income is generated. When program income is generated by an activity only partially assisted with CDBG funds, the income shall be prorated to reflect the percentage of CDBG funds used. B. That any such program income must be paid to the Recipient by the Subrecipient as soon as practicable after such program income is generated unless the Statement of Work in Exhibit 1 specifically permits the Subrecipient to retain program income. C. The Subrecipient further recognizes that the Recipient has the responsibility for monitoring and reporting to HUD on the use of any such program income. The responsibility for appropriate recordkeeping by the Subrecipient and reporting to the Recipient by the Subrecipient on the use of such program income is hereby recognized by the Subrecipient. The Recipient agrees to provide technical assistance to the Subrecipient in establishing an appropriate and proper recordkeeping and reporting system, as required by HUD. D. That in the event of close-out or change in status of the -. Subrecipient, any program income that is on hand or received subsequent to the close-out or change in status shall be paid to Recipient as soon as practicable after the income is received. The Recipient agrees to notify the Subrecipient, should close-out or change in status of the Subrecipient occur. 16 . USE OF REAL PROPERTY The following standards shall apply to real property under the control of the Subrecipient that was acquired or improved, in whole or in part, using CDBG funds: A. The Subrecipient shall inform the Recipient at least thirty (30) days prior to any modification or change in the use of the real property from that planned at the time of acquisition or improvements including disposition. The Subrecipient will comply with the requirements of 24 CFR 570.505 to provide affected citizens the opportunity to comment on any proposed change and to consult with affected citizens. B. The Subrecipient shall reimburse the Recipient in an amount equal to the current fair market value (less any portion thereof attributable to expenditures of non-CDBG funds) of property acquired or improved with CDBG funds that is sold or transferred for a use which does not qualify under the CDBG regulations. Said reimbursement shall be provided to the Recipient at the time of sale or transfer of the property referenced herein. Such reimbursement shall not be required if the conditions of 24 CFR 570.503(b) (8) (i) are met and satisfied. Fair market value shall be established by a current written appraisal by a qualified appraiser. The Recipient will have the option of — requiring a second appraisal after review of the initial appraisal. C. Any program income generated from the disposition or transfer of real property prior to or subsequent to the close-out, change of status or termination of the Joint Cooperation Agreement between the Recipient and the Subrecipient shall be repaid to the Recipient at the time of disposition or transfer of the property. — 17. ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS The uniform administrative requirements delineated in 24 CFR 570.502 and any and all administrative requirements or guidelines promulgated by the Recipient shall apply to all activities undertaken by the Subrecipient provided for in this Agreement and to any program income generated therefrom. 18. AFFIRMATIVE ACTION AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY — A. During the performance of this Agreement, the Subrecipient agrees to the following: In accordance with the Hennepin County Affirmative Action Policy and the County Commissioners' Policies Against Discrimination, no person shall be excluded from full employment rights or participation in, or the benefits of, any program, service or activity on the grounds of race, color, creed, religion, age, sex, — disability, marital status , affectional/sexual preference, public assistance status, ex-offender status , or national origin; and no person who is protected by applicable federal or state laws against — discrimination shall be otherwise subjected to discrimination. B. The Subrecipient will furnish all information and reports required to _ comply with the provisions of 24 CFR Part 570 and all applicable state and federal laws, rules , and regulations pertaining to discrimination and equal opportunity. 19. NON-DISCRIMINATION BASED ON DISABILITY A. The Subrecipient shall comply with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation — Act of 1973, as amended, to ensure that no otherwise qualified individual with a handicap, as defined in Section 504, shall, solely by reason of his or her handicap, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination by the Subrecipient receiving assistance from the Recipient under Section 106 and/or Section 108 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended. B. When and where applicable, the Subrecipient shall comply with, and make best efforts to have its third party providers comply with, _ Public Law 101-336 Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990, Title I "Employment, " Title II "Public Services" - Subtitle A, and Title III "Public Accomodations and Services Operated By Private Entities" and all ensuing federal regulations implementing said Act. 20. LEAD-BASED PAINT The Subrecipient shall comply with the Lead-Based Paint notification, inspection, testing and abatement procedures established in 24 CFR 570.608. 21. FAIR HOUSING The Subrecipient shall be prohibited from receiving CDBG funds for _. activity/ies subject to this Agreement should it not affirmatively further fair housing within its own jurisdiction or impede action taken by Recipient to comply with the fair housing certification. 22. LOBBYING A. No federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of the Subrecipient, to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the awarding of any Federal contract, the making of any Federal Grant, the making of any Federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative agreement, and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement. B. If any funds other than Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress , an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement Subrecipient will complete and submit Standard Form-LLL, "Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying, " in accordance with its instructions. 23. USE OF EXCESSIVE FORCE BY LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES Subrecipient has adopted and is enforcing a policy prohibiting the use of excessive force by law enforcement agencies within its jurisdiction against any individuals engaged in non-violent civil rights demonstrations; and a policy of enforcing applicable state and local laws against physically barring entrance to or exit from a facility or location which is the subject of such non-violent civil rights demonstrations within its jurisdiction. 24. OTHER CDBG POLICIES The Subrecipient shall comply with the applicable section of 24 CFR 570.200, particularly sections (b) (Special Policies Governing Facilities) ; (c) (Special Assessments) ; (f) (Means of Carrying Out Eligible Activities) ; and (j) (Constitutional prohibitions Concerning Church/State Activities) . 25. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE The Recipient agrees to provide technical assistance to the Subrecipient in the form of oral and/or written guidance and on-site assistance regarding CDBG procedures and project management. This assistance will be provided as requested by the Subrecipient, and at other times at the initiative of the Recipient when new or updated information concerning the CDBG Program is received by the Recipient and deemed necessary to be provided to the Subrecipient. — 26. RECORDKEEPING The Subrecipient shall maintain records of the receipt and expenditure of — , all CDBG funds, such records to be maintained in accordance with OMB Circulars A-87 and the "Common Rule" Administrative Requirements in 24 CFR 85 and in accordance with OMB Circular A-110 and A-122, as applicable. All -- records shall be made available upon request of the Recipient for inspection/s and audit/s by the Recipient or its representatives. If a financial audit/s determines that the Subrecipient has improperly expended CDBG funds, resulting in the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) disallowing such expenditures, the Recipient reserves the right to recover from the Subrecipient such disallowed expenditures from non-CDBG sources. Audit procedures are specified below in Section 22 of this Agreement. 27. ACCESS TO RECORDS — The Recipient shall have authority to review any and all procedures and all materials, notices, documents, etc. , prepared by the Subrecipient in implementation of this Agreement, and the Subrecipient agrees to provide all information required by any person authorized by the Recipient to request such information from the Subrecipient for the purpose of reviewing the same. 28. AUDIT The Subrecipient agrees to provide Recipient with an annual audit consistent with the Single Audit Act of 1984, (U.S. Public Law 98-502) and the implementing requirements of OMB Circular A-128, Audits of State and Local Governments, and, as applicable, OMB Circular A-110, Uniform Requirements for Grants to Universities, Hospitals and Non-Profit Organizations. A. The audit is to be provided to Recipient on July 1 of each year this Agreement is in effect and any findings of noncompliance affecting the use of CDBG funds shall be satisfied by Subrecipient within six (6) months of the provision date. B. The audit is not required, however, in those instances where less than $25,000 in assistance is received from all Federal sources in any one — fiscal year. C. The cost of the audit is not reimburseable from CDBG funds . —. D. The Recipient reserves the right to recover from the Subrecipient's non-CDBG funds any CDBG expenses which are disallowed by an audit. SUBRECIPIENT, having signed this Agreement, and the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners having duly approved this Agreement on 19 , and pursuant to such approval and the proper County officials having signed this Agreement, the parties hereto agree to be bound by the provisions herein set forth. Upon proper execution, this COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, Agreement will be legally STATE OF MINNESOTA valid and binding. By: J�� Chairman of its County Board Assistant Coun y torney And: .._, `� Deputy/Associate County Administrator Date: Attest: Deputy/Clerk of the County Board APPROVED AS TO EXECUTION: SUBRECIPIENT: Assistant County Attorney Date: By: Its: And: _ Its: Attest: Title: The City is organized pursuant to: _ Plan A _ Plan B _ Charter — Contract No. A09422 SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM EXHIBIT 1 STATEMENT OF WORK The following activity/ies shall be carried out by the City of Chanhassen under the terms of this Agreement and the details and processes set forth below. Up to $40,744 are to be provided in Urban Hennepin County CDBG funds to the City of Chanhassen to assist in the funding of the following activities in the amount and under the stipulations individually specified: Attachment A. #017 Chanhassen Sr. Center-Oper $ 8,736 Attachment B. #018 Handicap Access-Lake Ann 8,000 Attachment C. #019 H.O.M.E. 5,830 Attachment D. #020 Senior Housing Study 11,478 Attachment E. #021 Sojourn Adult Day Care 2,700 Attachment F. #022 Southshore Senior Center-Oper 4.000 Total $40,744 CDBG YEAR XVIII SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT ATTACHMENT A TO STATEMENT OF WORK 1. ACTIVITY: Chanhassen Senior Center/Oper 2. LOCATION: ADDRESS: Citywide CENSUS TRACT: 3. NUMBER: 017 — 4. BUDGET: $8,736 5. BENEFIT: L/M (Limited Clientele) 6. DESCRIPTION: Fund part of the senior center's 1992-1993 operating budget. This is a multi-year activity. 7. