CC Packet 2005 10 24AGENDA
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
MONDAY, OCTOBER 24, 2005
CHANHASSEN MUNICIPAL BUILDING, 7700 MARKET BOULEVARD
5:30 P.M. - CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION, FOUNTAIN CONFERENCE ROOM
Note: If the City Council does not complete the work session items in the time allotted, the
remaining items will be considered after the regular agenda.
A. 5:30 p.m. - 2005 MUSA Improvements; Update, Project 04-05.
B. 6:15 p.m. - Dogwood Improvements Discussion, Project 00-01-1.
C. 6:30 p.m. - Wireless Proposal for Commercial/Industrial Users, Stonebridge, Inc.
D. No Wake Ordinance Discussion.
E. 2006 Budget:
1. Public Works Budget; 2006 Requests
2. 2006 Proposed Budget, Park & Recreation Department
7:00 P.M. – REGULAR MEETING, CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
CALL TO ORDER (Pledge of Allegiance)
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS
F. Invitation to Halloween Party.
CONSENT AGENDA
All items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the city council and will
be considered as one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items. If discussion is
desired, that item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately. City
council action is based on the staff recommendation for each item. Refer to the council packet for
each staff report.
1. a. Approval of Minutes:
- City Council Work Session Minutes dated October 10, 2005
- City Council Summary Minutes dated October 10, 2005
- City Council Verbatim Minutes dated October 10, 2005
Receive Commission Minutes:
- Park & Recreation Commission Summary Minutes dated September 27, 2005
- Park & Recreation Commission Verbatim Minutes dated September 27, 2005
b. Approval of the 2006 Police Contract with the Carver County Sheriff's
Department.
c. Well Nos. 10 & 11, Project 04-08A; Approved Plans & Specifications; Authorize
Advertisement for Bids.
d. Accept Donation from Chanhassen American Legion Club Post 580 for Fire
Prevention Week.
e. Certification of Delinquent Utility Accounts.
f. Chanhassen American Legion Club; Accept $500 Donation for Fire Prevention
Week.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
LAW ENFORCEMENT/FIRE DEPARTMENT UPDATE
2a. Sgt. Jim Olson, Carver County Sheriff's Department
2b. Chief Gregg Geske, Chanhassen Fire Department
AWARD OF BID
3. Award of Bid, 2005 Bond Issues.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
4. CLAWSON BUSINESS ENTERPRISES, INC. dba WINESTYLES, 600 Market Street
Station, Suite 140; Request for an Off-Sale Liquor License.
5. TH 312/212; Special Assessment Hearing, Project Nos. 03-09-3, 04-05, 04-06.
6. 2005 MUSA, Phase I, Project No. 04-05:
a. Special Assessment Hearing
b. Award Contract - Bid Package 1
UNFINISHED BUSINESS – None
NEW BUSINESS – None
COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS
CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION
Correspondence Section
ADJOURNMENT
A copy of the staff report and supporting documentation being sent to the city council will be
available after 2:00 p.m. on Thursday. Please contact city hall at 952-227-1100 to verify that
your item has not been deleted from the agenda any time after 2:00 p.m. on Thursday.
GUIDELINES FOR VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
Welcome to the Chanhassen City Council Meeting. In the interest of open communications, the Chanhassen City
Council wishes to provide an opportunity for the public to address the City Council. That opportunity is provided
at every regular City Council meeting during Visitor Presentations.
1. Anyone indicating a desire to speak during Visitor Presentations will be acknowledged by the Mayor.
When called upon to speak, state your name, address, and topic. All remarks shall be addressed to the
City Council as a whole, not to any specific member(s) or to any person who is not a member of the City
Council.
2. If there are a number of individuals present to speak on the same topic, please designate a spokesperson
that can summarize the issue.
3. Limit your comments to five minutes. Additional time may be granted at the discretion of the Mayor. If
you have written comments, provide a copy to the Council.
4. During Visitor Presentations, the Council and staff listen to comments and will not engage in discussion.
Council members or the City Manager may ask questions of you in order to gain a thorough
understanding of your concern, suggestion or request.
5. Please be aware that disrespectful comments or comments of a personal nature, directed at an individual
either by name or inference, will not be allowed. Personnel concerns should be directed to the City
Manager.
Members of the City Council and some staff members may gather at Houlihan’s Restaurant & Bar, 530 Pond Promenade in Chanhassen immediately
after the meeting for a purely social event. All members of the public are welcome.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager
FROM: Paul Oehme, Dir. of Public Works/City Engineer
DATE: October 24, 2005
SUBJ: Update on 2005 MUSA Improvement Project No. 04-05
BACKGROUND
Staff would like to review the 2005 MUSA Improvements and TH 212
improvements prior to the assessment hearing. Staff will give a brief presentation
on the projects, assessment methodology, and the project schedule.
c: Jon Horn, Kimley-Horn
g:\eng\public\04-05 2005 musa\bkgd ws update 102405.doc
MEMORANDUM
TO: Paul Oehme, City Engineer/Public Works Director
FROM: Alyson Morris, Assistant City Engineer
DATE: October 24, 2005
SUBJ: Discuss Dogwood Improvements - Project No. 00-01-1
BACKGROUND
On October 3, 2005, the City received a petition signed by 53% of the property owners
on Dogwood requesting preparation of a feasibility report for the installation of public
improvements along Dogwood Road and Tanadoona Drive. The neighbors amended the
standard city petition to state that the City would pay for the study and if the project
proceeds, the cost of the feasibility report would be assessed back to the benefiting
properties. A copy of this petition is enclosed. Most of the property owners who have
signed the petition are mainly interested in city sewer service. This area has experienced
many septic system problems with failed or potential failing systems.
Two feasibility studies have been drafted for future improvements to Dogwood Road;
one in January, 2002 and one in May, 1988. Both reports were paid for by the private
parties, not by the City and included future watermain, sanitary and roadway
improvements.
Bruce Carlson, owner of 7537 Dogwood Road, has approached city staff regarding the
development of his property and a portion of the property to the south, 7570 Dogwood
Road, which is owned by Peter and De Brandt. The proposed development includes 22
single-family homes and the extension of West 78th Street to Dogwood Road. A copy of
this concept layout is attached. Public sanitary and watermain improvements necessary
to serve this development would extend within Tanadoona Drive and Dogwood Road
right-of-way. Bruce Carlson may plan to start the development review process in the
near future.
On September 21, 2005, staff met with several residents along Dogwood Road to discuss
their interest in utility and roadway improvements. A copy of the neighborhood sign-in
sheet is attached. As with the previous two times that street and utility improvements
were discussed, residents were concerned with the costs, the wider street, and tree loss.
UTILITIES
In order to proceed with the Bruce Carlson development, watermain must be extended
from Tanadoona Drive, just west of the entrance to Camp Tanadoona. Gravity sanitary
sewer for the proposed development would extend to the existing lift station. The
existing lift station and forcemain are not adequately sized to convey wastewater from the
existing homes along Dogwood Road or from the proposed development; therefore new
pumps and a larger forcemain would be required. The development would help pay for
Dogwood Road
October 24, 2005
Page 2
C:\DOCUME~1\karene\LOCALS~1\Temp\Dogwood Improvements.doc
the improvement cost along Dogwood Road to help offset some of the costs to the
benefiting properties. Specifically, the existing lift station and forcemain on Dogwood
would need to be improvement and is proposed to be paid for by the developer.
Paul and Mary Sumner, owners of 7620 Crimson Bay Road, have expressed interest in
connecting to city sewer due to problems with their septic system. To accomplish this,
gravity sanitary sewer would be installed within Crimson Bay Road. It is anticipated a
small lift station would be required at the north Crimson Bay Road to serve the five lots
along Crimson Bay Road and a forcemain would be installed within the street and
connect to the gravity sanitary sewer within Dogwood Road. Roadway right-of-way
would be dedicated from Dogwood Road to Crimson Bay Road. Should City Council
authorize the preparation of the feasibility report at a future meeting, staff recommends
that the Crimson Bay Road area also be included in the scope of the project for future
utility extensions. Other property owners along Crimson Bay Road have also expressed
interest in connecting to city services.
STREETS
Public sanitary sewer and watermain to serve the proposed development would be
installed within Dogwood Road and Tanadoona Drive right-of-way. Dogwood Road and
a portion of Tanadoona Drive are gravel. Staff surveyed street pavement condition and
found that the street is in poor condition. The Pavement Condition Index (PCI) is 5 out
of 100. The PCI is used in the City’s Pavement Management system to determine which
streets are recommended for improvement. When the PCI is 40 or less, it is
recommended that the street be reconstructed.
Dogwood Road
October 24, 2005
Page 3
C:\DOCUME~1\karene\LOCALS~1\Temp\Dogwood Improvements.doc
Dogwood Road currently ranges between 10 and 16 feet wide. Per the Fire Marshal, the
minimum street width for emergency vehicles ingress and egress is 24 feet. The previous
feasibility study recommended narrowing the street from City standards to save on tree
loss. This approach has been discussed on other street improvement areas where
roadways do not currently meet city standards such as in the Carver Beach area. The
right-of-way in this area is mainly 20’ wide. If the road were to be widened, additional
right-of-way would need to be acquired.
MnDOT has advised staff that at some point in the future, access to Crimson Bay Road
from Highway 5 may be restricted to a right-in, right-out access. Based on this
information, staff would recommend the development dedicate right-of-way from
Crimson Bay Road to Dogwood Road to plan for a secondary connect. Also, future
utility extension to Crimson Bay Road could utilize this right-of-way.
FUNDING
Since Tanadoona Drive and Dogwood Road are public streets and City maintained, staff
envisions using the City’s assessment practice of assessing 40% of the street
improvement costs back to the benefiting property owners. The remaining 60% of the
cost would be paid by the City. However, if any new development lot fronted Dogwood
Road, the developer would pay 100% of the roadway improvement cost for that lot.
Most of the financing is consistent with the annual street improvement assessment
practice. Funding for the watermain and sanitary sewer improvements would be 100%
paid by the developer and the benefiting property owners.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends Council authorize preliminary investigation work for this project.
Staff envisions updating the January, 2002 feasibility costs and assessment methodology
and coming up with preliminary cost splits for the project. Also, staff is recommending
reviewing the right-of-way needs in the area and seeing if the right-of-way could be
dedicated. After the preliminary investigation information is obtained, staff would hold a
neighborhood meeting to discuss the findings. The feedback received from the property
owners would then be presented to Council to see if a feasibility study should be drafted.
Staff estimates that the preliminary investigation work would cost approximately
$10,000.
If this project moves forward, the earliest the project would be considered for
construction is in the summer of 2007.
Attachments: 1. Concept layout for Bruce Carlson.
2. Petition for Public Improvement.
3. September 21, 2005 neighborhood meeting sign-in sheet.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager
FROM: Justin Miller, Assistant City Manager
DATE: October 13, 2005
RE: Stonebridge Wireless Internet Proposal
BACKGROUND
Staff has been approached by Stonebridge Wireless, Inc. regarding a proposal to
provide wireless internet services to commercial and industrial locations within
Chanhassen. They provide this service in other metro cities (Burnsville, Blaine,
Hugo, Otsego, and Oakdale) and would like to duplicate their efforts in
Chanhassen.
The proposal calls for a water tower lease agreement similar to what the city
enters into with cellular telephone companies. However, the rent structure would
more closely resemble our franchise agreement with Mediacom, which calls for
the tenant to pay the city 5% of the gross revenues derived from the site. The city
would also receive two subscriptions that could be used throughout the city.
Plans call for Stonebridge to install equipment on the W. 76th Street tower first,
and then expand as needed.
Experience in other metro cities varies depending on their location and customer
saturation. For example, Burnsville receives roughly $400 per month in fees,
while Hugo, a more rural setting, receives about $200 per month.
Representatives from Stonebridge Wireless plan to be at the work session to
answer any questions the council may have.
RECOMMENDATION
If this is an arrangement the City Council would like to proceed with, staff can
begin negotiating the terms of the water tower lease agreement with Stonebridge
and bring back to the council an agreement before the end of the year.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager
FROM: Lori Haak, Water Resources Coordinator
DATE: October 17, 2005
SUBJ: Consideration of Automatic Slow/No Wake Restrictions on
Chanhassen Lakes
BACKGROUND
The City contains all or part of eleven (11) lakes that have DNR shoreland
designations. They are: Ann, Christmas, Harrison, Lotus, Lucy, Minnewashta,
Rice, Rice Marsh, Riley, St. Joe and Susan. Of those, three (3) are within
multiple jurisdictions (Christmas, Rice Marsh and Riley) and four (4) are
classified as Natural Environment lakes by the DNR (Harrison, Rice, Rice
Marsh and St. Joe).