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS: Requirements with an "X" are applicable to this — activity and are to be included in this section and made a part of this agreement. [X] Supplemental Agreement Type: [X] Non-Profit Agency SENIOR COMMUNITY SERVICES [ ] Public Agency [ ] Other An agreement must be executed between subrecipient and any other agency — providing a service or implementing an activity on behalf of subrecipient. Said agreement must contain all pertinent sections contained in Subrecipient Agreement and such other requirements as are identified _ herein. [X] Schedule Activity must be implemented in a timely manner and completed by December 31, 1993. [X] Environmental Review Record Per 24 CFR Part 58 Subpart E the environmental review status for this activity has been determined as follows: [ ] Exempt (EX) [ ] Categorically Excluded (CE) [X] Categorically Excluded/Exempt (CE/EX) [ ] Assessment Required (AR) [ ] Funds Released (FR) Date: — [ ] Labor Standards/Equal Employment Opportunity All construction projects of $2,000 or more and financed in whole or part with federal funds shall comply with the provisions of the Davis-Bacon Act (prevailing wage) , the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act and the Copeland (Anti-Kickback) Act. All federally funded or assisted construction contracts or subcontracts of $10,000 or more shall comply with Executive Order 11246, Equal Employment Opportunity, as amended by Executive Order 12086, and the regulations issued pursuant thereto in 41 CFR Part 60. [ ] Procurement Standards and guidelines are established in 24 CFR Part 85.36 for the procurement of supplies, equipment, construction and services for federally assisted programs. All procurement shall be made by one of the following methods. The method used shall be adequately documented and contracts shall contain standard conditions as appropriate. Small Purchase. (Informal Method) To be followed for the purchase of services, supplies or other property costing in the aggregate not more than $25,000. If small purchase procurement is used, written price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources. Competitive Sealed Bids. (Formal Advertising) To be followed when the purchase/s, costing in the aggregate, exceeds $25,000. Sealed bids shall be publicly solicited and a firm fixed-price contract is to be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder. This method is preferred for soliciting construction bids. Competitive Proposals. This method is normally used when more than one source submits an offer, and either a fixed-price or cost- - reimbursement type contract is awarded. This method is typically used for procuring professional services. ( ] Section 3 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968 In connection with the planning and implementation of any project assisted under the Act, to the greatest extent feasible, opportunities for training and employment be given to low and moderate income persons residing within the unit of local government or the metropolitan area in which the project is located, and that contracts for work in connection with the project be awarded to eligible business concerns which are located in, or owned in substantial part by persons residing in the same metropolitan area as the project. Contracts for work may include, but are not limited to, contracts for supply of goods and/or services. [ ] Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition The standards described in 24 CFR 570.606 shall apply to activity that involves the acquisition of real property or the displacement of persons, including displacement caused by rehabilitation and demolition. [ ] Residential Antidisplacement and Relocation Assistance All occupied and vacant occupiable low-moderate income dwelling units demolished or converted to another use as a direct result of activity shall be replaced and relocation assistance shall be provided to each displaced low-moderate income household in accordance with the Urban Hennepin County CDBG Program Anti-displacement and Relocation Assistance Policy pursuant to Section 104(d) of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, and the provisions in 24 CFR 570.606. [ ] Property Management The standards described in 24 CFR Part 570.505 Subpart J shall apply to all — real property which was acquired or improved in whole or in part using CDBG funds in excess of $25,000. These standards apply for a period of five (5) years after the termination of this agreement. _ [ ] Land Disposition Agreement This agreement, executed between Hennepin County and the subrecipient community, contains the terms under which the community can acquire and hold land for a specified use and time period. [X] Low and Moderate Income Using the applicable Section 8 income limits established by HUD, it shall _ be demonstrated that a low- and moderate-income activity so indicated in 5. Benefit, above, meets one of the four criteria of 24 CFR Part 570.208, relating to: [ ] Area Benefit [X] Limited Clientele [ ] Housing — [ ] Job Creation or Retention [ ] Prevention or Elimination of Slums and Blight It shall be demonstrated that a slum and blight activity so indicated in 5. Benefit, above, meets one of the following criteria: [ ] Area Determination. The boundaries of the slum or blighted area must be defined and meet the requirements of 24 CFR Part 570.208(b)(1) . [ ) Spot Basis. The specific conditions of blight or physical decay not located in a slum or blighted area must be described. [ ] Urgent Community Need It shall be demonstrated that an urgent need activity, so indicated in 5. Benefit. above, is designed to alleviate a recent (within 18 months) — condition which poses a serious and immediate threat to the health or welfare of the community. [ ) Other Requirements CDBG YEAR XVIII SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT ATTACHMENT B TO STATEMENT OF WORK 1. ACTIVITY: Handicapped Accessibility-Lake Ann Park 2. LOCATION: ADDRESS: CENSUS TRACT: 906 3. NUMBER: 018 4. BUDGET: $8,000 5. BENEFIT: L/M (Limited Clientele) 6. DESCRIPTION: Install hard surface accessibility trail and resilient rubber mat under play equipment. 7. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS: Requirements with an "X" are applicable to this activity and are to be included in this section and made a part of this agreement. [ ] Supplemental Agreement Type: [ ] Non-Profit Agency [ ] Public Agency [ ] Other An agreement must be executed between subrecipient and any other agency providing a service or implementing an activity on behalf of subrecipient. Said agreement must contain all pertinent sections contained in Subrecipient Agreement and such other requirements as are identified herein. [X] Schedule Activity must be implemented in a timely manner and completed by December 31, 1993. [X] Environmental Review Record Per 24 CFR Part 58 Subpart E the environmental review status for this activity has been determined as follows: [ ] Exempt (EX) [ ] Categorically Excluded (CE) [X] Categorically Excluded/Exempt (CE/EX) [ ] Assessment Required (AR) [ ] Funds Released (FR) Date: [X] Labor Standards/Equal Employment Opportunity All construction projects of $2,000 or more and financed in whole or part with federal funds shall comply with the provisions of the Davis-Bacon Act (prevailing wage) , the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act and the Copeland (Anti-Kickback) Act. All federally funded or assisted construction contracts or subcontracts of $10,000 or more shall comply with Executive Order 11246, Equal Employment Opportunity, as amended by Executive Order 12086, and the regulations issued pursuant thereto in 41 CFR Part 60. [X] Procurement — Standards and guidelines are established in 24 CFR Part 85.36 for the procurement of supplies, equipment, construction and services for federally _ assisted programs. All procurement shall be made by one of the following methods. The method used shall be adequately documented and contracts shall contain standard conditions as appropriate. Small Purchase. (Informal Method) To be followed for the purchase of services, supplies or other property costing in the aggregate not more than $25,000. If small purchase procurement is used, written price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources. Competitive Sealed Bids. (Formal Advertising) To be followed when the purchase/s, costing in the aggregate, exceeds $25,000. Sealed bids shall be publicly solicited and a firm fixed-price contract is to be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder. This method is — preferred for soliciting construction bids. Competitive Proposals. This method is normally used when more than — one source submits an offer, and either a fixed-price or cost- reimbursement type contract is awarded. This method is typically used for procuring professional services. [X] Section 3 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968 In connection with the planning and implementation of any project assisted under the Act, to the greatest extent feasible, opportunities for training and employment be given to low and moderate income persons residing within the unit of local government or the metropolitan area in which the project is located, and that contracts for work in connection with the project be awarded to eligible business concerns which are located in, or owned in substantial part by persons residing in the same metropolitan area as the project. Contracts for work may include, but are not limited to, contracts for supply of goods and/or services. [ ] Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition — The standards described in 24 CFR 570.606 shall apply to activity that involves the acquisition of real property or the displacement of persons, _ including displacement caused by rehabilitation and demolition. [ ] Residential Antidisplacement and Relocation Assistance All occupied and vacant occupiable low-moderate income dwelling units demolished or converted to another use as a direct result of activity shall be replaced and relocation assistance shall be provided to each displaced low-moderate income household in accordance with the Urban Hennepin County CDBG Program Anti-displacement and Relocation Assistance Policy pursuant to Section 104(d) of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, and the provisions in 24 CFR 570.606. [ ] Property Management The standards described in 24 CFR Part 570.505 Subpart J shall apply to all real property which was acquired or improved in whole or in part using CDBG funds in excess of $25,000. These standards apply for a period of five (5) years after the termination of this agreement. [ ] Land Disposition Agreement This agreement, executed between Hennepin County and the subrecipient community, contains the terms under which the community can acquire and hold land for a specified use and time period. [X] Low and Moderate Income Using the applicable Section 8 income limits established by HUD, it shall be demonstrated that a low- and moderate-income activity so indicated in 5. Benefit, above, meets one of the four criteria of 24 CFR Part 570.208, relating to: [ ] Area Benefit [X] Limited Clientele [ ] Housing [ ] Job Creation or Retention [ ] Prevention or Elimination of Slums and Blight It shall be demonstrated that a slum and blight activity so indicated in 5. Benefit, above, meets one of the following criteria: [ ] Area Determination. The boundaries of the slum or blighted area must be defined and meet the requirements of 24 CFR Part 570.208(b) (1) . [ ] Spot Basis. The specific conditions of blight or physical decay not located in a slum or blighted area must be described. [ ] Urgent Community Need It shall be demonstrated that an urgent need activity, so indicated in 5. Benefit. above, is designed to alleviate a recent (within 18 months) condition which poses a serious and immediate threat to the health or welfare of the community. [ ] Other Requirements CDBG YEAR XVIII SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT ATTACHMENT C TO STATEMENT OF WORK 1. ACTIVITY: Household & Outside Maintenance for Elderly (H.O.M.E.) 2. LOCATION: ADDRESS: Citywide CENSUS TRACT: 3. NUMBER: 019 4. BUDGET: $5,830 5. BENEFIT: L/M (Limited Clientele) 6. DESCRIPTION: Funding for the HOME program to provide increased routine _ home maintenance/repairs and homemaker services to the elderly and handicapped residing in Brooklyn Center, Chanhassen, Eden Prairie, Edina, Minnetonka and Richfield. The HOME program is provided through and operated by the South Hennepin Human Services Council. — 7. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS: Requirements with an "X" are applicable to this activity and are to be included in this section and made a part of this agreement. [X] Supplemental Agreement Type: [X] Non-Profit Agency SENIOR COMMUNITY SERVICES [ ] Public Agency [ ] Other — An agreement must be executed between subrecipient and any other agency providing a service or implementing an activity on behalf of subrecipient. — Said agreement must contain all pertinent sections contained in Subrecipient Agreement and such other requirements as are identified herein. [X] Schedule Activity must be implemented in a timely manner and completed by December 31, 1993. [X] Environmental Review Record Per 24 CFR Part 58 Subpart E the environmental review status for this activity has been determined as follows: [X] Exempt (EX) [ ] Categorically Excluded (CE) [ ] Categorically Excluded/Exempt (CE/EX) — [ ] Assessment Required (AR) [ ] Funds Released (FR) Date: [ ] Labor Standards/Equal Employment Opportunity All construction projects of $2,000 or more and financed in whole or part with federal funds shall comply with the provisions of the Davis-Bacon Act (prevailing wage) , the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act and the Copeland (Anti-Kickback) Act. All federally funded or assisted construction contracts or subcontracts of $10,000 or more shall comply with Executive Order 11246, Equal Employment Opportunity, as amended by Executive Order 12086, and the regulations issued pursuant thereto in 41 CFR Part 60. [ ] Procurement Standards and guidelines are established in 24 CFR Part 85.36 for the procurement of supplies, equipment, construction and services for federally assisted programs. All procurement shall be made by one of the following methods. The method used shall be adequately documented and contracts shall contain standard conditions as appropriate. Small Purchase. (Informal Method) To be followed for the purchase of services, supplies or other property costing in the aggregate not more than $25,000. If small purchase procurement is used, written price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources. Competitive Sealed Bids. (Formal Advertising) To be followed when the purchase/s, costing in the aggregate, exceeds $25,000. Sealed bids shall be publicly solicited and a firm fixed-price contract is to be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder. This method is preferred for soliciting construction bids. Competitive Proposals. This method is normally used when more than one source submits an offer, and either a fixed-price or cost- - reimbursement type contract is awarded. This method is typically used for procuring professional services. [ ] Section 3 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968 In connection with the planning and implementation of any project assisted under the Act, to the greatest extent feasible, opportunities for training and employment be given to low and moderate income persons residing within the unit of local government or the metropolitan area in which the project is located, and that contracts for work in connection with the project be awarded to eligible business concerns which are located in, or owned in substantial part by persons residing in the same metropolitan area as the project. Contracts for work may include, but are not limited to, contracts for supply of goods and/or services. [ ] Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition The standards described in 24 CFR 570.606 shall apply to activity that involves the acquisition of real property or the displacement of persons, including displacement caused by rehabilitation and demolition. [ ) Residential Antidisplacement and Relocation Assistance All occupied and vacant occupiable low-moderate income dwelling units demolished or converted to another use as a direct result of activity shall be replaced and relocation assistance shall be provided to each displaced low-moderate income household in accordance with the Urban Hennepin County CDBG Program Anti-displacement and Relocation Assistance Policy pursuant to Section 104(d) of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, and the provisions in 24 CFR 570.606. [ ] Property Management The standards described in 24 CFR Part 570.505 Subpart J shall apply to all — real property which was acquired or improved in whole or in part using CDBG funds in excess of $25,000. These standards apply for a period of five (5) years after the termination of this agreement. — [ ] Land Disposition Agreement This agreement, executed between Hennepin County and the subrecipient — community, contains the terms under which the community can acquire and hold land for a specified use and time period. [X] Low and Moderate Income Using the applicable Section 8 income limits established by HUD, it shall be demonstrated that a low- and moderate-income activity so indicated in 5. Benefit, above, meets one of the four criteria of 24 CFR Part 570.208, relating to: [ ] Area Benefit [X] Limited Clientele [ ] Housing — [ ] Job Creation or Retention [ ] Prevention or Elimination of Slums and Blight It shall be demonstrated that a slum and blight activity so indicated in 5. Benefit, above, meets one of the following criteria: [ ] Area Determination. The boundaries of the slum or blighted area must be defined and meet the requirements of 24 CFR Part 570.208(b)(1) . [ ] Spot Basis. The specific conditions of blight or physical decay not located in a slum or blighted area must be described. [ ] Urgent Community Need — It shall be demonstrated that an urgent need activity, so indicated in 5. Benefit. above, is designed to alleviate a recent (within 18 months) — condition which poses a serious and immediate threat to the health or welfare of the community. [ ] Other Requirements CDBG YEAR XVIII SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT ATTACHMENT D TO STATEMENT OF WORK 1. ACTIVITY: Senior Housing Study 2. LOCATION: ADDRESS: Citywide CENSUS TRACT: 3. NUMBER: 020 4. BUDGET: $11,478 5. BENEFIT: Planning/Administration 6. DESCRIPTION: Funds will be used to complete a multi-year study of the housing needs of senior citizens in the city of Chanhassen. 7. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS: Requirements with an "X" are applicable to this activity and are to be included in this section and made a part of this agreement. [ ] Supplemental Agreement Type: [ ] Non-Profit Agency [ ] Public Agency [ ] Other An agreement must be executed between subrecipient and any other agency providing a service or implementing an activity on behalf of subrecipient. Said agreement must contain all pertinent sections contained in Subrecipient Agreement and such other requirements as are identified herein. [X] Schedule Activity must be implemented in a timely manner and completed by December 31, 1993. [X] Environmental Review Record Per 24 CFR Part 58 Subpart E the environmental review status for this activity has been determined as follows: [X) Exempt (EX) [ ] Categorically Excluded (CE) [ ] Categorically Excluded/Exempt (CE/EX) [ ] Assessment Required (AR) [ ] Funds Released (FR) Date: [ ] Labor Standards/Equal Employment Opportunity All construction projects of $2,000 or more and financed in whole or part — with federal funds shall comply with the provisions of the Davis-Bacon Act (prevailing wage) , the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act and the Copeland (Anti-Kickback) Act. All federally funded or assisted construction contracts or subcontracts of $10,000 or more shall comply with Executive Order 11246, Equal Employment Opportunity, as amended by Executive Order 12086, and the regulations — issued pursuant thereto in 41 CFR Part 60. [X] Procurement — Standards and guidelines are established in 24 CFR Part 85. 36 for the procurement of supplies, equipment, construction and services for federally assisted programs. All procurement shall be made by one of the following methods. The method used shall be adequately documented and contracts shall contain standard conditions as appropriate. Small Purchase. (Informal Method) To be followed for the purchase of services, supplies or other property costing in the aggregate not more than $25,000. If small purchase procurement is used, written price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources. Competitive Sealed Bids. (Formal Advertising) To be followed when the purchase/s, costing in the aggregate, exceeds $25,000. Sealed bids shall be publicly solicited and a firm fixed-price contract is to be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder. This method is — preferred for soliciting construction bids. Competitive Proposals. This method is normally used when more than — one source submits an offer, and either a fixed-price or cost- reimbursement type contract is awarded. This method is typically used for procuring professional services. [X] Section 3 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968 In connection with the planning and implementation of any project assisted under the Act, to the greatest extent feasible, opportunities for training and employment be given to low and moderate income persons residing within the unit of local government or the metropolitan area in which the project _ is located, and that contracts for work in connection with the project be awarded to eligible business concerns which are located in, or owned in substantial part by persons residing in the same metropolitan area as the project. Contracts for work may include, but are not limited to, contracts for supply of goods and/or services. [ ] Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition — The standards described in 24 CFR 570.606 shall apply to activity that involves the acquisition of real property or the displacement of persons, including displacement caused by rehabilitation and demolition. [ ] Residential Antidisplacement and Relocation Assistance All occupied and vacant occupiable low-moderate income dwelling units demolished or converted to another use as a direct result of activity shall be replaced and relocation assistance shall be provided to each displaced low-moderate income household in accordance with the Urban Hennepin County CDBG Program Anti-displacement and Relocation Assistance Policy pursuant to Section 104(d) of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, and the provisions in 24 CFR 570.606. [ ] Property Management The standards described in 24 CFR Part 570.505 Subpart J shall apply to all real property which was acquired or improved in whole or in part using CDBG funds in excess of $25,000. These standards apply for a period of five (5) years after the termination of this agreement. [ ] Land Disposition Agreement This agreement, executed between Hennepin County and the subrecipient community, contains the terms under which the community can acquire and hold land for a specified use and time period. [ ] Low and Moderate Income Using the applicable Section 8 income limits established by HUD, it shall be demonstrated that a low- and moderate-income activity so indicated in 5. Benefit, above, meets one of the four criteria of 24 CFR Part 570.208, '— relating to: [ ] Area Benefit [ ] Limited Clientele [ ] Housing [ ] Job Creation or Retention [ ] Prevention or Elimination of Slums and Blight It shall be demonstrated that a slum and blight activity so indicated in 5. Benefit, above, meets one of the following criteria: [ ] Area Determination. The boundaries of the slum or blighted area must be defined and meet the requirements of 24 CFR Part 570.208(b) (1) . [ ] Spot Basis . The specific conditions of blight or physical decay not located in a slum or blighted area must be described. [ ] Urgent Community Need It shall be demonstrated that an urgent need activity, so indicated in 5. Benefit. above, is designed to alleviate a recent (within 18 months) condition which poses a serious and immediate threat to the health or welfare of the community. [ ] Other Requirements CDBG YEAR XVIII SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT ATTACHMENT E TO STATEMENT OF WORK 1. ACTIVITY: Sojourn Adult Day Care 2. LOCATION: ADDRESS: 4151 Highway 7, Excelsior CENSUS TRACT: 905 3. NUMBER: 021 4. BUDGET: $2,700 5. BENEFIT: L/M (Limited Clientele) 6. DESCRIPTION: This program is a senior day care program, wherein families _ taking care of senior adults are able to drop them off during the day. Requested funds would be used to acquire a medicine cart in compliance with state regulations, a Wander Guard Alarm System to help in client management, and various supplies to meet state licensing requirements. 7. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS: Requirements with an "X" are applicable to this activity and are to be included in this section and made a part of this — agreement. [X] Supplemental Agreement Type: [X] Non-Profit Agency SOJOURN [ ] Public Agency [ ] Other —. An agreement must be executed between subrecipient and any other agency providing a service or implementing an activity on behalf of subrecipient. — Said agreement must contain all pertinent sections contained in Subrecipient Agreement and such other requirements as are identified herein. [X] Schedule Activity must be implemented in a timely manner and completed by — December 31, 1993. [X] Environmental Review Record Per 24 CFR Part 58 Subpart E the environmental review status for this activity has been determined as follows: [ ] Exempt (EX) [ ] Categorically Excluded (CE) [X] Categorically Excluded/Exempt (CE/EX) — [ ] Assessment Required (AR) [ ] Funds Released (FR) Date: [ ] Labor Standards/Equal Employment Opportunity All construction projects of $2,000 or more and financed in whole or part with federal funds shall comply with the provisions of the Davis-Bacon Act (prevailing wage) , the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act and the Copeland (Anti-Kickback) Act. All federally funded or assisted construction contracts or subcontracts of $10,000 or more shall comply with Executive Order 11246, Equal Employment Opportunity, as amended by Executive Order 12086, and the regulations issued pursuant thereto in 41 CFR Part 60. [ ] Procurement Standards and guidelines are established in 24 CFR Part 85.36 for the procurement of supplies, equipment, construction and services for federally assisted programs. All procurement shall be made by one of the following methods. The method used shall be adequately documented and contracts shall contain standard conditions as appropriate. Small Purchase. (Informal Method) To be followed for the purchase of services, supplies or other property costing in the aggregate not more than $25,000. If small purchase procurement is used, written price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources. Competitive Sealed Bids. (Formal Advertising) To be followed when the purchase/s, costing in the aggregate, exceeds $25,000. Sealed bids shall be publicly solicited and a firm fixed-price contract is to be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder. This method is preferred for soliciting construction bids. Competitive Proposals. This method is normally used when more