During any time of abnormally high precipitation within Chanhassen, elected
City officials and City staff receive numerous requests for slow/no wake
restrictions to be put into effect on one or more of Chanhassen’s Recreational
Development lakes in order to protect private property and lake water quality.
With those requests also come requests for a limit on the frequency and duration
of such restrictions to provide opportunities for lake use.
In 2005, Chanhassen received record amounts of rain in September and October.
This led to extremely high water levels on the lakes within the City. On two
separate occasions (one in September and one in October), the level of Lotus
Lake was more than 12 inches above its Ordinary High Water Level (OHW) of
896.3. On September 6, 2005, the City Council passed Resolution 2005-71
establishing an emergency slow/no wake area on Lotus Lake. The slow/no
wake restrictions were removed on September 21, 2005 after three consecutive
days of water levels below the lake’s OHW.
In 2001, the Chanhassen City Council considered passing an automatic slow/no
wake ordinance for Lotus Lake. The Council did not pass an ordinance at that
time due to a lack of consensus among property owners on Lotus Lake as to
when the restriction should be put into effect and for how long.
Mr. Todd Gerhardt
October 18, 2005
Page 2
ISSUES
Many issues arise when considering slow/no wake restrictions on lakes. The
primary concerns brought to the attention of staff recently include:
· Private property damage due to wave-induced erosion and/or flooding of
property;
· Potential for lake water to enter sanitary sewer system and overwhelm
existing lift stations;
· The level to which recreational use of lakes would be constrained due to
the automatic implementation of slow/no wake restrictions; and
· Long-term impairment of lake water quality and shoreline stability.
PROCEDURE
The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) oversees the water
surface use regulations adopted by cities and counties within Minnesota. Any
City Council decision on a slow/no wake ordinance would have to be approved
by the DNR prior to its implementation. To that end, City staff recommends
close cooperation between the City and the DNR in the development of any
water surface use ordinance amendment(s).
Neighboring communities that contain portions of Chanhassen lakes should also
be invited into this process at the earliest opportunity, if the decision is made to
pursue slow/no wake restrictions on these “shared lakes” as well.
In addition, the owners of properties on the lake would be directly affected by
any water surface use restriction. Staff recommends involving property owners
in this process directly, potentially through open house-type meetings, direct
mailings or other means.
Although it will be difficult to identify and notify lake users, they would be
directly affected by water surface use restrictions. Lake users should be made
aware of any potential changes through the City’s usual publication strategies
(e.g., public hearing notices in the Chanhassen Villager, posting on the City
website, information on Cable Channel 8).
The final decision on any water surface use regulation change would be made by
the City Council and would require approval by the DNR.
Mr. Todd Gerhardt
October 18, 2005
Page 3
RECOMMENDATION
City staff recommends the City Council consider adoption of an automatic
slow/no wake restriction for Chanhassen’s Recreational Development lakes,
excluding Lake Ann on which boats are already restricted to the use of electric
trolling motors, in times of high water. This would include Christmas, Lotus,
Lucy, Minnewashta, Riley and Susan Lakes.
As a basis for discussion, staff recommends: slow/no wake restrictions become
effective automatically when a lake exceeds the 100-year predicted water level,
as set forth in the City’s Surface Water Management Plan; and slow/no wake
restrictions are removed automatically when a lake is below the 100-year
predicted water level.
The level at which the slow/no wake restriction automatically goes into effect
and the duration for which the restriction remains are the two major items to be
considered. Also to be considered include: lake level monitoring for the
regulated lakes; enforcement of any slow/no wake restrictions; and notification
of lakeshore property owners and lake users when the slow/no wake restriction
goes into effect and when it is removed.
Staff also recommends the City Council direct staff to conduct several public
open house-type forums for lakeshore property owners and lake users to gain
information about potential regulations and to voice their input on the proposed
changes. Public comment and questions would then be brought to the City
Council. The City Council would then hold a public hearing to discuss the
matter and hear any additional public comment. Then, the Council would make
a decision regarding slow/no wake regulations on Chanhassen’s lakes.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager
FROM: Paul Oehme, City Engineer/Dir. of Public Works
DATE: October 24, 2005
SUBJ: 2006 Budget Request - Public Works
DISCUSSION
Attached are the 2006 budget request worksheets for the Public Works
Departments. I am planning to give a brief review of the budget to the Council on
Monday night.
Below are the major budget request changes for 2006 for each department:
The budget request in the Engineering Department (101-1310) is $511,800, an
increased of 2.5% from the 2005 budget. The increase is mainly requested for
personnel services.
The budget request in the Street Department (101-1320) is $734,400, an increase
of 1.6% from the 2005 budget. The increase is mainly requested for personnel
services. Materials and supplies category has decreased some due to current
stockpile of sand and salt at the public works building. The budget request
reflects the estimated material needed for an average winter snow fall.
The budget request for the City Garage Department (101-1370) is $419,000, an
increase of 11.9% from the 2005 budget. The increase is mainly from personnel
services and material supplies. The material supplies increase is mainly from
increased fuel costs.
The budge request for Street Lighting and Signal (101-1350) is $243,300, an
increase of 4.3% from the 2005 budget. The increase is mainly from electrical
utility charges.
The budget request for Sewer Operations is $2,083,250, an increase of 10.19%
from the 2005 budget. The increase is mainly from personnel services and the
Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) charges.
The budget request for Water Operations is $1,042,000, an increase of 21.5%
from the 2005 budget. The personnel services increase is a 28.3% increase over
the 2005 budget and includes a new employee to operate the east treatment plant.
This position was included in the 2004 rate study and has also been included in
the 2005 updated rate study. The materials and supplies will need to be increased
to cover the additional needs of the treatment plant.
Attachments
g:\eng\budget\06\memo bkgd ws budget102405.doc
MEMORANDUM
TO: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager
FROM: Todd Hoffman, Park & Recreation Director
DATE: October 19, 2005
SUBJ: 2006 Proposed Budget, Park and Recreation Operations
The Park and Recreation staff is pleased to submit for Council consideration our
proposed 2006 operation and maintenance budgets. Budgeted areas include
Administration, the Park and Recreation Commission, Recreation Programming,
Lake Ann Park Operations, Self-Supporting Programs, the Recreation Center,
Senior Center and Park Maintenance, which includes the maintenance of our
downtown and trail system. The three largest drivers amongst these areas are
Park Maintenance, Recreation Programs, and the Recreation Center. Together
these functions account for 77% of park and recreation expenditures.
Proposed changes in this year’s budget include the following:
Park and Recreation Commission
· No significant changes
Park and Recreation Administration
· Increase personal services by $4,500
· Add $13,500 for printing of park and trail map third edition
· Add $300 to subscriptions and memberships
· Add $1800 in postage to mail brochure
· Decrease telephone by $200
Total proposed increase is $19,900 or 17.88%
Recreation Center
· Increase personal services by $17,700
- $11,000 in retirement contributions (under budgeted in 2005)
- $5,000 was added to temporary salaries to decrease hours of single
coverage
- $800 was added to regular salaries
- $700 was added for insurance contributions
- $200 was added for workers compensation
Total proposed increase is $17,700 or 7.54%
Mr. Todd Gerhardt
October 19, 2005
Page 2
Lake Ann Park Operations
· Increase personal services by $1700 (wage and hour of operation
increases)
· Increase supplies by $3450 (purchase paddleboat with trade-in)
· Increase Contractual Services by $150
Total proposed increase is $5,300 or 8.13%
Park Maintenance
· Increase personal services by $28,900
- $15,500 in regular salaries and wages
- $5,000 in temp salaries (raise starting pay .25 and .50 for returning workers)
- $1,000 in retirement contributions
- $7,000 in insurance contributions
- $400 in workers compensation
· Increase rental of portable toilets by $2,500
· Decrease materials and supplies by $5,000
· Decrease telephone by $2,000
· Decrease repair and maintenance by $2,000
Total proposed increase is $22,400 or 2.92%
Senior Citizens Center
· Increase personal services by $5,800 (4 additional hours per week for
coordinator)
· Decrease materials and supplies by $400
· Increase contractual services by $6450 (more trips/participants)
Total proposed increase is $11,850 or 30.16%
Recreation Programs
· Increase personal services by $5,400
· Increase materials and supplies by $1,350
· Decrease contractual services by $1,400
Total proposed increase is $5,350 or 2.25%
Self-Supporting Programs
· Increase personal services by $1,150
· Increase materials and supplies by $200
· Increase contractual services by $10,000
Total proposed increase is $11,350 or 9.02%
Mr. Todd Gerhardt
October 19, 2005
Page 3
Total proposed increase all budgets is $93,850 or 5.92%
Note: Some numbers are rounded
Staff looks forward to discussing this proposed budget with the City Council.
20
0
6
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
B
u
d
g
e
t
Pa
r
k
&
R
e
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
De
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
Pa
r
k
&
R
e
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
•
Ad
m
i
n
i
s
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
-
Par
k
&
R
e
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
C
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
•
Re
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
m
i
n
g
-
Lak
e
A
n
n
P
a
r
k
O
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
-
Sel
f
-
S
u
p
p
o
r
t
i
n
g
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
s
•
Re
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
C
e
n
t
e
r
•
Se
n
i
o
r
C
e
n
t
e
r
•
Pa
r
k
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
2
0
0
6
E
x
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e
s
Park
&
R
e
c
C
o
mm
i
s
s
i
o
n
0%
Se
lf
-Sup
p
o
r
ting
Prog
r
ams
8%
R
e
cre
ation
Prog
r
ams
15
%
Se
ni
o
r
C
e
nt
e
r
3%
Lake Ann Operations 4%Recreation Center 15%
Pa
rk & Rec
Administration 8%
Pa
rk
M
ain
t
e
na
nc
e
47
%
20
0
5
-
2
0
0
6
Ex
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e
s
$0
$1
0
0
,
00
0
$2
0
0
,
00
0
$3
0
0
,
00
0
$4
0
0
,
00
0
$5
0
0
,
00
0
$6
0
0
,
00
0
$7
0
0
,
00
0
$8
0
0
,
00
0
$9
0
0
,
00
0
Park & Rec Com
mission
Park & Rec Administration Recreation Center
Lake Ann Operations Park Maintenance
Senior Center
Recreation Programs Self-Supporting Programs
20
0
5
20
0
6
To
t
a
l
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
B
u
d
g
e
t
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
Wate
rcraft
R
ental
1%
Park Facility Usage Fee 4%Recreation Center 43%
Fo
o
d
C
o
nces
s
i
o
ns
4%
Se
nio
r P
r
o
g
rams
8%
Self-
S
upporting
Pr
o
g
rams
40
%
20
0
5
-
2
0
0
6
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
$0
$2
0
,
00
0
$4
0
,
00
0
$6
0
,
00
0
$8
0
,
00
0
$1
0
0
,
00
0
$1
2
0
,
00
0
$1
4
0
,
00
0
$1
6
0
,
00
0
$1
8
0
,
00
0
Recreation
Center
Park Facility
Usage Fee
Watercraft
Rental
Self-
Supporting
Programs
Senior ProgramsFood Concessions
20
0
5
20
0
6
Ad
m
i
n
i
s
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
•
St
a
f
f
•
Pa
r
k
&
R
e
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
D
i
r
e
c
t
o
r
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
A
d
m
i
n
i
s
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
20
0
6
Ex
p
e
n
s
e
s
Materi
al
s
&
S
upp
l
i
e
s
1%Co
n
t
r
a
c
t
u
a
l
Se
r
vic
e
s
16
%
Personal Services 83%
Ad
m
i
n
i
s
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
E
x
p
e
n
s
e
s
20
0
5
-
200
6
$0
$2
0
,
0
0
0
$4
0
,
0
0
0
$6
0
,
0
0
0
$8
0
,
0
0
0
$1
0
0
,
0
0
0
$1
2
0
,
0
0
0
Pers
onal S
erv
ices
Materi
als &
S
upplies
Contractual Services
20
0
5
20
0
6
Re
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
m
i
n
g
•
St
a
f
f
•
Re
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
S
u
p
e
r
i
n
t
e
n
d
e
n
t
•
Re
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
S
u
p
e
r
v
i
s
o
r
20
0
6
R
e
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
m
i
n
g
Ma
te
rials &
S
upplies 8%Personal Services 45%
Co
n
t
r
a
c
t
u
a
l
Se
r
vic
e
s
47
%
Re
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
m
i
n
g
E
x
p
e
n
s
e
s
20
0
5
-
200
6
$0
$5
0
,
00
0
$1
0
0
,
000
$1
5
0
,
000
$2
0
0
,
000
$2
5
0
,
000
Personal S
ervices
Material
s &
S
upplies
Contractual Services
20
0
5
20
0
6
Re
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
C
e
n
t
e
r
•
St
a
f
f
•
Ma
n
a
g
e
r
•
Pa
r
t
-
T
i
m
e
S
t
a
f
f
:
•
Fa
c
i
l
i
t
y
S
u
p
e
r
v
i
s
o
r
s
•
Fi
t
n
e
s
s
I
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
o
r
s
•
Da
n
c
e
C
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
o
r
/
I
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
o
r
s
•
Pe
r
s
o
n
a
l
T
r
a
i
n
e
r
s
20
0
6
R
e
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
C
e
n
t
e
r
Ex
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e
s
Con
t
r
actua
l
Se
r
vi
ce
s
13
%
Ma
terials
&
Sup
p
l
ie
s
5%
Personal Services 82%
20
0
5
-
2
0
0
6
Re
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
C
e
n
t
e
r
E
x
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e
s
$0
$5
0
,
00
0
$1
0
0
,
00
0
$1
5
0
,
00
0
$2
0
0
,
00
0
$2
5
0
,
00
0
Person
a
l
S
ervic
es
Materials &
S
up
p
l
i
e
s
Contractual Services
20
0
5
20
0
6
Se
n
i
o
r
C
e
n
t
e
r
•
St
a
f
f
•
½
Tim
e
C
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
o
r
(
p
o
s
i
t
i
o
n
i
s
pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
t
o
i
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
f
r
o
m
2
0
t
o
2
4
ho
u
r
s
p
e
r
w
e
e
k
i
n
2
0
0
6
.