than one source submits an offer, and either a fixed-price or cost- reimbursement type contract is awarded. This method is typically used for procuring professional services. [ ] Section 3 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968 In connection with the planning and implementation of any project assisted under the Act, to the greatest extent feasible, opportunities for training and employment be given to low and moderate income persons residing within the unit of local government or the metropolitan area in which the project is located, and that contracts for work in connection with the project be awarded to eligible business concerns which are located in, or owned in substantial part by persons residing in the same metropolitan area as the project. Contracts for work may include, but are not limited to, contracts for supply of goods and/or services. [ ] Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition The standards described in 24 CFR 570.606 shall apply to activity that involves the acquisition of real property or the displacement of persons, including displacement caused by rehabilitation and demolition. [ ] Residential Antidisplacement and Relocation Assistance All occupied and vacant occupiable low-moderate income dwelling units — demolished or converted to another use as a direct result of activity shall be replaced and relocation assistance shall be provided to each displaced low-moderate income household in accordance with the Urban Hennepin County — CDBG Program Anti-displacement and Relocation Assistance Policy pursuant to Section 104(d) of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, and the provisions in 24 CFR 570.606. [ ] Property Management The standards described in 24 CFR Part 570.505 Subpart J shall apply to all — real property which was acquired or improved in whole or in part using CDBG funds in excess of $25,000. These standards apply for a period of five (5) years after the termination of this agreement. [ ] Land Disposition Agreement This agreement, executed between Hennepin County and the subrecipient — community, contains the terms under which the community can acquire and hold land for a specified use and time period. [X] Low and Moderate Income Using the applicable Section 8 income limits established by HUD, it shall — be demonstrated that a low- and moderate-income activity so indicated in 5. Benefit, above, meets one of the four criteria of 24 CFR Part 570.208, relating to: [ ] Area Benefit [X] Limited Clientele [ ] Housing [ ] Job Creation or Retention [ ] Prevention or Elimination of Slums and Blight It shall be demonstrated that a slum and blight activity so indicated in 5. Benefit, above, meets one of the following criteria: [ ] Area Determination. The boundaries of the slum or blighted area must be defined and meet the requirements of 24 CFR Part 570.208(b)(1) . [ ] Spot Basis. The specific conditions of blight or physical decay not located in a slum or blighted area must be described. [ ] Urgent Community Need — It shall be demonstrated that an urgent need activity, so indicated in 5. Benefit. above, is designed to alleviate a recent (within 18 months) — condition which poses a serious and immediate threat to the health or welfare of the community. [ ] Other Requirements — _ CDBG YEAR XVIII SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT ATTACHMENT F TO STATEMENT OF WORK 1. ACTIVITY: Southshore Senior Center/Oper 2. LOCATION: ADDRESS: Citywide CENSUS TRACT: 3. NUMBER: 022 4. BUDGET: $4,000 5. BENEFIT: L/M (Limited Clientele) 6. DESCRIPTION: Funds will be used for the salary of the center's coordinator and program staff for the period between July 1, 1992 to June 30, 1993. The project will allow for the continuation of the center's operation. 7. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS: Requirements with an "X" are applicable to this activity and are to be included in this section and made a part of this agreement. [X] Supplemental Agreement Type: [X] Non-Profit Agency SENIOR COMMUNITY SERVICES [ ] Public Agency [ ] Other An agreement must be executed between subrecipient and any other agency providing a service or implementing an activity on behalf of subrecipient. Said agreement must contain all pertinent sections contained in Subrecipient Agreement and such other requirements as are identified herein. [X] Schedule Activity must be implemented in a timely manner and completed by — December 31, 1993. [X] Environmental Review Record Per 24 CFR Part 58 Subpart E the environmental review status for this activity has been determined as follows: [ ] Exempt (EX) [ ] Categorically Excluded (CE) [X] Categorically Excluded/Exempt (CE/EX) [ ] Assessment Required (AR) [ ] Funds Released (FR) Date: [ J Labor Standards/Equal Employment Opportunity All construction projects of $2,000 or more and financed in whole or part — with federal funds shall comply with the provisions of the Davis-Bacon Act (prevailing wage) , the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act and the Copeland (Anti-Kickback) Act. — All federally funded or assisted construction contracts or subcontracts of $10,000 or more shall comply with Executive Order 11246, Equal Employment _ Opportunity, as amended by Executive Order 12086, and the regulations issued pursuant thereto in 41 CFR Part 60. [ ] Procurement — Standards and guidelines are established in 24 CFR Part 85.36 for the procurement of supplies, equipment, construction and services for federally assisted programs. All procurement shall be made by one of the following methods. The method used shall be adequately documented and contracts shall contain standard conditions as appropriate. Small Purchase. (Informal Method) To be followed for the purchase of services, supplies or other property costing in the aggregate not more than $25 ,000. If small purchase procurement is used, written price or — rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources. Competitive Sealed Bids. (Formal Advertising) To be followed when the purchase/s, costing in the aggregate, exceeds $25,000. Sealed bids shall be publicly solicited and a firm fixed-price contract is to be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder. This method is preferred for soliciting construction bids. Competitive Proposals. This method is normally used when more than — one source submits an offer, and either a fixed-price or cost- reimbursement type contract is awarded. This method is typically used for procuring professional services. [ ] Section 3 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968 In connection with the planning and implementation of any project assisted under the Act, to the greatest extent feasible, opportunities for training and employment be given to low and moderate income persons residing within the unit of local government or the metropolitan area in which the project — is located, and that contracts for work in connection with the project be awarded to eligible business concerns which are located in, or owned in substantial part by persons residing in the same metropolitan area as the project. Contracts for work may include, but are not limited to, contracts for supply of goods and/or services. [ ] Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition — The standards described in 24 CFR 570.606 shall apply to activity that involves the acquisition of real property or the displacement of persons, — including displacement caused by rehabilitation and demolition. [ ] Residential Antidisplacement and Relocation Assistance All occupied and vacant occupiable low-moderate income dwelling units demolished or converted to another use as a direct result of activity shall be replaced and relocation assistance shall be provided to each displaced low-moderate income household in accordance with the Urban Hennepin County CDBG Program Anti-displacement and Relocation Assistance Policy pursuant to Section 104(d) of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, and the provisions in 24 CFR 570.606. [ ] Property Management The standards described in 24 CFR Part 570.505 Subpart J shall apply to all real property which was acquired or improved in whole or in part using CDBG funds in excess of $25,000. These standards apply for a period of five (5) years after the termination of this agreement. [ ] Land Disposition Agreement This agreement, executed between Hennepin County and the subrecipient community, contains the terms under which the community can acquire and hold land for a specified use and time period. [X] Low and Moderate Income Using the applicable Section 8 income limits established by HUD, it shall be demonstrated that a low- and moderate-income activity so indicated in 5. Benefit, above, meets one of the four criteria of 24 CFR Part 570.208, relating to: _ [ ] Area Benefit [X] Limited Clientele [ ] Housing [ ] Job Creation or Retention [ ] Prevention or Elimination of Slums and Blight It shall be demonstrated that a slum and blight activity so indicated in 5. Benefit, above, meets one of the following criteria: [ ] Area Determination. The boundaries of the slum or blighted area must be defined and meet the requirements of 24 CFR Part 570.208(b) (1) . [ ] Spot Basis. The specific conditions of blight or physical decay not located in a slum or blighted area must be described. [ ] Urgent Community Need It shall be demonstrated that an urgent need activity, so indicated in 5. Benefit. above, is designed to alleviate a recent (within 18 months) condition which poses a serious and immediate threat to the health or welfare of the community. [ ] Other Requirements CITYOF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 ► Action by etty Administratat Endorsed ✓ Atodihe MEMORANDUM �acte Deb Submitted to Commission TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager Date submitte" to council FROM: Paul Krauss, Planning Director DATE: August 6, 1992 SUBJ: Extension of Time to Obtain Final Plat Approval for Ches Mar Trails, Craig Swaggert On July 8, 1991, the City Council approved the preliminary plat for Ches Mar Trails PUD. You may recall that this replat would result in the reconstruction of the existing apartment building and the removal of a dilapidated home, while allowing for the construction of a few new single family residences. In the attached letter, Craig Swaggert, who is the applicant, has indicated that although he has been working diligently to complete this project, he is requesting an additional 6 months to obtain final plat approval. Staff can confirm that Mr. Swaggert has been working with us over the past year to progressively resolve the few remaining outstanding issues concerning the plat. He indicates that he has full intent to proceed on this and staff has already allowed him to do some preliminary grading and removal of dilapidated structures. We are recommending that the City Council approve the extension for the six months that are requested. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the final plat approval for Ches Mar Trails PUD be extended for an additional six months to January 8, 1993. ATTACHMENTS 1. Letter from Craig Swaggert. 2. City Council minutes dated July 8, 1991. t4, PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER Craig Swaggert 2739 Ches Mar Farm Road Excelsior, Mn 55331 City of Chanhassen Mayor and City Council 690 Coulter Drive -' Chanhassen, MN 55317 Re: Ches Mar Farms Dear Mayor and City Council Members, We would like to request an extension of six months on our PUP and replat proposal for Ches Mar Farm Trails. We have found it to be a bigger project than we had anticipated and have not fully defined our direction, although it will not deviate much from our original proposal . I would like to make sure we have our I's dotted and our T's crossed. Although I have done projects like this in the past I am surprised by the magnitude of requirements by governmental agencies. MDOT, Watershed District, DNR water, DNR forestry, city engineers, building inspector, plumbing and heat inspectors, fire marshall , city planning department, county surveyor, park director, and a few others have all become involved in this project. We plan to complete all of the requirements within the next three months but we are requesting the six months to accomidate any unforseen problems or issues. I thank you in advance for your cooperation in this matter. Sincerl , Cr ig S gert City Council Meeting - y 8, 1991 �! I f anybcd;. and nek evidentally it 's a problem and I think it can be worked out . Real easily. haycr Cr:r„El : You can line up that discussion with staff. — Brian L'_ndcch_ 1 Okay. Councilman Wing moved, Councilwoman Disler seconded to approve Conditional Use Permit $91-5 to al.' Dw a portable chemical toilet on Minnewashta Creek Homeowners Association Recreational Beachlot (Outlot B) with the following conditions: 1. The applicant applies for a license from the city on an annual basis prior to installation of the portable chemical toilet . 2. The portable chemical toilet shall only be permitted from Memorial Day to Labor Day and shall be removed from the beachlot during the rest of the year. 3. The beachlot shall be maintained in good condition in a manner consistent with previous approvals and current ordinance requirements. 4. The portable chemical toilet shall be located in accordance with the application/plans received by the City on May 20, 1991. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. CHES MAP FARM, APPROXIMATELY ONE-HALF MILE NORTH OF TH 5 OFF OF TH 41. CRAIG SWAGGERT. -' Paul Krauss: Ch you do want a report on this? Mayor Chrriel: Yes. Councilwoman Dimler: I was at the Planning Commission so. Paul Krauss: Keep in mind I'm the second string on this one. Jo Ann's still on vacation. This is an incredibly complex request for a relatively simple action and it 's got a real confusing history which makes matters worse. This was — approved originally in 1985 and it was a pre-existing situation and the PUD was used for a use that I've never heard of before and it was basically to legitimize a non-conforming situation so they could sell off individual lots. — It was a real abnormality. The sewer wasn't anywhere close and it's only as of 5 or 6 weeks cgo that the MUSA line was anywhere visible from this property but there was always an existing multi-family dwelling out there and there are a _ number of homes when the PUD was done. It was modified in 1989 slightly. Basically what it did is we had a series of single family homes including the quasi-elderly, pseudo historical home that 's since been removed. It was in very bad shape and it 's been cleared by the applicant in preparation of building a new home. But what it boils down to is the current proposal with all the requests, he's basically had to apply for virtually every permit we have in this application, is to increase the size of the PUD and decrease the number of — units. So we view it as a big step in the right direction. It's bringing it into compliance with what 's supposed to be out there. The guide plan is to take 47 City Council Meeting - ' y 8, 1991 it from medium density, which you can see is a little blip on the map up there and the zoning district is an abberation and come down to single family reoidential which is really what it 's supposed to be. The multi-family dwelling which has been a real difficult one and there's some code compliance issues and I knc there's been some questions about the on site sewer for that and some other thir:go over the years. That 's going .to be converted to either a duplex or single family and all the other lots are going to be developed as single family residences and reasonably attractive ones. There is a request for a CUP for beachlot . That is going to be used by several of the homes in here. There's a wetland alteration permit which is for our normal boardwalk structure which we use tc protect the wetland to get out to the dock on the beachlot . Basically as odd as this request is, it does conform to our standards and we do believe it's in the best interest of the city and the neighborhood for this to happen. We did bring this before the Planning Commission. There were several adjoining residents who had questions answered and came away supportive of the proposal. The Planning Commission discussed at length. There are several members of the Planning Commission who remembered the other two times this came -up and were very familiar with it and cleaned up a lot of the recommendations in a way that I certainly couldn't have done not having the history and they recommended approval and we are continuing to recommend approval. I should note however that I pilfered through Jo Ann's mailbox today and we did get a letter somewhat late but it 's from Camp Tanadoona where they expressed some concern over development and protection of wetlands. We did not have an opportunity to speak to them but I firmly believe that this is no threat to the natural environment over there. In fact it 's probably the reverse is true. To the extent that we had a problem: property there close to the Girl's Camp, we're now removing that and it 's going to be single family homes on very large lots and very nicely developed. As far as the surface water management plan goes or the DNR, our boardwalks are developed according to DNR standards and we work hand and hand with them and we specifically do that to avoid impacting the wetland. I don't know if they're here tonight . I don't believe so but short of that, I didn't have a chance to address this directly but I'm firmly convinced that the issues raised in this letter are not relevant to this request and be happy to speak to Miss Johnson after. Mayor Ch-iel : It 's sort of far removed isn't it from one point to the other? Paul Krauss: It 's not that far from, well it 's far from where the active parts of the camp are. They of course are notified because they're an immediate, adjoining resident but I really don't believe there's any direct impact. One other thing too before I forget. There's a condition that we mentioned to the Planning Commission that they agreed with but got deleted by accident. It has to do with a north/south trail connection through there as part of that overall comprehensive trail system we have heard so much about a short time ago. One of the trail corridors runs from basically the TH 5 area up to Minnewashta Regional Park ultimately. As properties develop and we can obtain the trail and there was a request for an easement coming through there and it's I believe in your packet . On the overhead when this came up when we mentioned it the first time, the location of the trail was shown right through here. We have some flexibility on where it's exactly located and can work with the applicant on -the final location. We know where it has to go but we have some flexibility in that corridor to locate it so I would request that you add another condition to the 48 City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991 PUD a7_7.dr.Ent that a 20 foot wide north/south trail easement be provided in the location acceptable to the City. With that we are recommending approval. Mayor Chr:iel : Thanks Paul . Is there any discussion?' Does the applicant have anything to say? Craig Swaggert : I'm Craig Swaggert . I live at 2800 Stone Arch Road, Woodland, Minnesota. In addressing the wetland alterations, I have contacted the ONR. I do have to get a permit through them. I also have to get a permit through Minnehaha Watershed District and I'm still waiting from the Corps of Engineers — whether I need .a permit from them so I feel that we're pretty well covered as far as wetland protection. A couple of the recommendations that I have a question on. On the PUD agreement , it's my understanding that the City Attorney — would draft that . Is that correct? Paul Krauss: We draft that in house in conjunction with the City Attorney to make sure all the is are dotted and is are crossed. We have a broiler plate fcrr, we use . Craig Swaggert : Alright and that 's a relatively fast process or something that — I have to look at first? Mayor Chr.iel : Within the next 10 minutes. Paul Krauss: We will draft one up as soon as possible. Craig Swaggert : And then item 3 in the recommendations. I fully intend to get — back in here quite quickly for the final plat and by State Law I need to give 60 day notice to the residents. I would like to request that I have certified letters requesting vacation as a condition rather than the actual vacation of the properties. Of the 6 units. Paul Krauss: Which condition are you addressing now? Craig Swaggert : Condition 3. Mayor Chmiel: Of? — Craig Swaggert : Of this sixplex. Paul Krauss: Oh, must be vacated prior to final plat approval. And your proposal was to certify letters? Craig Swaggert : Right . Requesting vacation. And along with that , it's my understanding that I don't have to, that I can still have two units occupied but not six units. Paul Krauss: I think that I would be comfortable with that unless the City Attorney has some objection if we had a date certain involved as to when we- would achieve at least the duplex or two unit% If you would come up with a - — date Craig for us to review. You know if we're talking 60 days hence, we'll write that into the. 49 City Concil Meeting - J 8, 1991 Craig Sw2_cert : Well , it 'd be 60 days from June 1st because I'd have to give them notice on the first of the month. And in fact we have two units vacated already. Paul Cka>. We could go with August 1st or August 15th or whatever we worked out . As long as we had a date certain. in the contract , I'm more . corfortable with that . Craig Swaggert : Than the certified letters? Okay. And then number 5, the driveway easements. My attorney would draft that? Is that correct? Paul Krauss: Either your attorney would draft it in a form acceptable to our attorney or our attorney would draft it and you'd be billed for the time. Craig Swaggert : I think if I've got to pay for it I'd just as soon have my attorney do it . Mayor Chriel : Our 's is reasonable. Councilman Mason: Cheap. And he's good too. Craig Swaggert : Maybe he could do it during the Council meeting. Paul Krauss : There is a problem though. I mean we have standard formatting for that so if your attorney would check with Roger. Craig Swaggert : Absolutely. And then on number 12, the tree preservation plan shall be submitted by the applicant for city approval. Is that in conjunction with the issuance of the building permit or the replatting? Paul Krauss: With the building permit . We should clarify that . Craig Swaggert : Okay, and then on 13 the trail easement. Is that going to be part of the plat? The final plat or an easement? Roger Knutson: Trail easements are not recorded on the plat . Craig Swaggert : They are not? Okay. Roger Knutson: It 's a separate document. Craig Swaggert : Thank you. Do you have any questions for me? Mayor Chmiel: No. I sat at the Planning Commission meeting so I guess. Councilman Wing: Mr. Mayor, in order of time. One thing I didn't understand. I have two questions. One on the dock and one on the driveway. Paul, I didn't understand why when there's somewhat of a formal entryway to Ches Mar Farms now, an existing road, why wasn't there some way to preserve the existing road and driveway. Why do we have to put in a second driveway? Second access on TH 41? Paul Krauss: They're quite a distance apart and the existing curb cut wasn't all that great anyway. There was some consultation with MnDot as to whether 50 City Ccurcil fleeting my 8, 1991 they felt this was an appropriate solution and they did. And it is a shared driveway and we became comfortable with it at that time. We initially had some concerns with that as well. Cc:r:cilrran Ling: Okay. Perhaps my greatest concern is on the dock. Not the fact that the dock's going in but maybe the location of the dock. What I wanted to clarify, is the dock going west into the lake or do you intend to put the — dock into that little lagoon cut back area? Craig Swaggert : It will go into the little lagoon cutback area. — Councilman Wing: I'm not sure if the ONR would accept that . I don't know if they were notified. The little lagoon I'm very familiar with and it 's really not even navigable in the fall• of the year if the lake level. There's kind of a reef and some rocks that go across the front of it and then it kind of deepens slightly into the shoreline. It seems to be somewhat of a spawning ground. A little setback reef area and I think it 's environmentally not acceptable for a — dock. That 's my opinion and if I had been home I would have asked the Council to core and look at that physically because I think it 's a very significant issue . I wouldn't be opposed to the boardwalk cutting through the wetlands and _ then going straight west into the main lake portion itself. So I guess I'm opposed to the dock's location going into the lagoon. I think that's a real issue and I think it should be looked at prior to approval. But also if you haven't looked at that closely, it may not be to your benefit to put it there. — Craig Swaggert : I was out there this week to look at that issue. I've been out there in the winter and the spring and it's kind of difficult to get to so I — brought my boat out there and went into that little lagoon. There is a reef there. The deepest part in that reef is about 3 1/2 feet . Councilman Ling: In high water. — Craig Swaggert : At today's level which is, it 's about a foot below the high water mark. For the 100 year high water mark. — Councilman Wing: In the fall of the season, because I sunfish out there, you can't get a pontoom boat across there without tilting the motor up because _ there's enough rocks and so you're basically, if we have a low summer or our average 18 inch drop on Minnewashta. This is the 20 year average. My dock has never changed it 's position in 25 years. Where you're putting the dock is not going to be, you're not going to be able to get boats in and out without — dredging or digging out a little channel. That 's my opinion but more important , I really think prior to approval that needs to be looked at specifically. I would favor the dock in any way going straight into the lake. Not into that — little lagoon. I think that's to your benefit but more importantly I think it's a real important environmental question that we should look at. Mayor Chmiel: I think staff could probably look at that and come up with some conclusion on that if that's a real concern. Councilman Wing: I think the proposal you have is excellent. It's an addition to the area and I support it but I would ask consideration of the Council to table this prior to staff looking at that dock placement. 