20
0
6
S
e
n
i
o
r
C
e
n
t
e
r
B
u
d
g
e
t
Con
t
ra
ctua
l
Se
rvic
e
s
34
%
Personal Services 60%
Ma
te
ria
ls &
Su
pplie
s
6%
Se
n
i
o
r
C
e
n
t
e
r
20
0
5
-
200
6
B
u
d
g
e
t
$0
$5
,
00
0
$1
0
,
00
0
$1
5
,
00
0
$2
0
,
00
0
$2
5
,
00
0
$3
0
,
00
0
$3
5
,
00
0
Pers
o
nal
S
erv
ices
Materi
al
s
&
S
upplies
Contractual Services
20
0
5
20
0
6
Pa
r
k
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
(I
n
c
l
u
d
e
s
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
&
T
r
a
i
l
s
)
•
St
a
f
f
:
•
Pa
r
k
S
u
p
e
r
i
n
t
e
n
d
e
n
t
•
Pa
r
k
F
o
r
e
m
a
n
•
He
a
v
y
E
q
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
O
p
e
r
a
t
o
r
•
4
E
q
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
O
p
e
r
a
t
o
r
s
20
0
6
P
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
Pa
r
k
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
E
x
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e
s
Personal Services 80%
Ot
he
r
Eq
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
0%
Co
n
tr
a
ctu
a
l
Se
rvic
e
s
10
%
Ma
te
ria
ls &
Su
ppli
e
s
10
%
Pa
r
k
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
20
0
5
-
200
6
B
u
d
g
e
t
$0
$1
0
0
,
00
0
$2
0
0
,
00
0
$3
0
0
,
00
0
$4
0
0
,
00
0
$5
0
0
,
00
0
$6
0
0
,
00
0
$7
0
0
,
00
0
Pe
rsonal
Se
rvices
Ma
terials &
Suppli
e
s
Con
t
ractual
Se
rvicesOtherEquipment
20
0
5
20
0
6
Po
s
s
i
b
l
e
1
0
%
C
u
t
s
(
$
1
5
5
,
0
0
0
)
(e
x
c
l
u
d
e
s
S
e
l
f
-
S
u
p
p
o
r
t
i
n
g
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
s
)
Po
s
s
i
b
l
e
C
u
t
Imp
a
c
t
Cost Saving
El
i
m
i
n
a
t
e
S
u
m
m
e
r
Di
s
c
o
ver
y
P
l
a
y
g
r
o
u
n
d
35
0
c
h
i
l
d
r
e
n
d
o
n
o
t
h
a
v
e
ac
c
e
s
s
t
o
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
$32,000
El
i
m
i
n
a
t
e
R
i
n
k
A
t
t
e
nd
a
n
t
s
an
d
W
a
r
m
i
n
g
H
o
u
s
e
s
Cl
o
sur
e
o
f
f
o
u
r
w
a
r
m
i
n
g
ho
u
s
e
s
$23,000
El
i
m
i
n
a
t
e
L
a
k
e
A
n
n
Li
f
e
g
u
a
r
d
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
La
k
e
A
n
n
B
e
a
c
h
w
o
u
l
d
be
c
o
m
e
a
n
“
u
n
g
u
a
rd
e
d
”
fa
c
i
l
i
t
y
$29,000
El
i
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
o
f a
l
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
Ev
e
nt
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
s
9,
4
0
0
d
o
n
o
t
p
a
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
e
i
n
City s
p
ec
i
al
e
v
en
ts
$57,000
El
i
m
i
n
a
t
e
w
i
n
t
e
r
s
n
o
w
re
m
o
v
a
l
o
n
t
r
a
i
l
s
Li
m
i
t
e
d
o
r
n
o
u
s
e
o
f t
r
a
i
l
s
in
w
i
n
t
e
r
$14,000
INVITATION TO HALLOWEEN PARTY
Annually, the City of Chanhassen, in cooperation with our local business community, sponsors a
series of special events. The city’s fall special event is the “Halloween Party,” which will be
held on Saturday, October 29. Children ages 2-10 are invited to participate in this festive event
and make sure you bring along your family and friends. The event runs from 5:30-7:30 p.m.
Events include… children’s musical entertainment featuring “Treasure Beyond Measure” (A
Children’s Pirate Show), trick-or-treating, hayrides (outside weather permitting), children’s
games, haunted areas, and refreshments.
Pre-registration is required by Friday, October 28 at either City Hall or the Chanhassen
Recreation Center. The fee is $4 per child (adults are free) and covers all activities.
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
WORK SESSION
OCTOBER 10, 2005
Mayor Furlong called the work session to order at 5:40 p.m.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Furlong, Councilwoman Tjornhom, Councilman
Peterson, Councilman Lundquist, and Councilman Labatt
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Justin Miller, Paul Oehme, Kate Aanenson, Greg Sticha,
and Steve Torell
CREATION OF ABATEMENT DISTRICT FOR THE RECONSTRUCTION OF
LYMAN BOULEVARD, CHANHASSEN WEST BUSINESS PARK.
Justin Miller explained what and how an abatement district works. He passed out paper copies
of information that was hard to see on the computer. Todd Gerhardt explained that he’s had
preliminary talks with School District 112 and the County regarding the construction of a new
secondary school scheduled for the Fall of 2009 and would like the upgrade of Lyman Boulevard
to coincide with that construction schedule. Therefore the council needs to be looking at funding
options now. Councilman Lundquist asked staff to explain the advantage of using abatement
versus bonding. Todd Gerhardt explained how different governmental agencies will be impacted
by an abatement district and another option the city could take is a wait and see approach and
just let the County do the upgrade project sometime in the future. Councilman Lundquist talked
about having to do a sell job in the next year before development begins in Chanhassen West
Business Park. Mayor Furlong stated this is a chance for government entities to work together to
get things done efficiently and economically. Todd Gerhardt stated he felt School District 112
and Chaska should be supportive and that he would keep the City Council updated.
JOINT MEETING WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
Planning Commission members present: Mark Undestad, Jerry McDonald, Debbie Larson and
Dan Keefe. Kate Aanenson reviewed the projects and meetings the Planning Commission has
worked on over the past year and explained how during their work sessions the commission
members have taken tours of completed projects and proposed project sites, which have been
very helpful. Dan Keefe stated the tours have been very beneficial and asked that given the
recent 100 year rain events, if there’s anything the Planning Commission should be looking at in
their considerations. Todd Gerhardt explained what staff has learned in terms of storm water
management planning from the Yoberry and Lake Harrison developments and the need to do a
better job of educating the public on maintenance of emergency overflow areas. Jerry McDonald
noted that after a visit to Woodbury and seeing the damage caused by flooding he sees the need
to enforce ordinance and encroachment agreements regarding where structures can and cannot be
built. Mayor Furlong noted that the update to the Surface Water Management Plan should show
what’s worked and what still needs to be done but that the Planning Commission should not
ignore storm water aspects in review of plans. Jerry McDonald asked for additional education on
storm water issues. Kate Aanenson explained that Kurt Papke is the Planning Commission
City Council Work Session – October 10, 2005
2
liaison to the Surface Water Task Force but staff can present an update to the Planning
Commission at a future meeting. Todd Gerhardt suggested that signage could be used to make
residents aware of emergency overflow areas in their neighborhoods. Councilman Peterson
asked if the Planning Commission feels the City Council has been agreeing or disagreeing with
their recommendations. Jerry McDonald stated it’s been pretty agreeable but asked what further
information the Planning Commission can provide to the City Council. Mayor Furlong noted
that the summary statement after a motion is made is very helpful. Councilwoman Tjornhom
asked about Planning Commission members attendance at City Council meetings. Dan Keefe
asked for clarification on the role of Planning Commissioners at City Council meetings.
Councilman Lundquist explained that it’s a method for commission members to relay back to the
Planning Commission on what’s happening at the City Council level. Mayor Furlong suggested
putting an item on the Planning Commission agenda for those discussions. He thanked the
Planning Commissioners for their continued hard work and noted their attendance records.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BUDGET.
Kate Aanenson gave a power point presentation regarding the proposed 2006 budget for the
Community Development department. Steve Torell gave an update on the revenues received
from the rental licensing program. Mayor Furlong asked for clarification on the use of the
general fund versus other funds for revenues and expenses. Councilman Peterson asked if
residential or commercial areas were more labor intensive for building inspectors. Steve Torell
noted that residential is more labor intensive. Councilman Lundquist asked if revenues were up
or down and proposed versus actual. Mayor Furlong asked to see the 2004 actual numbers
versus projected for the revenue and expenditure sheets. Councilman Peterson asked to see an
up to date actual numbers versus estimated projections. Greg Sticha passed out a sheet
explaining the surface water utility fund numbers and noted that Ehlers and Associates will be
providing a more detailed study on the utility rates. He noted that he would like to see the fund
balance stay above the $2 million mark. Todd Gerhardt stated staff needs to spend more time
studying the storm water funds and the City Council will be seeing that item again the first
meeting in November from Ehlers and Associates.
The work session we recessed at 7:00 p.m.. It was reconvened at 8:25 p.m..
The council continued to discuss requests for salary increases. Councilman Lundquist noted he
would like to look at the issue of salary increases after all departments have presented their 2006
budgets.
UPDATE ON POST OFFICE DELIVERY ISSUES.
Justin Miller presented an update on discussions with the postal service which have resulted in
allowing cluster box units for downtown deliveries. He reviewed the letter from Sheila Meyers
which explains the postal service’s position on these issues. Mayor Furlong noted that criteria
needs to be established on where the cluster boxes are located. Justin Miller explained his
findings on the Chaska/Excelsior zip code issue, noting that the postal service’s software cannot
differentiate city names, but deliveries are based on zip codes. Mayor Furlong asked staff to nail
down locations for cluster boxes in the downtown area. He explained that Representative John
City Council Work Session – October 10, 2005
3
Kline had called him and expressed his disappointment in the postal service’s letter but that he
could not justify asking for legislative change because of the difficulty of getting the item passed
through the legislature. Mayor Furlong directed staff to draft a letter of thanks to Representative
Kline for his efforts on the city’s behalf.
Mayor Furlong adjourned the work session meeting at 8:40 p.m..
Submitted by Todd Gerhardt
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
SUMMARY MINUTES
OCTOBER 10, 2005
Mayor Furlong called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. The meeting was opened with the
Pledge to the Flag.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Furlong, Councilman Labatt, Councilwoman
Tjornhom, Councilman Peterson and Councilman Lundquist
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Roger Knutson, Justin Miller, Paul Oehme, Greg Sticha,
and Kate Aanenson
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None.
CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman Labatt seconded that
the City Council approve the following consent agenda items pursuant to the City
Manager’s recommendations:
a. Approval of Minutes.
b. Approval of Request for an Off-Sale 3.2 Beer License, Cub Foods, 7900 Market
Boulevard.
c. Resolution#2005-87: Approval of Resolution Authorizing the Sale of Water Revenue
Bonds, and Resolution#2005-88: Approval of Resolution Authorizing the Sale of
Refunding Park Bonds.
e. Approval of an Off-Premise Directional Sign to Direct Traffic into the Park Nicollet
Clinic and American Legion Site.
f. Approval of Amendment to Chapter 10 of City Code, Eliminating the Limit on the
Number of Off-Sale Liquor Licenses Allowed in the City.
g. Approval of Amendment to Hidden Creek Meadows Development Contract.
h. Approval of Addendum to Chanhassen West Business Park Development Contract as
amended.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
City Council Summary – October 10, 2005
2
D. APPROVAL OF 2006 POLICE CONTRACT WITH CARVER COUNTY
SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT.