51 City ,.. unc'.1 Mee' 'ng - J1 8, 1991 Paul Krauss: You've got this coming back for PUD agreement authorization. We could do it prior to that . Councilman LWing: That 's fine. That will give time, that would be adequate then for you: to review that? If that 's okay with you. Craig Swaggert : Yes. Definitely. Councilman Wing: Id a personal note to you, having lived on the lake 25 years, that literally is high and dry on that outer reef area in the fall season. Many years. I don't know if the dock would be useable part of the year. Just a • comment . - . Craig Swaggert :- Thank you. • Mayor Chmiel : Okay, any other discussion? Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion to accept all 4 and if you look on page 8, the first one and then carry it threagh with the balance of each of the numbers. Okay. Want me to do it? City Council approves PUD Amendment $91-1 shown on plans dated May 28, 1991 with a variance to the lot width requirement for Lot 1, Block 1 and the following conditions of item 1 thru 13. Councilwoman Dimler: 14. Paul Krauss: With a 14th condition. Mayor Chr.iel : With item number 14 added. Okay, City Council also approves a Comprehensive Plan Amendment $91-1 changing the Land Use Designation from _ Residential Medium Density to Residential Low Density subject to the conditions of the PUD Amendment , Conditional Use Permit and Wetland Alteration Permit . Item number 3. The City Council approves Conditional Use Permit $91-4 for a recreational beachlot on Outlot A as shown on plans dated May 28, 1991 with the following conditions. Items number 1 through 4. Also, City Council approves Wetland Alteration Permit #91-1 for construction of a permanent boardwalk through a Class A wetland as shown on the plans dated May 28, 1991 with the following conditions of items 1 through 6. Councilwoman Dimler: Second. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, it 's been moved and seconded. Any other discussion? Councilman Wing: Did my concern get covered in this or would I have to ask an additional item under Conditional Use Permit for a beachlot regarding the dock pending staff review? Paul Krauss: I assume we've been directed to do that. We'll bring it back. Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to approve PUD Amendment 191-1 as shown on plans dated May 28, 1991 with a variance to the lot width requirement for Lot 1, Block 1 and the following conditions: 1 . The PUD agreement will be drafted and recorded against the property. The PUD agreement will contain all conditions of approval for the PUD. 52 City Council "--ting Ally 8, 1991 2. A revised preliminary plat must be submitted redesignating Lot 2, Block 1 as Outlot B. 3. The residence on Lot 4, Block 1 shall either be a duplex or single family urit . The six apartment units must be vacated prior to final plat approval . 4. The applicant shall receive an access permit from MnDot for the proposed — access servicing Lots 1 and 3, Block 1 and Outlot A and B. 5. P driveway easement shall be provided across Lot 2 (Outlot B), Lot 1 and Outlot A and recorded against such properties. The driveway must be constructed so as to accommodate emergency vehicles and must be maintained in good passable condition. 6. The applicant shall be required to install a culvert sized by a professional engineer, and approved by City Engineers prior to construction to accommodate anticipated flows through the existing ditch on Lot 1, Block 1. — 7. No more than 4 dwelling units will be permitted as part of the PUD; one on Lot 1 , one on Lot 3 and one on Lot 4 unless the existing building is — converted to a duplex. 8. Demolition permits are required for all demolition; demolition of all the buildings to be razed shall be completed within 6 months of final plat — approval . 9. A revised preliminary plat shall be submitted showing all existing and — proposed on-site sewage treatment sites and proposed house pads and elevations. 10. If a news residence is constructed on Lot 4, Block 2 it must meet all required setbacks. All other existing buildings on Lot 4 must be razed. 11 . The applicant shall meet any and all conditions of Conditional Use Permit — #91-4 and wetland Alteration Permit #91-1. • 12. A tree preservation plan shall be submitted by the applicant for city _ approval for Lot 1, Block 1. 13. A revised preliminary plat shall be submitted by the applicant and shall reflect revised southerly lot line of Lot 3, the trail easement across Lot 1, Block 1 in accordance with Park and Recreatio Commission recommendations and elimination of the driveway onto Outlot A. A barrier shall be erected over the driveway at the lot line between Lot 1 and Outlot A to keep — vehicles from driving or parking on Outlot A. 14. A 20 foot trail easement running north/south shall be provided in a location acceptable to the City. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. 53 . .City Council Meet i^g - 31. 8, 1991 Resolution $91-66: Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilwoman Dialer seconded to approve Comprehensive Plan Amendment #91-1 changing the Land Use Designation from Residential Medium Density to Residential Low Density subject to the conditions of the PUD Amendment , Conditional Use Permit and Wetland Alteration Permit. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilwoman Dialer seconded to approve Conditional Use Permit $91-4 for a recreational beachlot on Outlot A as shown on plans dated May 28, 1991 with the fcllowing conditions: 1 . The recreational beachlot will be permitted only one dock with overnight • storage of up to 3 watercraft . - . 2. Launching of boats from the recreational beachlot is prohibited. 3. The conditional use permit for the recreational beachlot is only for the proposed dock improvements. Any additional improvements to the recreational beachlot shall require another conditional use permit and wetland alteration permit . 4 . The applicant shall meet any and all conditions of the PUD amendment #91-1 and Wetland Alteration ^ermit $91-1. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. • Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilwoman Dialer seconded to approve Wetland Alteration Permit $91-1 for construction of a permanent boardwalk through a Class A wetland as shown on the plans dated May 28, 1991 with the following conditions: 1 . Th__=re shall be no filling or dredging/grading permitted within the wetlands. 2. The applicant shall receive a permit from the Department of Natural Resources for the permanent boardwalk. 3. The proposed trail shall be constructed at least 10 feet away from the wetland located in the southwest corner on Outlot A. 4 . The wetland shall be permitted to return to its natural state after installation of the boardwalk. 5. No other alteration to the wetlands are permitted without receiving another wetland alteration permit . Further, all approved alterations shall be undertaken at a time and in a manner so as to minimize disruption to the wetland. 6. The applicant shall meet any and all conditions of the PUD Amendment $91-1 and Conditional Use Permit #91-4. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. 54 C I TY O F0,1,111 CHANHASSEN f 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 Acton tri City Adminishttoi MEMORANDUM Bid ✓ DW r i Modified TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager Re4eCttd �_ b_qy Oft. Pete Submitted to Ccmmissio�n FROM: Todd Gerhardt, Assistant City Manager '�� Deco Submitted to Council DATE: August 6, 1992 SUBJ: Approval of Purchase Agreement with Chanhassen Taco Shop Attached for the City Council's approval is the purchase agreement for the Chanhassen Taco Shop. The reason the City Council must approve this agreement is that the Council authorized the public taking of this property for the purpose of constructing the realignment of State Highway 101 and West 78th Street. Even though the City Council is approving the purchase agreement, the funds to pay for this facility will come from the Chanhassen Housing and Redevelopment Authority. Funding for the construction of the roadway will be paid through Economic Development District #1, based on the state legislature approval of extending the life of this district for three additional years. This district extension was conditioned upon the monies being solely used for the construction of the realignment of State Highway 101 and West 78th Street. RECOMMENDATION Staff would recommend that the City Council approve the attached purchase agreement between Guy Petersen, owner of the Chanhassen Taco Shop, and the City of Chanhassen. ATTACHMENT 1. Purchase Agreement dated 111, TO: PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER CAMPBELL , KNUTSON , SCOTT & FUCHS , P .A Aug 6 ,92 15 : 12 No . 005 P .02 CAMPBELL, KNUTSON, SCOTT & FUCHS, P.A. AttornL'y at Law j.C unl,hcll (612) 152 5L\ Rc,v.cr N. Knutunn Fax (612)452.5550 Thoma$M.Scott Cary 0. Fuc'lt, Jame.R.Waktun Elli,,tr ti. Knet,clt August 6, 1992 Michael A.fn,hack Rcnac h.Steiner Mr. Don Ashworth City Manager 690 Coulter Drive, Box 147 _ Chanhassen, MN 55317 Re: Court File No. 91-28228 // Our File No. 12668/208 Condemnation of Chanhassen Taco Shop Property City of Chanhassen v. Guy S . Petersen, et al Dear Mr. Ashworth: Enclosed herewith please find a draft of a Settlement Agreement between the City of Chanhassen and Guy S. Petersen regarding the acquisition of the Chanhassen Taco Shop property. Acquisition of the Taco Shop Property was necessary as part of the realignment of Highway 101 North of Highway 5 and was included in a condemnation proceeding in Carver County District Court. This settlement was negotiated primarily through the efforts of Todd Gerhardt. Mr. Gerhardt dealt directly with Guy Petersen, the owner of the property. The settlement amount is full payment for one of the most highly visible and valuable pieces of land in the City, as well as full payment for all costs of relocation of _ the business as is required by state and federal law. Those relocation costs could have been substantial . Based on my experience in these matters, I believe Mr. Gerhardt did an excellent job of negotiating the settlement. Because settlement was negotiated prior to the Commissioners ' hearings, the City saved the expense of costs associated with the hearing, including attorneys ' fees and expert witness fees. In addition, the City has a small business owner who is satisfied with the settlement and is relocating his business within the City. In addition to the amounts set forth in the Settlement Agreement, the city is also required, pursuant to Minnesota statute, to reimburse Mr. Petersen for $500. 00 towards payment of his costs incurred in obtaining his appraisal for the property. That additional $500. 00 payment is not specifically provided for in the Settlement Agreement and that amount should be added to the amounts set forth in the Settlement Agreement. Suite 317 • Eagandale Office Center • 1380 Corporate Center Curve • Eagan, MN 55121 CAMPBELL , KNUTSON , SCOTT & FUCHS , P . A Aug 6 ,92 15 : 13 No .005 P .03 Mr. Don Ashworth August 6, 1992 Page 2 As attorneys for the City of Chanhassen, we recommend to the City Council that the Settlement Agreement be approved. If you — require any additional information or if you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Very truly yours, CAMPBELL, KN TSON, SCOTT & FUCHS, .A. — Hy• Gar G. Fu s GGF:clk Enclosures CAMPBELL , KNUTSON , SCOTT & FUCHS , P .A Aug 6 ,92 15 : 13 No . 005 P . 04 STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF CARVER FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT Case Type 2 : Condemnation City of Chanhassen, a Minnesota municipal corporation, Court File No. 91-28228 Petitioner, — vs. SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT Guy S . Petersen; — State Bank of Chanhassen; Apple Valley Red-E-Mix, Inc. n/k/a AVR, Inc. ; First Bank National Association; Builders Development, Inc. ; The Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States; B F Holding Company; Dorn and Associates, Inc. ; Metropolitan Financial Mortgage Corporation n/k/a Metropolitan Federal Bank fsb; Owatonna Savings and Loan Association n/k/a Metropolitan Federal Bank fsb; — St. Louis County Federal Savings & Loan Association n/k/a St. Louis Bank for Savings fsb; John Doe and — Mary Roe and County of Carver, Respondents. This SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT is made by and between PETITIONER, THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN (hereinafter "Petitioner") , ' and RESPONDENT, GUY S. PETERSEN (hereinafter "Petersen") . RECITALS A. Petitioner commenced this eminent domain proceeding seeking to acquire fee title to property owned by Petersen. The property owned by Petersen that is the subject of this proceeding — is legally described as: PARCEL 1 - FEE TITLE TO: — That part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter (NE 1/4 of NE 1/4) of Section 13 , Township 116 North, Range 23 CAMPBELL , KNUTSON , SCOTT & FUCHS , P . A Aug 6 ,92 15 : 14 No .005 P .05 West, Carver County, Minnesota, lying southerly of the Southeasterly right-of-way line of Chicago, Milwaukee, St. — Paul and Pacific Railroad and Northerly of the Northwesterly right-of-way line of new Trunk Highway No. 5; EXCEPT, a strip of land 35 feet wide running over and across the above described tract, lying adjacent to and being parallel with the Southeasterly right--of-way line of the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad. — (hereinafter the "Subject Property") . — B. At all times material hereto, Petersen owned and operated a commercial business on the Subject Property under the business name of "Chanhassen Taco Shop. " C. As a necessary part of the operation of his commercial business, Petersen has made certain permanent improvements on the Subject Property, has installed permanent fixtures and signs and has acquired certain personal property. — D. Petersen has sought and found a new location within the City of Chanhassen to which his commercial business enterprise may be relocated. — E. Petitioner and Petersen acknowledge that relocation of Petitioner' s business will result in substantial cost to Petersen — and Petitioner acknowledges its obligations for reimbursement of certain costs to Petersen incurred as a result of the relocation of Petersen' s business as those obligations are set forth in Minnesota Statutes Section 117. 