Councilman Lundquist asked that this item be tabled for 2 weeks to collect additional
information.
Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilwoman Tjornhom seconded to table approval of the
2006 Police Contract with the Carver County Sheriff’s Department. All voted in favor and
the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: None.
PUBLIC HEARING: CENTURY WINE & SPIRITS, 2695 WEST 78TH STREET,
REQUEST FOR AN OFF-SALE INTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSE.
Public Present:
Name Address
Dan Herbst 7640 Crimson Bay
Ron Clark 5716 Long Brake Tr, Edina
Jim Paulsen 8629 So, Falling, Victoria
Mark Bollio 1873 Whiteoak Drive, Chaska
Craig Alshouse 1300 Willowbrook, Wayzata
Tara Clawson 18909 Explorer Tr, Eden Prairie
Justin Miller presented the staff report on this item. Mayor Furlong informed the council that
Karen Engelhardt had received a phone call from a resident who could not be at the meeting and
sent along his comments to the council to be made part of the public record. Mayor Furlong
opened the public hearing. Asim Syed, 2766 Century Circle expressed concern about the
possibility of the crime rate going up with a wine store opening next door to his home. Craig
Alshouse who built and owns the building next to this proposed store expressed his support for
this request. Ron Clark, the developer of the property, explained why it has taken so long to get
a liquor store at this site. Mayor Furlong closed the public hearing.
Councilman Peterson moved, Councilman Labatt seconded that the City Council approve
the off-sale liquor license requested by Century Wine and Spirits, LLC contingent upon
receipt of the liquor liability insurance certificate and license fee. The license will not be
issued until a Certificate of Occupancy has been issued for the space. All voted in favor
and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
City Council Summary – October 10, 2005
3
PUBLIC HEARING: FOOD FOR THE JOURNEY dba JACOBS TAVERN, 7845
CENTURY BOULEVARD, REQUEST FOR AN ON SALE INTOXICATING LIQUOR
LICENSE.
Public Present:
Name Address
Craig Alshouse 1300 Willowbrook, Wayzata
John C. & Joan Howe-Pullis 1385 Wildflower Lane, Chaska
Justin Miller presented the staff report on this item. Councilman Lundquist asked for
clarification of the contingencies in the motion.
Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman Peterson seconded that the City Council
approves the request from Food for the Journey, LLC dba Jacob’s Tavern for an on-sale
intoxicating liquor license contingent upon the restaurant receiving site plan approval and
a Certificate of Occupancy. Additionally, staff will work with the applicant to provide an
insurance certificate and license fee prior to the restaurant opening. A background
investigation will be completed on the operating manager once designated. A license will
not be issued until all of the conditions are satisfied. All voted in favor and the motion
carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
LIBERTY ON BLUFF CREEK, TOWN & COUNTRY HOMES, EAST OF AUDUBON
ROAD, SOUTH OF LYMAN BOULEVARD AND NORTH OF PIONEER TRAIL,
PLANNING CASE 05-11:
· REQUEST FOR REZONING OF THE PROPERTY FROM A-2 TO PUD-R;
· SUBDIVISION WITH VARIANCES OF APPROXIMATELY 91 ACRES INTO 84
LOTS, 3 OUTLOTS, AND PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY;
· SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR 444 TOWNHOUSE UNITS;
· WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT;
· CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE BLUFF
CREEK OVERLAY DISTRICT AND FOR ALTERATION TO A FLOOD PLAIN.
Public Present:
Name Address
Shawn Siders Town and Country Homes
Kevin Clark Town and Country Homes
Rick Janssen Town and Country Homes
Jeff Fox 5270 Howards Point Road, Excelsior
Rick Dorsey 1551 Lyman Boulevard
City Council Summary – October 10, 2005
4
Kate Aanenson presented the staff report and update since the last meeting with council. Kevin
Clark presented a summary of the changes that have occurred since that meeting. Mayor
Furlong asked the applicant to elaborate on the architectural changes made to the Premiere style
townhomes and asked that more work be done on the rear elevations between now and final plat.
Councilman Lundquist asked the City Manager to explain the general revenue generation from a
development such as this with this kind of density versus office industrial. After council
discussion the following motion was made.
Councilman Labatt moved, Councilman Lundquist seconded that the City Council approve
the request for rezoning from A2 to PUD-R; site plan review with subdivision of 6 blocks
and 69 buildings including 444 units, 3 Outlots (A & B which represent the Overlay District,
and C which is the association pool), and 7 common lots of 91.02 acres; conditional uses for
the development in the Bluff Creek Overlay District and alteration of the Flood Plain; and
a Wetland Alteration Permit, as stated below and as shown on the site plan and
construction plans dated 9-06-05, subject to the following conditions:
Planning Recommended Conditions of Approval
1. Provide design plan that shows the color and architectural detail for each unit on the site.
2. The assessment for the AUAR will be paid at the time of plat recording. The assessment
amount, based on gross acreage of 15.5 %, plus wetland delineation and cultural resources
inventory is $22,709.00.
Engineering Recommended Conditions of Approval
3. The final plat can not be presented to City Council for approval until City Project 04-05 is
awarded.
4. Before site grading commences, the three existing buildings on the property must be razed.
5. On-street parking may be used to satisfy the parking requirement with the following
stipulations:
On-street parking is prohibited between November 1 and April 1 between the hours of 1:00
a.m. and 7:00 a.m., consistent with Section 12-16 of the City Code: Winter Parking
Regulations. Credit for on-street parking is not allowed along the curve of the public streets.
6. The developer’s engineer must work with Peterson’s Bluff’s engineer to ensure that the
proposed grading on each property matches at the property line and to eliminate and/or
decrease the height of retaining walls to the maximum extent possible.
7. Ground slopes shall not exceed 3H:1V.
City Council Summary – October 10, 2005
5
8. The final grading plan must show the proposed top and bottom of wall elevations for all
retaining walls.
9. Retaining walls over four feet high must be designed by a Structural Engineer registered in
the State of Minnesota and require a building permit.
10. The existing driveway at Audubon Road must be removed.
11. All of the ponds are required to be designed to National Urban Runoff Program (NURP)
standards with maximum 3:1 slopes and a 10:1 bench at the NWL.
12. The lowest floor elevation of all buildings must be at least three feet above the HWL of the
adjacent ponds.
13. The last public storm water structure that is road-accessible prior to discharging to a water
body must have a 3-foot sump.
14. The applicant shall include a drain tile system behind the curbs to convey sump pump
discharge from homes not adjacent to ponds.
15. The style of home and lowest floor elevation must be noted on the final grading plan.
16. Blanket drainage and utility easements are required over all common lots; however, the
following storm sewer segments shall be owned and maintained by the homeowners
association:
a. Northeast and west of Lot 5, Block 1.
b. Within the private cul de sac to Lots 1-4, Block 3.
c. The connection between the private drives to Lots 9, 10, 11 and 12 Block 1 and the
public lateral within Street A.
d. The connection between the private cul de sac to Lots 1-4, Block 3 and the public
lateral within Street D.
e. East of Lot 7, Block 4.
f. North of Lots 11-13, Block 5.
g. West of and between Lots 2 and 3, Block 6.
17. The plat must be signed by a Land Surveyor registered in the State of Minnesota.
18. A minimum 75-foot long rock construction entrance must be shown on the plans.
19. Tree preservation fencing must be installed at the limits of tree removal.
20. An easement is required from the appropriate property owner for any off-site grading.
21. If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will
be required to supply the City with detailed haul routes.
City Council Summary – October 10, 2005
6
22. Utility services for the buildings must be shown on the final utility plan. Sanitary services
must be 6-inch PVC and water service must be 1-inch copper, Type K.
23. Each new lot is subject to the sanitary sewer and water hookup charges. The 2005 trunk
hookup charge is $1,458 for sanitary sewer and $2,955 for watermain. Sanitary sewer and
watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel at the time of building
permit issuance. All of these charges are based on the number of SAC units assigned by the
Met Council and are due at the time of building permit issuance.
24. Upon project completion, the developer must submit inspection/soil reports certifying that
the private streets were built to a 7-ton design.
25. All of the utility improvements are required to be constructed in accordance with the City's
latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. The applicant is also required to
enter into a development contract with the City and supply the necessary financial security in
the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee installation of the improvements and
the conditions of final plat approval. The applicant must be aware that all public utility
improvements will require a preconstruction meeting before building permit issuance.
26. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies will be required prior to construction,
including but not limited to MPCA, Department of Health, Carver County and Watershed
District.
27. The benchmark used to complete the site survey must be shown on the grading plan.
28. Intersection neckdowns are limited to public street intersections only.
Park and Recreation Recommended Conditions of Approval
29. Full park dedication fees shall be collected per city ordinance in lieu of requiring parkland
dedication.
30. The trails on both the north and south sides of collector road “A” are widened to 10 feet.
31. The internal or private trail north of Block 1 be designed subject to staff approval to allow
convenient access to the Bluff Creek Corridor.
32. Other internal or private trails connecting residents to amenities within the PUD be enhanced.
Wetland Alteration Permit Recommended Conditions of Approval
33. Wetland replacement shall occur in a manner consistent with the Minnesota Wetland
Conservation Act (MR 8420).
34. The applicant shall work with staff to address comments received from the reviewing
agencies, including conducting MnRAMs for impacted and replacement wetlands for use in
City Council Summary – October 10, 2005
7
sequencing flexibility for impacts on wetlands A, D, E, J and L. Details regarding the
stabilization of areas upslope of mitigation area M2 shall be included in the replacement
plan. More detailed plans for mitigation areas M1 and M2, including cross-sections, shall be
submitted. The applicant shall consider restorations of wetlands A, F and G for new wetland
credit. The applicant must receive approval of a wetland replacement plan prior to or
concurrent with final plat approval and prior to wetland impacts occurring.
35. A five-year wetland replacement monitoring plan shall be submitted. The replacement
monitoring plan shall include a detailed management plan for invasive non-native species,
particularly hybrid cattail, purple loosestrife and reed canary grass. The plans shall show
fixed photo monitoring points for the replacement wetland. The applicant shall provide proof
of recording of a Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants for Replacement Wetland.
36. A wetland buffer 16.5 to 20 feet in width (with a minimum average of 16.5 feet) shall be
maintained around all wetlands, with the exception of Basin C. A wetland buffer 20 to 30
feet in width (with a minimum average of 20 feet) shall be maintained around Basin C.
Wetland buffer areas shall be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City’s
wetland ordinance. The applicant shall install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of
City staff, before construction begins and must pay the City $20 per sign.
37. All structures shall be set back 40 feet from the edge of the wetland buffer. The wetland buffer
setback should be shown on the plans.
38. The applicant shall submit a letter of credit equal to 110% of the cost of the wetland creation
(including grading and seeding) to ensure the design standards for the replacement wetland
are met. The letter of credit shall be effective for no less than five years from the date of
final plat approval. The applicant shall submit a cost estimate for wetland creation (including
grading and seeding) so the City can calculate the amount of the wetland creation letter of
credit.
39. Clay diversions shall be used to divert runoff around the wetlands on the south side of the
development to the temporary sediment basins downslope of them.
Water Resources Subdivision Recommended Conditions of Approval
40. Bluff areas (i.e., slope greater than or equal to 30% and a rise in slope of at least 25 feet
above the toe) shall be preserved. In addition, all structures shall maintain a 30-foot setback
from the bluff and no grading may occur within the bluff impact zone (i.e., the bluff and land
located within 20 feet from the top of a bluff).
41. No alterations are allowed within the primary corridor or within the first 20 feet of the
setback from the primary corridor. All structures shall meet the 40-foot setback from the
primary corridor.
42. A copy of the LOMA shall be submitted to the City prior to alterations within the floodplain.
In lieu of a LOMA, the applicant shall obtain a conditional use permit for alterations within
City Council Summary – October 10, 2005
8
the floodplain.
43. The developer shall determine the base flood elevation (100-year) to ensure that the
structures will meet all floodplain elevation requirements.
44. The grade stabilization structure at the north end of Basin A is in disrepair and shall be
replaced. Before the development incorporates this structure into the permanent storm water
management system, the structure shall be assessed and a plan proposed and approved by the
city for the repair or replacement of the structure, as well as long term maintenance. The
applicant shall work with the property owner to the north to get permission to repair or
replace the structure.
45. Drainage and utility easements with a minimum width of 20 feet shall be provided over all
existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, buffer areas used as PVC and storm water
infrastructure.
46. A complete Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be in place before
applying for and receiving NPDES construction permit coverage from the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency (MPCA).
47. Minimization of the amount of exposed soils on the site is needed; phasing of the
development shall limit the disturbed areas open.
48. All emergency overflows need temporary and permanent stabilization and shall be shown in
a detail or on the SWPPP. Energy dissipation (riprap and geotextile fabric) shall be installed
within 24 hours of installation of flared end sections and outlet structures.
49. Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3:1. All
exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round,
according to the following table of slopes and time frames:
Type of Slope Time (Maximum time an area can
Steeper than 3:1 7 days remain open when the area
10:1 to 3:1 14 days is not actively being worked.)
Flatter than 10:1 21 days
50. These areas include constructed storm water management pond side slopes, and any exposed
soil areas with a positive slope to a storm water conveyance system, such as a curb and gutter
system, storm sewer inlet, temporary or permanent drainage ditch or other natural or man
made systems that discharge to a surface water.
51. Temporary sediment basins shall be constructed and could be located in the proposed
permanent storm water pond locations. If Pond A does not get excavated prior to disturbing
the contributing area; a temporary basin shall be constructed approximately in the areas of
Street D and Lot 5, Block 3. Temporary basins shall be labeled on the SWPPP. A detail
shall be provided for the temporary outlet structures for the temporary basins. Clay berms
City Council Summary – October 10, 2005
9
shall be used to temporarily divert runoff from the construction site to the temporary basins
prior to discharge. Additionally the clay diversions shall be used to divert runoff around the
wetlands on the south side of the development to the temporary sediment basins downslope
of them.
52. Chanhassen Type 2, Heavy Duty silt fence shall be used around all wetlands, streams, creeks,
bluffs and ravines; Chanhassen Type 1 silt fence shall be used around the remaining areas.
The inlet control (for area inlets, not curbside) detail shall be mono-mono heavy duty
machine sliced silt fence with 4 foot maximum spacing for metal T-posts. A rock berm
placed around the silt fence shall be at least 2 feet wide and 1 foot high of 1½ -inch clear
rock. Wimco-type inlet controls shall be installed in all inlets through out the project within
24 hours of inlet installation. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include
daily street scraping and street sweeping as-needed.
53. At this time, the estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat
recording, is $288,050.
54. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g.,
Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Construction Permit), Minnesota Department of
Natural Resources (dewatering permit), and Army Corps of Engineers) and comply with their
conditions of approval.
Forestry Recommended Conditions of Approval
55. Tree protection fencing shall be installed prior to construction around all areas designated for
preservation.
56. A walk-through inspection of the silt/tree preservation fence shall be required prior to
construction.
57. A turf plan shall be submitted to the city indicating the location of sod and seeding areas.
58. Dedication of Outlot A and B shall be made to the city or a conservation easement shall be
established over said outlots.
Inspections and Fire Marshal Recommended Conditions of Approval
59. A 10-foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e. street lamps, trees,
shrubs, bushes, Xcel Energy, Qwest, cable TV, and transformer boxes. This is to ensure that
fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to
Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1.
60. There are a number of additional fire hydrants required and some will be re-located.
City Council Summary – October 10, 2005
10
61. Fire apparatus access roads and water supply for fire protection is required to be installed.
Such protection shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the time of
construction except when approved alternate methods of protection are provided.
62. Temporary street signs shall be installed on street intersection when construction of the new
roadway allows passage by vehicles. Pursuant to 2002 Minnesota Fire Code Section 501.4.
63. No burning permits will be issued for trees to be removed. Trees and shrubs must either be
removed from site or chipped.
64. Submit street names to Chanhassen Building Official and Chanhassen Fire Marshal for
review and approval. The Chanhassen Building Official and Fire Marshal will determine
which streets will need naming.
65. “No parking fire lane” signs will be required. Contact the Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact
location of signs to be installed.
66. Submit cul-de-sac design dimensions to City Engineer and Fire Marshal for review and
approval.
Building Recommended Conditions of Approval
67. Accessibility will have to be provided to all portions of the development and a percentage of
the units may also be required to be accessible or adaptable in accordance with Minnesota
State Building Code Chapter 1341. Further information is needed to determine these
requirements.
68. Buildings over 8,500 sq. ft. in size must be protected with an automatic fire protection
system. The State of Minnesota is in the process of revising Chapter 1306 of the Minnesota
State Building Code regarding fire protection systems. It is not yet entirely clear how these
changes will affect residential construction. It is important that the developer meet with the
Inspections Division prior to final design to determine what ramifications, if any, the new
requirements will have on the project.
69. The developer must submit a list of proposed street names and an addressing plan for review
and approval prior to final plat of the property.
70. Demolition permits must be obtained before demolishing any structures on the site.
71. A final grading plan and soils report must be to the Inspections Division before permits can
be issued.
72. Walls and projections within 3 feet of property lines are required to be of one-hour fire-
resistive construction.
City Council Summary – October 10, 2005
11
73. The buildings will be required to be designed by an architect and engineer as determined by
the Building Official.
74. The developer and or their agent shall meet with the Inspections Division as early as possible
to discuss plan review and permit procedures.”
All voted in favor, except Councilwoman Tjornhom who opposed and the motion carried
with a vote of 4 to 1.
COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS: Councilman Peterson presented an update from Southwest
Metro Transit.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: Todd Gerhardt presented an update on the storm
damage that occurred in the previous week’s storm.
CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION. Councilman Lundquist noted the letter of
congratulations to Mr. Josh Iskierka on his Eagle Scout project.
Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman Labatt seconded to adjourn the meeting. All
voted in favor and the motion carried. The City Council meeting was adjourned at 8:25
p.m..
Submitted by Todd Gerhardt
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
OCTOBER 10, 2005
Mayor Furlong called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. The meeting was opened with the
Pledge to the Flag.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Furlong, Councilman Labatt, Councilwoman
Tjornhom, Councilman Peterson and Councilman Lundquist
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Roger Knutson, Justin Miller, Paul Oehme, Greg Sticha,
and Kate Aanenson
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS:
Mayor Furlong: Good evening and thank you for joining us. Those here in our council
chambers and those watching at home. Glad you’re with us. At this point I would ask if there
are any modifications or additions, changes to the agenda that was distributed with the council
packet. If not and if there are no objections the agenda will stand as distributed.
CONSENT AGENDA:
Kate Aanenson: Can I just clarify Mayor for the record, item (h). It states approval of
amendment to Chan West Business Park and I did provide modifications to that amendment
which included changing it from Eden Trace to Minger-Volk Properties LLC and expiration date
on that was 2006 as modified.
Mayor Furlong: Alright, thank you.
Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman Labatt seconded that the City Council approve
the following consent agenda items pursuant to the City Manager’s recommendations:
a. Approval of Minutes.
b. Approval of Request for an Off-Sale 3.2 Beer License, Cub Foods, 7900 Market
Boulevard.
c. Resolution#2005-87: Approval of Resolution Authorizing the Sale of Water Revenue
Bonds, and Resolution#2005-88: Approval of Resolution Authorizing the Sale of
Refunding Park Bonds.
e. Approval of an Off-Premise Directional Sign to Direct Traffic into the Park Nicollet
Clinic and American Legion Site.
f. Approval of Amendment to Chapter 10 of City Code, Eliminating the Limit on the
Number of Off-Sale Liquor Licenses Allowed in the City.
City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005
2
g. Approval of Amendment to Hidden Creek Meadows Development Contract.
h. Approval of Addendum to Chanhassen West Business Park Development Contract as
amended.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
D. APPROVAL OF 2006 POLICE CONTRACT WITH CARVER COUNTY
SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT.
Councilman Lundquist: Couple of reasons Mr. Mayor. First of all, we spent a lot of time over
the last year on public safety stuff. On that so I wanted us to highlight that and bring that out that
you know some of these things, changes or non-changes in here have come as a result of that,
which I think is a good thing. The question I had, the change Todd or Justin, change proposed
for 2006 versus ’05. Same number of deputies. And then what was the total contract amount in
’05?
Justin Miller: I have that, I can’t tell you the exact number off the top of my head. It’s.
Councilman Lundquist: Just over a million.
Justin Miller: It was I think a million 70,000. Something like that.
Councilman Lundquist: About 100,000 increase? Okay. And then the other thing is I would,
discussion with other council members about the potential as I’m doing some work with Mr.
Gerhardt and the sheriff’s department now to entertain tabling this item for 2 weeks to bring it
back at our next council meeting so that we can collect some more information. If other
members would be open.
Mayor Furlong: I guess the question I have, is there any urgency from a time standpoint that
would prevent us from considering this in 2 weeks? Okay, if there’s nothing. Do you want to
make a motion to table?
Councilman Lundquist: I would move that we table item 1(d).
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Is there a second?
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Second.
Mayor Furlong: Made and seconded.
Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilwoman Tjornhom seconded to table approval of the
2006 Police Contract with the Carver County Sheriff’s Department. All voted in favor and
the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: None.
City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005
3
PUBLIC HEARING: CENTURY WINE & SPIRITS, 2695 WEST 78TH STREET,
REQUEST FOR AN OFF-SALE INTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSE.
Public Present:
Name Address
Dan Herbst 7640 Crimson Bay
Ron Clark 5716 Long Brake Tr, Edina
Jim Paulsen 8629 So, Falling, Victoria
Mark Bollio 1873 Whiteoak Drive, Chaska
Craig Alshouse 1300 Willowbrook, Wayzata
Tara Clawson 18909 Explorer Tr, Eden Prairie
Justin Miller: Good evening Mayor, council. The city has received a request for an off sale
liquor license from Century Wine & Spirits, LLC to operate a new liquor store at 2695 West 78th
Street. The store is planned to be on the north side of Highway 5 in the Arboretum shopping
center. This is a PUD development that was approved and in that development liquor stores
were an approved use in that development. Law enforcement has completed background
investigations on all the principals stated in the application and no negative comments were
found. This is a public hearing and notice was sent to the property owners within 500 feet of the
proposed store. At this time staff did not receive any comments before the meeting. Staff
recommend that you hold a public hearing and then approve the off sale liquor license request by
Century Wine & Spirits LLC contingent upon receipt of the liquor liability insurance certificate
and license fee. And also the license will not be issue until a Certificate of Occupancy is issued.
Be happy to answer any questions.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Questions for staff. Just for the record, we did receive or Karen
Engelhardt at the City had received a phone call from a resident who could not be here tonight. I
know that she sent that from Mr. Wright. She sent his comments along to the council so we
should make that part of the public record.
Councilman Lundquist: That’s from the next one I think.
Todd Gerhardt: No, this one.
Mayor Furlong: I think it’s on this one. Okay, so if we can make that part of the public record
as well. Thank you. Any other questions for staff? If not, this is a public hearing so at this time
we would entertain comments from interested parties on this matter. Please come forward to the
microphone. State your name and address please. Please. Now would be the time.
Asim Syed: Good evening everyone. My names is Asim Syed. I live right next to this proposed
site. My home address is 2766 Century Circle, Chanhassen. I’m not very good with this
proceedings. I just received this in my mail and based on my experience, I don’t have a lot of
experience. You probably have a lot of experience here but my…and my knowledge says that I
should not have a wine store next to my house. So if the council members here can guarantee
City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005
4
that the crime rate or anything that won’t suffer as a direct result of this wine store, then I’ll be
happy… But again I just say, I don’t have a lot of experience but I did invest to buy a house
right next to the proposed site so…
Mayor Furlong: Well that’s a fair comment. I think it’s difficult for us to guarantee anything but
I think it is a fair question to ask of staff. What has been our experience, if at all, with the
existing off sale liquor stores in town? We have 3 currently, is that correct? So perhaps can we
give some comment.
Todd Gerhardt: Typically the concern with most liquor stores is serving liquor to underage
individuals and our local establishments have done an excellent job. They’ve been using new
technology now where you can scan somebody’s drivers license in and can tell if it’s a fake or
not. So they’ve done a great job in maintaining that. As to criminal activity, I’m not aware of
any that has occurred in the 3 stores that we’ve had in the last 15 or so years that I’ve been here.
Asim Syed: Yeah, I understand but if you’re going to open a store up here and we have seen a
lot of crime… I’m not saying it’s because of the wine store but… Now having a wine store next
to my house is going to increase the flow of traffic and will invite a lot of customers from
different backgrounds, so that bothers me a lot. And in fact raising children in that area, it
bothers me a lot. So those are the concerns. I’m not sure if my sense is right here but that’s
something I have.