50 through 117 .56 . F. Petitioner and Petersen wish to resolve this eminent — domain proceeding and the City' s obligations for relocation payments and, in furtherance of that desire, enter into this Settlement Agreement. -2- CAMPBELL , KNUTSON , SCOTT & FUCHS , P .A Aug 6 , 92 15 : 14 No . 005 P . 06 SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT In consideration of the terms, covenants, conditions and payments as set forth herein, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the City of Chanhassen, by and through its Mayor and City Manager, and Guy S. Petersen, a single person, HEREBY AGREE AS FOLLOWS; 1 . This Settlement Agreement is full and final settlement of any and all claims for compensation, damages, relocation costs and expenses and losses of any kind that may have been sustained by, or incurred by, Guy S. Petersen, known or unknown, as a result of the City' s eminent domain proceeding to acquire fee title to the Subject Property owned by Guy S . Petersen as that property is described above. 2 . Petitioner shall pay to Petersen the sum of Three Hundred Thirteen Thousand and no/100 ($313, 000. 00) Dollars as full and final compensation for all condemnation damages and all relocation benefits and costs on the following terms and conditions: a. Petitioner shall pay Petersen $247,700 . 00 upon final execution of this Agreement by the parties hereto. b. Petitioner shall pay Petersen an additional $65, 300 . 00 pursuant to the Uniform Relocation and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, 42 U.S . Code, Sec. 4601-4638 if, and only if, on or before November 1, 1992, Petersen relocates his Chanhassen Taco Shop business to the recently constructed Market Square Shopping Center development located on the southeast corner of the intersection of Market Boulevard and West 78th Street in the City of Chanhassen, said relocation to be a good faith, bona fide relocation of the business pursuant to a lease for a period of at least three years, said relocation to be deemed accomplished upon the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the premises leased by Petersen in the Market Square Shopping Center. -3- CRMPBELL , KNUTSON , SCOTT & FUCHS , P .A Aug 6 ,92 15 : 15 No .005 P .07 _ 3 . Petitioner shall have the right to fee title and possession of the Subject Property upon payment of the $247, 700.00 amount in accordance with 2a. above. The parties understand and _ agree that the $65, 300 . 00 contingent payment is a portion of Petersen 's relocation expenses and that nonpayment of that amount shall have no affect whatsoever on Petitioner' s ownership or possession of the Subject Property and, further, nonpayment of the $65, 300. 00 contingent amount shall not entitle Petersen to any _ other or additional compensation or relocation benefits . 4 . Subject to the provisions of paragraph 2 above, the — parties agree that the $313 , 000. 00 payment is full and final payment of all compensation due to Petersen pursuant to Minn. Stat. §117 . 01 et seq. , including, but not limited to: a. The land acquired in this proceeding and all improvements thereto. — b. The building located on the land and all related and appurtenant improvements thereto. _ c. All fixtures, signs and nonmoveable personal property located on the Subject Property. d. The packing, crating, transportation, storage, insurance and unpacking of personal property. e. The dismantling, removing and reassembly of equipment. f. The replacement of lost or damaged personal property.g. The cost of all re-lettering of signs and all new stationery, phone numbers, checking accounts and advertising costs. h. The construction and installation of new signs. i . Any increased costs of operation of the Taco Shop business at its new location. -4- CAMPBELL , KNUTSON , SCOTT & FUCHS , P .A Aug 6 ,92 15 : 16 No .005 P .08 j . Any and all other such relocation costs and benefits to which Petersen may be entitled under the Uniform Relocation Act of 1970, referred to above. 5. Petitioner agrees that Petersen may place a sign on the Subject Property that informs the public of the new location of Petersen's Taco Shop business. Any such sign shall comply with all applicable City ordinances and shall be approved by the City Manager prior to being placed on the Subject Property. The sign shall be constructed, installed, maintained and removed at Petersen' s sole expense. The sign, and all associated structural supports, shall be removed no later than March 31, 1993 . 6. The real estate taxes for the Subject Property, due and payable in the year 1991 , have been paid in full and Petersen shall have no obligation to pay the real estate taxes for the subject Property due and payable in the year 1992 and thereafter. 7 . Upon receipt of verification from Petersen that sewer availability charge (SAC) units were paid by Petersen for the Subject Property, Petitioner will transfer the SAC units that are currently allocated to the Petersen Taco Shop property to the new Taco Shop operation in Market Square in such a manner that those SAC units will not be charged to Petersen as a result of the relocation of his Taco Shop business. 8. Notwithstanding Petitioner' s right to possession, Petersen shall have the right to remain in possession of the Subject Property pursuant to the terms and conditions of a Lease Agreement, a true and correct copy of which is marked as -5- CAMPBELL , KNUTSON , SCOTT & FUCHS , P . A Aug 6 ,92 15 : 16 No .005 P .09 LEASE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this day of 1992 , by and between THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN, a — municipal corporation under the laws of the State of Minnesota ("City") , and GUY S. PETERSEN ( "Tenant") . 1. Lease. The City hereby leases to Tenant, subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and the Tenant hereby leases from the City real property described as follows, to-wit: — CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA: — That part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter (NE 1/4 of NE 1/4) of Section 13 , Township 116 North, Range 23 west, Carver County, Minnesota, lying Southerly of the — Southeasterly right-of-way line of Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad and Northerly of the Northwesterly right-of-way line of new Trunk Highway No. 5 ; — EXCEPT, a strip of land 35 feet wide running over and across the above described tract, lying adjacent to and being — parallel with the Southeasterly right-of-way line of the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad together with all improvements and fixtures located thereon (hereinafter the "Subject Property") .2 . Term. This Lease shall commence on the date the City acquires possession of the Subject Property pursuant to a Settlement Agreement between the parties of even date herewith and shall terminate on November 1, 1992 , unless sooner terminated under the terms of the Lease. The Tenant may, however, terminate — this Lease at any earlier date by giving the City ten (10) days ' advance written notice. — EXHIBIT A-1 CAMPBELL , KNUTSON , SCOTT & FUCHS , P . A Aug 6 ,92 15 : 17 No . 005 P . 10 3. Rent. The Tenant shall pay to the City rent of Ten and no/100 ($10. 00) Dollars for the term of the Lease. 4 . Tenant's covenants. Tenant hereby agrees as follows: (a) To use the Subject Property only for the purpose of a restaurant and related activities, so long as any such related activities are consistent with all applicable laws and ordinances and are acceptable to the City of Chanhassen. (b) At all times during the Term of this Lease, the City shall have the right, by itself, its agents and employees, to enter into and upon the Subject Property during reasonable business hours upon reasonable notice for the purpose of examining and inspecting the same. (c) Not to assign or sublet his interest in the Subject Property pursuant to this Lease. In addition, Tenant shall not make or suffer any alteration to be made in or on the Subject Property without the written consent of the City and shall not allow any liens to be placed on the Subject Property. (d) Not to call on the City to make any improvements or repairs on the Subject Property of any nature whatsoever. (e) The Subject Property described herein may be used for the purposes stated in paragraph (a) above. The Tenant shall comply with any and all laws, rules, regulations, or ordinances imposed by any jurisdiction affecting the use to which the Subject Property is put. Inability on the part of the Tenant to comply with any of said laws, rules, regulations, or ordinances will not relieve the Tenant of the obligation to so comply. (f) The Tenant shall maintain a standard form policy of comprehensive general public liability insurance covering the Subject Property during the term of the Lease in the following amounts: Minimum coverage per person per occurrence of $500, 000; minimum coverage per occurrence of $1, 000, 000 . Prior to execution of this Lease the Tenant shall furnish a certificate of insurance to the City. The City shall be named as an additional insured on the policy. (g) The City is not obligated to, and will not, maintain insurance on the Subject Property insuring against loss by fire, lightning or any other risk customarily covered by insurance for loss of or damage to property. In the event the Subject Property is damaged or destroyed during the term of this Lease, the City will have no obligation whatever to repair, restore or rebuild, nor in any other manner to provide Tenant with tenantable property. Tenant may, at his option, insure against any losses he may -2- CAMPBELL , KNUTSON , SCOTT & FUCHS , P . A Rug 6 ,92 15 : 18 No .005 P . 11 suffer as a result of an event of damage or destruction to the Subject Property or the contents thereof by purchasing, at his own cost, business interruption insurance, property — insurance, or other insurance, to protect his interests. (h) Tenant shall pay all utility charges incurred — during the term of this Lease as a result of and relating to Tenant ' s occupancy. Installments of special assessments, if any, payable during the term of this Lease shall be paid by — the City. (i) Should the Tenant hold over after the expiration of the term of this Lease with the consent of the City, express — or implied, said tenancy shall be deemed to be a tenancy only from month to month, subject otherwise to all of the terms and conditions of this Lease. _ (j ) If default shall be made in any of the material covenants or agreements on the part of the Tenant contained in this Lease, the City may, at its option, at any time — after such default or breach, notify Tenant thereof in writing and Tenant shall be given a period of ten (10) days in which to cure the same. If the default is not cured by Tenant within said ten (10) day period, the City may, at its option, and without further notice to anyone, terminate this Lease and re-enter and take possession of the Subject — Property and remove all persons therefrom. (1) To indemnify, save, and hold harmless the City and any agents or employees thereof, from all claims, demands, — actions or causes of action of whatsoever nature or character, excluding those caused by the negligence, the willful act or omission on the part of the City, its agents — or employees, arising out of or by reason of the Lease of the Subject Property by the City to the Tenant. 5. Condition of Property. The Tenant has examined the Subject Property and is satisfied with its condition. The Tenant — agrees to rent the Subject Property in "AS IS" condition without reliance upon any representations from the City about the condition of the Subject Property. Tenant acknowledges and agrees that the City has no obligation whatever to maintain, repair, or replace the Subject Property, nor any portion thereof, — for any reason whatever. Tenant further acknowledges and agrees -3- — CAMPBELL , KNUTSON , SCOTT & FUCHS , P .A Aug 6 ,92 15 : 19 No .005 P . 12 that any destruction, damage, deterioration or condition of the Subject Property that renders the Subject Property unfit for occupancy or for Tenant's proposed use, or any determination by any governmental body or agency to such effect, shall terminate this Lease and entitle the City to recover possession of, and remove Tenant from, the Subject Property. 6. Termination. Except as hereinafter specifically provided in 6 (b) below, the City shall have no obligation whatever, monetary or otherwise, to Tenant as a result of termination of this Lease or termination of Tenant' s occupancy of the Subject Property prior to November 1, 1992, for any such termination that occurs pursuant to the terms of this Lease. 7 . Notice. All notices, certificates, or other communications required to be given to the City and the Tenant hereunder shall be sufficiently given and shall be deemed given when delivered or deposited in the United States mail in regi- stered form with postage fully prepaid and addressed as follows: If to the City: CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 Counter Drive, Box 147 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Attention: Mr. Don Ashworth If to the Tenant: GUY S . PETERSEN 910 Nez Perce Court Chanhassen, MN 55317 The City and the Tenant, by notice given hereunder, may designate different addresses to which subsequent notices, certificates, or other communications will be sent. -4- ev o r o r m CAMPBELL , KNUTSON , SCOTT & FUCHS , P .A Aug 6 ,92 15 : 19 No .005 P . 13 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this agreement has been executed by the — parties the day and year first above written. THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN • By: DONALD J. CHMIEL, Mayor _ AND DON ASHWORTH, City Administrator — TENANT: — GUY S . PETERSEN, Individually STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. : — COUNTY OF CARVER ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this — day of 1992 , by DONALD J. CHMIEL and DON ASHWORTH, respectively the Mayor and City Administrator of the City of Chanhassen, a municipal corporation under the laws of the — State of Minnesota, on its behalf. NOTARY PUBLIC — STATE OF MINNESOTA ) — ) ss. : COUNTY OF CARVER ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 1992, by GUY S . PETERSEN, individually. NOTARY PUBLIC — DRAFTED BY: Campbell , Knutson, Scott & Fuchs, P.A. Suite 317 , 1380 Corporate Center Curve — Eagan, Minnesota 55121 (612) 452-5000 -5- CAMPBELL , KNUTSON , SCOTT & FUCHS , P .A Aug 6 ,92 15 :20 No .005 P . 14 "EXHIBIT A, " is attached hereto and is incorporated herein by reference. 9 . Upon payment of the amount of $247 , 700. 00 in accordance with paragraph •2a. above, Petitioner may file with the Carver County District Court the Stipulation of Settlement, a true and correct copy of which is marked as "EXHIBIT B, " is attached hereto and is incorporated herein by reference, and a Final Certificate, a true and correct copy of which is marked as "EXHIBIT C, " is attached hereto and incorporated herein and may file with the Carver County Recorder's office a certified copy of the Final Certificate and a Partial Discharge of the Notice of Lis Pendens, a true and correct copy of which is marked as "EXHIBIT D, " is attached hereto and is incorporated herein. This Agreement is made effective the day of , 1992 . CITY OF CHANHASSEN By• DONALD Y . CHMIEL, Mayor By: DON ASHWORTH, City Manager GUY S. PETERSEN, Individually -6- CAMPBELL , KNUTSON , SCOTT & FUCHS , P .A Aug 6 ,92 15 :20 No .005 P . 15 STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF CARVER FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT — Case Type 2 : Condemnation City of Chanhassen, a Minnesota — municipal corporation, Court File No. 91-28228 Petitioner, _ vs. STIPULATION OF SETTLEMENT AS TO PARCEL ONE Guy S. Petersen; State Bank of Chanhassen; — Apple Valley Red-E-Mix, Inc. n/k/a AVR, Inc. ; First Bank National Association; Builders Development, Inc. ;The Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States; B F Holding Company; Dorn and Associates, Inc. ; _ Metropolitan Financial Mortgage Corporation n/k/a Metropolitan Federal Bank fsb; Owatonna Savings and Loan Association n/k/a Metropolitan Federal Bank fsb; — St. Louis County Federal Savings & Loan Association n/k/a St. Louis Bank for Savings fsb; John Doe and — Mary Roe and County of Carver, Respondents. The above-entitled matter, having been fully compromised and settled by and between Respondent GUY S. PETERSEN and Petitioner — CITY OF CHANHASSEN, the parties stipulate, by and through their respective counsel , to the entry of judgment based on the Settlement Agreement between the parties hereto, dated of even _ date herewith, and further stipulate that upon entry of judgment these proceedings, with respect to Parcel 1 as identified in the Petition herein, have, for all purposes under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 117, been completed. — Dated: July , 1992 . CAMPBELL, KNUTSON, SCOTT SIEGEL, BRILL, GREUPNER & FUCHS, P.A. & DUFFY, P.A. By: By: GARY G. FUCHS, 432566 JOSIAH E. BRILL, JR. , # Attorneys for Petitioner Attorneys for Guy S. Petersen — Suite #317 1300 Washington Square 1380 Corporate Center Curve 100 Washington Avenue South Eagan, MN 55121 Minneapolis, MN 55401 — Telephone: (612) 452-5000 Telephone: (612) 339-7232 EXHIBIT B CAMPBELL , KNUTSON , SCOTT & FUCHS , P .A Aug 6 ,92 15 :21 No . 005 P . 16 STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF CARVER FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT Case Type 2 : Condemnation City of Chanhassen, a Minnesota municipal corporation, court File No. 91-28228 Petitioner, vs. Guy S. Petersen; _ State Bank of Chanhassen; Apple Valley Red-E-Mix, Inc. n/k/a AVR, Inc. ; First Bank National Association; Builders Development, Inc. ; The Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States; B F Holding Company; Dorn and Associates, Inc. ; Metropolitan Financial Mortgage Corporation n/k/a Metropolitan Federal Bank fsb; Owatonna Savings and Loan Association n/k/a Metropolitan Federal Bank fsb; St. Louis County Federal Savings & Loan Association n/k/a St. Louis Bank for Savings fsb ; John Doe and Mary Roe and County of Carver, Respondents. IN THE MATTER OF THE CONDEMNATION OF CERTAIN LAND FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * FINAL CERTIFICATE AS TO PARCEL 1 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * By authority of Minnesota Statutes Section 117 . 205, I hereby certify that the rights herein described have been taken by the City of Chanhassen in eminent domain proceedings in conformity with the requirements of Chapter 117 of said statutes ; that EXHIBIT C-1 CAMPBELL , KNUTSON , SCOTT & FUCHS , P .A Aug 6 ,92 15 :21 No .005 P . 17 Commissioners were duly appointed by the Court to ascertain and report the amount of damages sustained by Guy S . Petersen, the owner of Parcel 1, and State Bank of Chanhassen, mortgagee of Parcel 1, on account of such taking; that said Commissioners were qualified to serve as Commissioners; that prior to the — Commissioners hearing evidence on compensation, the Petitioner and Respondent Guy S. Petersen negotiated a Settlement Agreement determining full compensation for damages sustained by the Petitioner' s taking of Parcel 1; that the Settlement Agreement was executed by Petitioner and Respondent Guy S. Petersen and submitted — to the District Court for approval ; that the Settlement Agreement was approved by the Court on , 1992 ; that all — damages have been paid by the City of Chanhassen; that said proceedings are now complete and that the City of Chanhassen now holds an interest as set forth below over the lands hereinafter described situated in the County of Carver, State of Minnesota: PARCEL 1 - FEE TITLE TO: That part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter (NE 1/4 of NE 1/4) of Section 13, Township 116 North, Range 23 West, Carver County, Minnesota, lying Southerly of the — Southeasterly right-of-way line of Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad and Northerly of the Northwesterly right-of-way line of new Trunk Highway No. 5; EXCEPT, a strip of land 35 feet wide running over and across the above described tract, lying adjacent to and being -2_ CAMPBELL , KNUTSON , SCOTT & FUCHS , P .A Aug 6 ,92 15 :22 No .005 P . 18 — parallel with the Southeasterly right-of-way line of the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad. Dated: July , 1992 . CAMPBELL, KNUTSON, SCOTT & FUCHS, P.A. By: GARY G. FUCHS, #32566 Attorneys for Petitioner Suite #317 — 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, MN 55121 Telephone: (612) 452-5000 THE ABOVE CERTIFICATE IS HEREBY APPROVED AND THE COUNTY RECORDER AND/OR REGISTRAR OF TITLES IS HEREBY ORDERED TO ACCEPT A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE SAME FOR FILING WITH THE RECORDS OF CARVER COUNTY, — MINNESOTA, OR CERTIFICATES OF TITLE COVERING THE ABOVE-DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY, IF ANY. Dated: , 1992 . BY THE COURT: Judge of District Court THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELL, KNUTSON, SCOTT & FUCHS, P.A. 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Telephone: (612) 452-5000 • • -3- CAMPBELL , KNUTSON , SCOTT & FUCHS , P .A Aug 6 ,92 15 : 23 No .005 P . 19 STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF CARVER FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT CASE TYPE: 2/Condemnation City of Chanhassen, a Minnesota Court File No. 91-28228 — municipal corporation, Petitioner, — vs. Guy S. Petersen; PARTIAL DISCHARGE OF _ State Bank of Chanhassen; NOTICE OF LIS PENDENS Apple Valley Red-E-Mix, Inc. , n/k/a AVR, Inc. ; First Bank National Association; Builders Development, Inc. ;The Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States; B F Holding Company; Dorn and Associates, Inc. ;Metropolitan Financial Mortgage Corporation n/k/a Metropolitan Federal Bank fsb; Owatonna Savings and Loan Association n/k/a Metropolitan Federal Bank fsb; St. Louis County Federal Savings & Loan Association n/k/a St. Louis Bank for Savings fsb; John Doe and — Mary Roe and County of Carver, Respondents. KNOW ALL BY THESE PRESENTS, that the undersigned Petitioner, CITY OF CHANHASBEN, by and through its attorney, Gary G. Fuchs of the law firm of CAMPBELL, KNUTSON, SCOTT & FUCHS, P.A. , Suite #317, Eagandale Office Center, 1380 Corporate Center Curve, Eagan, MN 55121, does hereby certify that a certain Notice of Lis Pendens, in the above-entitled action, which has been pending in the above- named Court, and which affected, involved and brought in question the real estate, situate in the County of Carver and State of _ Minnesota, described as follows, to-wit: PARCEL 1 - FEE TITLE TO: That part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter (NE 1/4 of NE 1/4) of Section 13 , Township 116 North, Range 23 West, Carver County, Minnesota, lying Southerly of the Southeasterly right-of- — way line of Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad and Northerly of the Northwesterly right-of-way line of new Trunk Highway No. 5 ; EXCEPT, a strip of land 35 feet wide running over and across the above described tract, lying adjacent to and being parallel with the Southeasterly right-of-way line of the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. — Paul and Pacific Railroad. EXHIBIT D CAMPBELL , KNUTSON , SCOTT & FUCHS , P . A Aug 6 ,92 15 :23 No .005 P . 20 '- Guy S. Petersen ) Fee Owner State Bank of Chanhassen ) Mortgagee County of Carver ) Taxing Authority and which was filed for record with the Carver County Registrar of Titles on October 23 , 1991, in Book 55, page 114 and 117 on Certificate Numbers 18156 and 18158 and also with the Carver County Recorder on October 23 , 1991, as Document No. 128737 is hereby discharged and said action has been dismissed so far as it pertains to the above-described real property. And the County Recorder and Registrar of Titles of said County are hereby authorized and directed to discharge the same upon the record thereof, according to the statute in such case made and provided. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the undersigned has hereunto set his hand this day of July, 1992. CAMPBELL, KNUTSON, SCOTT & FUCHS, P.A. By: Gary G. Fuchs, #32566 Attorneys for Petitioner 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, MN 55121 Telephone: (612) 452-5000 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. : COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) On this day of July, 1992 , before me, a Notary Public within and for said County and State, personally appeared GARY G. FUCHS, to me known to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that he executed the same as the free act and deed of said Petitioner City of Chanhassen. Notary Public THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELL, KNUTSON, SCOTT & FUCHS, P.A. Suite 317 , Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, MN 55121 Telephone: (612) 452-5000 -2-