Todd Gerhardt: I mean traffic will be generated with any type of use that may be there. Liquor
is a legal substance in Minnesota. Our law enforcement agencies patrol this area quite a bit and
do a lot of traffic control. We have one car that is just designated for traffic control so we watch
all the areas in town so as the Mayor stated, I don’t think we can guarantee you there won’t be
crime here. We’ve had crime at some of other establishments this past weekend and so, Pizzeria
and some of the gas stations had some theft that occurred this past weekend so it happens. But
we’ve got a great law enforcement agency working for us and surveys have shown that people in
the community do feel safe and I think that’s a credit back to our law enforcement.
Asim Syed: Okay, thanks for giving me an opportunity.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. If anybody else would like to comment during this public hearing
as well, please come forward at this time. Sir, please.
Craig Alshouse: Hi, my name is Craig Alshouse and I built and own the building next to this
facility that now houses 3 different entities that Edina Realty owns and we still have a little bit of
space next to it that we’re trying to lease out to some retail. My comment is that I think this is a
use that very well fits the zoning. I’m all in favor of it even though I have the store, or excuse
me the business next door. This is an off sale facility, not an on sale so the concerns that people
have with serving minors really doesn’t enter into this. They may sell something by mistake but
there certainly are concerns. And I don’t believe that we’re going to have criminal activity at the
store or around the store because these are package goods. People walk out with them and they
go someplace with them. I think you have, what you as the council and the planning people
wanted for this area was a retail establishment where people could drive in. Stop in on their way
City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005
5
home. Or drive past it and stop in on the way west or east and get gas. Buy liquor. Buy take out
food. Buy coffee. Buy this. Buy that and I think we’re getting there. What we need is more
traffic to build a synergy within that whole area, so I speak in favor of it. Thank you.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you.
Ron Clark: Good evening. I’m Ron Clark. I’m the developer of Arboretum Center and I just
wanted to explain to the council why it, the reason it has taken so long to be before you with this
request. I think it was quite a few months ago that we came to you requesting additional
approval of a liquor license at that location and at that point in time we actually had 3 perspective
tenants that wanted to enter into a lease with us and for one reason or another, not one of those 3
turned out to be the operator that I wanted for that location so knowing that I wanted to deliver
what we had, what the council had approved, I subsequently called Dan Herbst that I had been
acquainted with to see and knowing that he was a proven operator, to see if he wanted to get
back into that business and he certainly did and so we are here tonight for that. But it’s been a
long time coming and I wanted the council to understand why. Thank you.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Any other comments this evening as part of the public
hearing? If not then without objection we’ll close the public hearing and bring it back to council.
Any follow up questions for the council? That the council has for staff at this point.
Councilman Lundquist: No.
Mayor Furlong: If not, is there a discussion? I mean it’s one of those issues I think the concerns
raised by the resident are always valid concerns. Anyplace we live we want to make sure that
we’re not, that our neighbor is not increasing crime and other problems around the area. I think
this is an approved use within this PUD and it’s something that, especially because we haven’t
experienced problems at our other 3 locations, one that I think we can feel comfortable going
forward with. But as always we need to monitor that and Mr. Gerhardt, obviously we can work
with our policing services to make sure that that is monitored and traffic as well, around the area
as that continues to grow and develop. If there are no other comments, is there a motion to
approve?
Councilman Peterson: Motion to approve.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Is there a second?
Councilman Labatt: Second.
Mayor Furlong: Made and seconded. Any discussion on the motion?
Councilman Peterson moved, Councilman Labatt seconded that the City Council approve
the off-sale liquor license requested by Century Wine and Spirits, LLC contingent upon
receipt of the liquor liability insurance certificate and license fee. The license will not be
issued until a Certificate of Occupancy has been issued for the space. All voted in favor
and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005
6
PUBLIC HEARING: FOOD FOR THE JOURNEY dba JACOBS TAVERN, 7845
CENTURY BOULEVARD, REQUEST FOR AN ON SALE INTOXICATING LIQUOR
LICENSE.
Public Present:
Name Address
Craig Alshouse 1300 Willowbrook, Wayzata
John C. & Joan Howe-Pullis 1385 Wildflower Lane, Chaska
Justin Miller: Mayor, council. The staff has also received an application for an on sale liquor
license. This is for Food for the Journey, LLC. They would like to operate a restaurant named
Jacob’s Tavern on the site next to the Holiday Inn Express building. There’s not a building there
yet but they wanted to get the liquor license as part of their process. This site is zoned PUD and
a restaurant and liquor is permitted in this district. Public hearing notice was also sent to
property owners within 500 feet of this site and at this moment that I’m aware of, staff has not
received any comments. Background investigations were performed on the principles of the
organization and no negative comments were found. However an operating manager has not
been named for the restaurant. As soon as one is named, a background check will be performed
on that individual as well. Staff recommends that you hold the public hearing and after that
approve the request for the Food for the Journey LLC doing business as Jacob’s Tavern for an on
sale intoxicating liquor license contingent upon the restaurant receiving site plan approval and a
Certificate of Occupancy, as well as the appropriate insurance certificates and paying the license
fee. Be happy to answer any questions.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Questions for staff.
Councilman Lundquist: Mr. Miller, the operating manager, would staff also recommend that that
be contingent upon naming an operating manager and having that background check done as
well?
Justin Miller: Yes, that’s true.
Mayor Furlong: Other questions. Where are they in the site plan approval process?
Justin Miller: They have not submitted yet.
Kate Aanenson: That’s correct.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, so they’re trying to do this in advance?
Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. This is…
Mayor Furlong: I’m sorry.
City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005
7
Justin Miller: I think this will be helpful for them to acquire financing and get their…
Mayor Furlong: Very good, thank you. Any other questions for staff? If not, at this time then I
would open up public hearing on this matter and invite all interested parties to please come
forward and address the council, stating your name and address please. Nobody for this one?
Okay, without objection then we’ll close the public hearing. Bring it back to council for
discussion. Your thoughts or comments on this. I think this will be, if we can help them making
sure that we have proper conditions that need to be met before this is actually issued, if we can
help them bring in a nice restaurant to town, I think I’m all in favor of doing that and given that
the background checks came through very well, I would propose that we continue to go forward
with this as well. Any other discussion or comments? If not is there a motion to approve.
Councilman Lundquist: Motion to approve.
Mayor Furlong: Is there a second?
Councilman Peterson: Second.
Mayor Furlong: Made and seconded. Any discussion on the motion?
Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman Peterson seconded that the City Council
approves the request from Food for the Journey, LLC dba Jacob’s Tavern for an on-sale
intoxicating liquor license contingent upon the restaurant receiving site plan approval and
a Certificate of Occupancy. Additionally, staff will work with the applicant to provide an
insurance certificate and license fee prior to the restaurant opening. A background
investigation will be completed on the operating manager once designated. A license will
not be issued until all of the conditions are satisfied. All voted in favor and the motion
carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
LIBERTY ON BLUFF CREEK, TOWN & COUNTRY HOMES, EAST OF AUDUBON
ROAD, SOUTH OF LYMAN BOULEVARD AND NORTH OF PIONEER TRAIL,
PLANNING CASE 05-11:
· REQUEST FOR REZONING OF THE PROPERTY FROM A-2 TO PUD-R;
· SUBDIVISION WITH VARIANCES OF APPROXIMATELY 91 ACRES INTO 84
LOTS, 3 OUTLOTS, AND PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY;
· SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR 444 TOWNHOUSE UNITS;
· WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT;
· CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE BLUFF
CREEK OVERLAY DISTRICT AND FOR ALTERATION TO A FLOOD PLAIN.
Public Present:
Name Address
Shawn Siders Town and Country Homes
City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005
8
Kevin Clark Town and Country Homes
Rick Janssen Town and Country Homes
Jeff Fox 5270 Howards Point Road, Excelsior
Rick Dorsey 1551 Lyman Boulevard
Kate Aanenson: Thank you. The subject site located just south of Audubon, south of Lyman
Boulevard. Actually this project was given conceptual approval by the Planning Commission in
2002 so for the last 3 years we’ve worked on not only this project but the entire 2005 MUSA and
working with the property owners, the city engineer working through the frontage road issues,
and the AUAR. As we worked specifically advancing this project, there’s a lot of issues that
were refined as they moved along. Most recently at your September 29th, the council wanted to
review some changes that they had directed the applicant to make, specifically the location of
units and then some architectural details which you reviewed. Again I think for the public record
the developer’s here prepared to kind of summarize those tonight. I think that’d be helpful for
the public in a summary format, and then also I just wanted to remind the council too that this is
preliminary plat approval. You will see it again for final plat. When it comes back in final plat,
although there is a long laundry list of conditions, some of those conditions will go away as they
have been met and also you will have a design booklet which will call out each unit specifically
on the site. The color and material designs so you’ll all know that ahead of time if there’s things
that you want to move, that that would be something to you also. You have that final approval of
design. So the goal with this is to give them specific marching orders that they need to finalize
to get the ultimate project. One of the things that you asked for at the last meeting was kind of a
comparison chart, which is included right behind the summary report of other projects. I just
wanted to briefly summarize looking at that. It’s a little complex but this model is what we use
tracking for our subdivisions. It’s actually a similar model that we’ve used that the Met Council
has now picked up on tracking, not only multi-family but also single family to see where we are
for net density. One of the questions that you asked at your last meeting was, how does this
compare to other similar multi-family products so we just added another column, kind of looking
at net density. When you take out some of the edges or the primary, some of those other outlots
that you may have included, now when we do a PUD, when you look at each project, while we
treat them all the same, there might be something unique to each project that may not be on
another. For example there might be a large open space that you wanted because there’s some
trees. While it may not be in the primary district that you want to save those trees and put them
in a conservation easement or an outlot, so while we try to compare, if you look at the gross
density on that medium density comparison chart, it’s very similar then to other projects that
we’ve reviewed so it’s really in line. Again going back to the goals of the primary district for
that was put in place only, we decided that instead of trying to, with the park referendum money
and trying to value the overlay district, which was at the time not only for storm water
management, erosion, we thought it was a nice amenity that we wanted to have that corridor for
the city. And instead of trying to take that referendum money and go out and try to get
appraisals on each piece, that we negotiate those as they come in and maybe the lines moves out
or back depending on what we feel is significant. So that’s how we comment on this project and
we walk each project to decide how it rings out. So again the density on this one and the staff’s
feeling is that it’s very comparable and treated the same as we have on other projects. I did want
to, I did attach the original conditions of some things that were modified, for example on Town
and Country. Additional wetland work was done by the consultant so that number was modified
City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005
9
to reflect the additional wetland work that was done on that project. And on page 4 of the cover
sheet, there was a condition of the Park and Recreation, number 31 that I think is a little loose.
We just have to tighten that up and talk about the trail. That internal trail on the private road.
That that be designed subject to staff approval. Modify that. Again there’s several motions that
are involved with the subdivision. The lots have changed and types of homes have been
modified or moved to different projects. That does require rezoning, and rezoning for the PUD.
It does require subdivision. It does require site plan review. A wetland alteration permit and a
conditional use for alteration within the flood plain. We’ve worked with the developer to resolve
all those issues to date and… So with that I’d be happy to answer any questions and I’d like the
developer again to make just a real brief presentation, kind of a summary of the changes. With
that if I can answer any questions.
Mayor Furlong: Any questions for staff at this time? Ms. Aanenson, point of clarification.
Under the recommendation on the staff report, just to be clear. The second item talks about a site
plan review with subdivision. Should preliminary be included in there? Is that appropriate?
Kate Aanenson: That’s fine.
Mayor Furlong: Just for clarity.
Kate Aanenson: Yes.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Any other questions for staff? No? Then at this time I
certainly would invite the developer, representative from Town and Country Homes to come
forward. Good evening.
Kevin Clark: Good evening Mayor. Council members. My name is Kevin Clark. I reside at
3841 Red Cedar Point Drive and I’m here representing Town and Country Homes. A
K.Hovnanian company. I guess I would like to again review what we’ve talked about at some of
our recent meetings and touching on a few of the things, our goal here has been and it’s been
really an excellent experience working with yourselves, planning and city staff and the numerous
consultants and city engineering in what we hope to be a hallmark community for the city of
Chanhassen. Bringing together all the, boy the attract of inviting wonderful amenities that this
property offers with it’s trees, the bluffs, the creek and the sight lines that the topography offers.
We’re looking to do this and accomplish that goal by using quality trails but also building
architecture which will differentiate this neighborhood and also preserve the natural amenities to
provide a truly unique neighborhood within Chanhassen. Let me just review some of the items
that we touched on as we’ve come to this our most recent site plan design. Some of the areas
where we’ve revised the layout from previous to account for the readjusted Bluff Creek Overlay
District, that area that we had initially done a walk through over a year ago. Almost 2 years ago
now has been finally delineated spring-summer of this year, and subsequently we made
numerous adjustments to that as far as siting the product here and also along this area and in this
area here, well the flood plain down on the, what would be the southwest. The southeast area,
from our initial site plan, we had numerous retaining walls in this area. A number of other things
that we were working with, street grades and such, and upon your recommendation we went
back to the drawing board per se. Reviewed that. Adjusted our street grades and also reviewed
City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005
10
how the products were sited. We then removed some larger multi-family products to put in more
appropriately, full basement product along this creek area which allowed us to blend those
basement type products with this topography. Reduce the size of the buildings along this natural
wetland area, and in general created a nice centrally kind of grouping there with all the products
that we’re presenting in this neighborhood. By doing that we reduced the retaining walls
substantially down in the area of what was 17 to 20 feet, now to I think 4 to 6 in some cases. We
have two tiered walls so we’ve mitigated that tremendously. We’ve also represented that we will
on approval of this site plan be working with our neighbors to the east on the Peterson property
to make sure that our grades blend appropriately with them as their project moves forward in the
city process also. Throughout the process, coming out of the AUAR and the numerous revisions
to the infrastructure, specifically that main collector road that runs through the site. If you’ll
remember originally coming out of the AUAR it was intended to come out and then go at more
of a diagonal through the north corridor of the Peterson property. Upon review of other features,
whether it be flood plain, wetlands and such and crossing, it was decided that that road needed to
have a more northerly projectory on our east boundary and then working with city engineering
we’ve adjusted for all those impacts as we designed our site plan to accommodate those new
collector roads and the infrastructure that they’re currently planning on. Also, the recent public
hearing, one of the items that was addressed was the mix of units and really from the air of the
site plan as it looked, we’ve gone back and reviewed that. Looked at how the site plan and how
the buildings were sited on there. We’ve made numerous adjustments to removing what we refer
to ads the Chateau product in this area, and substituting that with a Majestic. And then I also
looked at this area up here, and then changing some of the products and creating more of a, kind
of a smaller collection with all the products in each of these four quadrants so we had a balance
of all those areas. Just to go through a number of the other areas we’ve worked with. I think
we’re looking forward to creating this neighborhood identity coming in off of Audubon with an
entry area here. Continuing through to this round about feature that’s been planned by the city in
their infrastructure. Creating a special identity for this neighborhood. The street patterns with
the main collector road progressing through here and the main intersection. We’ve been able to
site our products so there are no garages siting on any public streets. Maintaining a very
aesthetic architecturally pleasing sight lines as you drive through this entire neighborhood. As
our plan here shows, we’ve been able to preserve upwards of three-quarters or 63 acres of the 92
in open space, whether it be in bluff area or areas surrounding a building. Natural areas, so I
think we’ve done a tremendous job of working to provide and preserve this natural amenity
going forward. We’re proposing a totlot in this area. We also have a pool amenity that will be
part of the association in this area here. In response to some of the concerns in this pool area and
pedestrian crossing, we worked with city staff to make sure that in the design and planning of
this collector road there will be designated cross areas and our pedestrian pathways will be
constructed. Specifically to match up with the, to provide safe crossing to and from this planned
amenity. Parking. We have in each unit, there are 2 units covered in each parking or for each
unit and in addition to that we have about 922 additional sites. Parking. Both on street, in the
driveway and in parking clusters throughout the neighborhood. So we have 4.08 spaces per unit.
We’ve gone to great lengths again in working with the Bluff Creek overlay to preserve the trees
and probably one of the other things that evolved was there was a section of land here, the
Jeurissen parcel that we were able to incorporate so what we are able to speak to this whole area
in continuity. Those are just the summary of a number of changes we’ve made as we brought the
site plan to the condition it’s at now. I’d be glad to go through the architectural changes that I
City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005
11
know were in your packet. If you’d want me to. I’ll leave that to you. We’re looking forward to
working forward on this project with staff, engineering and with our neighbors, the Petersons and
other property owners, and look forward to advancing this project before you. I’ll stand ready to
answer any questions about architecture or anything else.
Mayor Furlong: Very good. Thank you Mr. Clark. Questions of Mr. Clark. I guess Mr. Clark
one area, and I know we discussed this, it is related to the architecture with regard to, we
discussed this at our last work session and you’ll excuse me, I forget the name of some of the
different units but they’re the four square unit. The Victorian, those styles.
Kevin Clark: I think you’re referring to the Premiere.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Yes.
Kevin Clark: That one was referring to the Churchill club. It’s upside down. Alright.
Mayor Furlong: I guess I’m speaking more to the architecture versus where they’re located
within the site plan. I think we made tremendous improvement on the front and the look in
coming with the four different units. The question I have, I know this came up at our last work
session were the rear views of these units. And specifically, basically a long wall and I know
that you’ve put your money in there. Is there something we can do, or working with staff to try
to build some dimension to that between now and final to break up those long walls? From just a
visual standpoint.
Kevin Clark: I know we did talk about this area and I think again to reiterate how we’ve landed
on it from this point, one of the things we’re looking at it as I described was the really the color
palette and how working with either the walls or different materials, the colors that will come
with that, and then what we’ve shown to yourselves and it was a 3 different distinct architectural
elevations that we’ve put together. I think yes, what I would ask is that we really defer to the
architects and our color consultant to say what would be appropriate because what we want to do
is speak to the market and give us the latitude to talk with them to see what we can do to
introduce that. One of the things that as we’ve got this product sited is the way the buildings sit
together as far as…one of the items you’d like to talk about is somehow undulating them is how
we’re matching that existing Bluff Creek Overlay and basically there are two buffers that we
need to account for, so we’ve been able to, you know in the context of the whole site, make sure
everything works in that area and I’d be hesitant to try to start breaking the building up because
of how those structures lay together along those buffer areas and how the structures come
together.
Mayor Furlong: And perhaps if you could hold up and pick the maroon one here. I think that’s
the four square, just as an example. Just the rear view. I think the colors look good and I know
you’re hiring a consultant there to pick a lot of good matching colors and work together, and that
there won’t be any buildings next to each other of like color that will work together. I guess
what I’m referring to as you look across there, on the two end units there’s some articulations,
I’m learning. There’s some depth added there with, from an architectural standpoint, and is there
an opportunity, whether it’s a similar type of articulation across the back there or the addition of
City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005
12
other features to try to break up that long wall view, and again working with staff, working with
your architects to try to break it up so that it’s not just a solid. While you’ve done a little bit of
that here, I guess what I’m looking for is a little bit more.
Kevin Clark: Right, and you mentioned it in your earlier comments that certainly we focus our
energy on the elevations. On really the sides and the front because going back to the site plan,
all these, really you’ll have to stand in the woods to see the back of all these, so what we’re
looking at is where is the value from the neighborhood, both the customer and the community as
they drive through there, where will that be better suited?
Mayor Furlong: And I think you’ve done a good job there. What I don’t know from current
existing landscaping, trees and such, as you come from the, as you look at your site plan here, as
you come from the east curving in there, you’re going to see a number of these units across the
primary zone of the Bluff Creek corridor. And so something to look at if you would between
now, as I say, and final plat, as a way to improve upon what I think is, you know you’ve already
made some great improvements so I don’t want to discount this but at the same time take a look
at that if you would.
Kevin Clark: We certainly will.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Any other questions for the applicant? At this time. No? Okay, very
good. Thank you. At this point then I guess we would bring it back to council for comments and
discussion. Your thoughts and comments. Councilman Lundquist.
Councilman Lundquist: It’s been an interesting time through this and I would echo your
comments to the developer and staff on improvements that have been made. We’ve come a long
ways. Especially in the last couple of months on this thing, so I don’t want to discount that
either. I’m still oh, up in the air I guess I should say. We’ve had some, you know some issues
on the, this property right now is guided for a mixed use there, or do a guidance. So we’ll be
giving up some industrial here, which is kind of near and dear to my heart and when I look at
this, you know we’ve used the density transfer tool to put it all together. When you look at this,
the pads, the building pad, the area itself, being that density at 11.2, it’s a lot of, it’s still a lot of
units. It’s a lot of stuff packed into a little area. Granted it’s a difficult site to work with and
we’re preserving the bluff and the open space and all those things are all good things. We’re
doing the density transfer using the tool properly for what we’ve put it in place for. But that, it’s
still a lot of houses packed into, or a lot of units packed into a little area so. You know I guess
there’s still some things that aren’t perfect in my mind but again it’s come a long ways and I do
have confidence that the units would be, or the development might be the best high density or
medium density thing that we could put in there, but I’d be interested to hear what fellow council
members viewpoints are and at this point I guess I’m still up in the air as to next course of action.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Councilman Labatt, thoughts.
Councilman Labatt: My computer keeps locking up on me so I’ll wing it here. You know this
has made it’s full circle here. I wasn’t really happy at first when this first came up and a lot of
the comments we all exchanged about the roads and the, now that the features and the changes
City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005
13
have been made over the last several revisions have pleased me. As I look at the net density, I
don’t, thanks Todd. You know the adjusted, I’m not going to look at the adjustments. I’m
looking at the net density and this is 11.24, which is on the low side of a lot of our recent
developments in the last, my 7 years on here. And the gross is very similar to what we’ve done.
We’ve done a few lower ones. So the density doesn’t bother me. The changes that were made in
the configuration of the development and the improvements that were made are nice. I think
Mayor, your point of the idea, the Premiere homes up there on the north with, and working with
the back of those to change the monogamous look to it. I mean when you’ve got 8 windows
across the structures, it still looks like a military barracks and I think that Mr. Clark got our point
of add some features there. Make it look nicer for when you’re coming down that new road.
Other than that I think the work session last, 2 weeks ago, the questions I had and to the
configuration of the development were answered. I am pleased with the park and when you look
at some of the parking issues and especially during the winter time, and some of the other
developments of this style and the problems that has caused, obviously this developer’s taken the
time to look into that and create extra parking spots. But I like it.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Other comments? Councilwoman Tjornhom, thoughts.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Yeah, I kind of wish the product that we were looking at today is
what we first saw a couple months ago. I’m beginning to become a person that is really into the
life cycling of neighborhoods and I think with the spaces that we have left we have to be wise in
making sure that we make sure we’ve covered our bases with this life cycling idea and I just
don’t see it here with this project. I don’t see the price point. 230 is starting for the Chateau and
I think, correct me if I’m wrong but for, I don’t want to say low income housing but for.
Mayor Furlong: For affordable.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Affordable housing, I think it’s like 193 or something. That’s where
it’s starting or I thought that’s what I read. And so if that doesn’t work for that, and also I
wanted, hoped to see something more for empty nesters. Something more rambler style than the
level townhouses. Maybe a blend of the whole thing mixing everything together instead of
having this one concentration of townhouses, we’ve got a stairs and so for me to change the
zoning, I had to see something better. I had to see something more unique maybe because in my
mind this is going to set the tone and set the bar for what happens for the future development in
this area and so at this point I don’t think I can vote yes.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Councilman Peterson.
Councilman Peterson: Yeah, I’ve probably struggled over this one more than I have most.
When this was before us a few years ago I was, I was very concerned about the rezoning from
industrial to anything less than industrial for all the reasons that we spoke of before. Because of
that I set the standard pretty high. I set the bar high. I think for all the right reasons too. So I’ve
been waving the flag about architectural design and distinctiveness all the way through, and I
think we have come a long way to achieve a product that is, it’s a good product. It’s, you know
if it was a straight development without a PUD, without zoning, then I would be pretty happy
with it. The things that concern me are the density. This will be one of the biggest, probably the
City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005
14
second largest development we have in the city as far as size of acreage and the number of units.
And so it’s a combination, to your point Steve, the density isn’t that different than other ones we
have but the sheer scope of the project is significant. You know it’s twice the size of the farming
community I grew up on. To add perspective I guess. You know so.
Councilman Lundquist: In acreage or in units?
Councilman Peterson: Both. Both. You know it’s a development that, I think I used the word a
few weeks ago that I wanted something that wowed me. It wows me today a lot more than it
wowed me a few months ago and I think that is, as you all have shared, that’s very
commendable. The developer and staff have worked hard to get a product that is better than it
was before, and that’s what the Planning Commission is tasked with and that’s what we’re tasked
with, to bring products that get better. But, the question I’ve been asking all the way up through
this very second is, is have they met where the bar is set for me? I think because of the
massiveness of the development and the architectural designs that I think are a little bit below my
standard yet, I’m concerned. So Mr. Mayor I’d like to hear your comments and what your
thoughts are on it even before I make up my ultimate mind but I wanted a product that is
absolutely outstanding for this area and I don’t think we’re at outstanding, but I don’t know if
I’m asking too much and I guess that’s what I’m looking for feedback on.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. I think that, and I will echo Councilman Labatt’s and other’s
comments as well and thank the staff and the applicant for getting us a proposal that we’re
looking at this evening. I think where we were back in July, it was not there. There wasn’t the
comfort there and the standard that we need to ask ourselves, are we getting the best possible?
We don’t as a council get to choose who develops property. It’s the property owner. That’s
America and I kind of like that because I own property too. That being said, I think from a
standard standpoint, are we getting the best possible out of the developer? And the comment that
I’ve used before in our work sessions is, is this going to be a development that’s going to be on
their next marketing literature? Is this what they’re going to be proud of? To say look at what
we did in Chanhassen. To me that’s a standard that, it’s a qualitative standard but nonetheless
it’s a standard that I can look to, are we getting the best? Can we do a little bit more? Earlier
tonight I was asking for some more. I think they’ve done a good job and they’ve gone the extra
step in terms of getting consultants in for color. We’re not seeing all these buildings are not the
same white or beige or gray. There’s variety, just like we have in other neighborhoods in our
city, there’s variety of colors from house to house, and there will be variety of colors here as
well. Councilman Lundquist talked about land use and that was a concern and it’s a valid
concern. It continues to be a concern of this council in terms of changing land use. In this
particular case our comprehensive plan showed a either or guiding for this development. Either
medium density or office industrial. I agree with Councilman Lundquist that our office
industrial, we’ve got to make sure if we’re going to give up some of that out of our
comprehensive plan, where are we going to get it back, and as we know at a recent work session
we sat down with staff and identified some specific properties that had the likelihood potential to
offset the 40 plus some odd acres here that will be developed and counted as medium density
going forward. So I think as, while there isn’t a desire at this point to change land use guiding,
as part of our comprehensive plan, we were able to identify specific parcels to offset that. I think
Councilman Lundquist to your point of raising that question, all of us can feel a little more
City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005
15
comfortable doing that. The comment on density, as I look at that, I tried to get a sense and a
feel of what we were looking at and in looking at staff’s comparison with regard to how the
density of this area within the building area of buildings compared to some of the other ones.
The most recent one that I looked at was in the Arboretum Village. The Pulte development.
And there, as I understand it, that, the net density on the chart is about the same, to Councilman
Labatt’s point, it’s about the same, little bit less than some of the other ones that have been done
in the city. But driving through there, one thing when I think of Pulte, my immediate thought
goes to the northeast corner of Highway 5 and 41, which is probably the most dense area.
Because clearly the twin homes north of West 78th, but this number that we’re seeing here is the
average including the twin homes and so when you think of the area of that neighborhood, that
development that’s in that northeast corner of 5 and 41, that’s more dense than what you’re
going to see here. I drove through there. It’s a neighborhood. It’s, there are people walking
around. There are cars parked. There are people, you know it’s a neighborhood. And you had
this feel while you were there that you were in a different place than perhaps driving through
Longacres or other parts of town as well, so I think, to Councilman Lundquist’s point, what’s
creating that sense in this development is really I agree, our proper use of transferring density
from the rest of the area, the 90 plus odd acres into the middle so that we can create on the north
side, preserve the primary zone for Bluff Creek on the south side where there is developable area
along our border with Chaska, a green zone. So as you’re driving up from Chaska there’ll be a
visual break with the trees before you hit development within Chanhassen. All these things I
think we have, as a council and again with the developer and with staff, we’ve worked to push
this to move this forward over these summer months. I think we’ve made some great progress. I
think we’ve raised some good issues in terms of land use. I think the issue of density transfer is
one that we should always be checking. If we could take these buildings, push it out, but we’re
not going to change the number of units on this 90 acre parcel. What we’re going to do is we’re
going to give up part of the primary zone of Bluff Creek corridor. I haven’t seen a compelling
reason to do that and when I compare this to other developments that we have in town that are
neighborhoods, they’re homes. People live here and enjoy living there. I view it as what are we
getting from a city, and you can talk about driving through or driving to. I think what we can
look at as a council is the driving to. Are we going to see areas of green? Are we going to see
preserved areas as well as developed areas in our city? We’ve done a good job of that as a city
over the years. This is another one of those areas. We’re not clear cutting. We’re preserving the
natural features of the area and using the development tool of transferring the density, not from a
negative result but from an overall positive result. Councilman Peterson you said, you know we
set our bar. We set it high. I think are we asking too much? I think we need to ask all that we
can out of each developer individually and if we achieve that, then we’re asking enough. And
that’s what we as a council, recognizing that property owners have rights and I’m glad that we all
do. That we need to push and I’m not saying let up. There was one area that I raised earlier. I
think that we can, if there’s an area to make an improvement, we should continue to do that even
if it is on the back of the house. That’s what we should do. So I think we’ve come a long way. I
am very pleased with the progress that has been made over these last few months as everybody
has worked hard to get something. I know the council’s put in a lot of time and given the
developer a lot of feedback. I think they’ve responded to the issues raised as they were raised
and we’ve had a chance to look at this within the comprehensive plan. I think it’s a worthwhile
development. It will be an asset to our city and I support it subject to the conditions contained
within the staff report as well as the additional comments made this evening. So Councilman
City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005
16
Peterson, those are my thoughts or comments and I certainly would be happy to listen to others
or, if you have other comments to share, or Councilman Lundquist. Anyone in particular with
regard to this development.
Councilman Peterson: I don’t know if it’s a sign but my computer, on this project is locking up.
I can’t open it up.
Councilman Labatt: You need to get to 134?
Councilman Peterson: Uh huh.
Councilman Labatt: Yeah, that’s all I can get to.
Todd Gerhardt: You want to hand my report down to him.
Mayor Furlong: Other thoughts and comments from others on this.
Councilman Lundquist: Todd, we talked a little in work session about tax capacity and
generation for medium density versus office industrial. About having exact numbers. Can you
give us a feel for just in general revenue generation from a development such as this with this
kind of density versus an office industrial.
Todd Gerhardt: Well, depends on what areas you’re taking in. The 11 units per acre are going
to generate more in tax dollars. When you look more at the 6, I believe it was a push with the
office industrial zoning. But 11 units per acre will generate more, so you get a lot of open space
in here. Probably would not be able to put any office industrial in those areas in the green with
the exception of the one to the south. You do have a heavily wooded area there. You probably
are going to have a buffer area when you go up against residential so odds are you probably
wouldn’t develop in that area. So in this case I would say probably the multi-family would
generate a little bit more. But then again you’ve got to take into account a little bit more in
community service. Schools and our park system.
Councilman Lundquist: And then that’s the next question. The comp plan is used for a lot of
things like the school developments and things. This doesn’t, I guess our intention would be if
this one gets approved then we’ve got to offset that somewhere else so we don’t get too skewed
one way or the other.
Mayor Furlong: You’re saying with land use?
Councilman Lundquist: Yes.
Mayor Furlong: That was one of our work session topics. A few meetings back.
Councilman Lundquist: And our options from here, if this one gets approved, as far as
architecture and colors and all of those things, we’ve still got full control over what goes.
City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005
17
Kate Aanenson: What the condition reads now is that you will approve the color palette to
represent the direction that you’ve given but you’ll get final approval on the, you know the
buildings will be sided but they’ll be called out and then the architectural color palette and
materials, you’ll approve that…
Councilman Lundquist: So we’ve still got control over architecture and color palette.
Kate Aanenson: Yes you do. But I think just to be clear, …it’s going to be similar to what’s
here.
Councilman Lundquist: Agreed.
Mayor Furlong: Other thoughts, comments. I guess as we proceed with the possibility of a
motion here, a couple things that came up. One is clarifying preliminary within the site plan.
And then the other condition was 31 or 32.
Kate Aanenson: Correct. 31.
Mayor Furlong: 31?
Kate Aanenson: That’s correct.
Mayor Furlong: To state that the internal private trail be designed subject to staff approval.
Kate Aanenson: Yeah, and Mayor if we could clarify I think Councilman Lundquist…referred
to the first condition.
Mayor Furlong: Condition 1?
Kate Aanenson: Yeah, design plan showing the color and architectural, and I just need to clarify
to say at the time of final plat, just to be clear that that’s our intent for approval.
Mayor Furlong: And that condition 1 addresses Councilman Lundquist’s concern Mr. Knutson?
Kate Aanenson: Yes. Based upon approval at final plat.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Okay, is there any other discussion?
Councilman Labatt: Condition 1 is maybe changed at the time of final plat.
Kate Aanenson: Correct.
Councilman Labatt: Condition 32 is going to be, instead of carefully planned it’s going to be say
designed?
Kate Aanenson: No, 31 about the trail.
City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005
18
Councilman Labatt: Or 31 is going to be changed, you’re changing here to say you carefully
planned or from that to say should be designed.
Mayor Furlong: Designed subject to staff approval to allow for convenient access.
Kate Aanenson: That’s correct.
Councilman Labatt: Is there another amendment or just those two?
Mayor Furlong: I think…that we clarify that it’s preliminary plat. Preliminary site plan.
Councilman Labatt: Right, yeah.
Mayor Furlong: Any other concerns, requests? Okay. Is there a motion?
Councilman Labatt: Mayor, I will recommend that we approve the request to rezone from A2 to
PUD-R, site plan review for subdivision of 6 blocks and 69 buildings including 444 units, 3
outlots A and B which represent the overlay district and C which is the association pool and 7
common lots of 91.02 acres, conditional uses for the development of Bluff Creek Overlay
District and alteration of the flood plain, and a wetland alteration permit as stated below and
showed on the site plans and construction plans dated 9-06-05. And the conditions as outlined in
the staff report with the noted that this is a preliminary site plan and number 1 is going to be at
the time of final plat. And number 31 is that the design is subject to staff approval. Did I hit
them all?
Mayor Furlong: Think so.
Councilman Labatt: You had number 2 highlighted there.
Mayor Furlong: No.
Councilman Labatt: Okay. Is this where we also adopt the findings of fact Roger?
Roger Knutson: Yes.
Councilman Labatt: As outlined in the staff report. Okay.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Is there a second?
Councilman Lundquist: I’ll second.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Made and seconded. Is there any discussion on the motion?
Councilman Labatt moved, Councilman Lundquist seconded that the City Council approve
the request for rezoning from A2 to PUD-R; site plan review with subdivision of 6 blocks
City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005
19
and 69 buildings including 444 units, 3 Outlots (A & B which represent the Overlay District,
and C which is the association pool), and 7 common lots of 91.02 acres; conditional uses for
the development in the Bluff Creek Overlay District and alteration of the Flood Plain; and
a Wetland Alteration Permit, as stated below and as shown on the site plan and
construction plans dated 9-06-05, subject to the following conditions:
Planning Recommended Conditions of Approval
1. Provide design plan that shows the color and architectural detail for each unit on the site.
2. The assessment for the AUAR will be paid at the time of plat recording. The assessment
amount, based on gross acreage of 15.5 %, plus wetland delineation and cultural resources
inventory is $22,709.00.
Engineering Recommended Conditions of Approval
3. The final plat can not be presented to City Council for approval until City Project 04-05 is
awarded.
4. Before site grading commences, the three existing buildings on the property must be razed.
5. On-street parking may be used to satisfy the parking requirement with the following
stipulations:
On-street parking is prohibited between November 1 and April 1 between the hours of 1:00
a.m. and 7:00 a.m., consistent with Section 12-16 of the City Code: Winter Parking
Regulations. Credit for on-street parking is not allowed along the curve of the public streets.
6. The developer’s engineer must work with Peterson’s Bluff’s engineer to ensure that the
proposed grading on each property matches at the property line and to eliminate and/or
decrease the height of retaining walls to the maximum extent possible.
7. Ground slopes shall not exceed 3H:1V.
8. The final grading plan must show the proposed top and bottom of wall elevations for all
retaining walls.
9. Retaining walls over four feet high must be designed by a Structural Engineer registered in
the State of Minnesota and require a building permit.
10. The existing driveway at Audubon Road must be removed.
11. All of the ponds are required to be designed to National Urban Runoff Program (NURP)
standards with maximum 3:1 slopes and a 10:1 bench at the NWL.
City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005
20
12. The lowest floor elevation of all buildings must be at least three feet above the HWL of the
adjacent ponds.
13. The last public storm water structure that is road-accessible prior to discharging to a water
body must have a 3-foot sump.
14. The applicant shall include a drain tile system behind the curbs to convey sump pump
discharge from homes not adjacent to ponds.
15. The style of home and lowest floor elevation must be noted on the final grading plan.
16. Blanket drainage and utility easements are required over all common lots; however, the
following storm sewer segments shall be owned and maintained by the homeowners
association:
a. Northeast and west of Lot 5, Block 1.
b. Within the private cul de sac to Lots 1-4, Block 3.
c. The connection between the private drives to Lots 9, 10, 11 and 12 Block 1 and the
public lateral within Street A.
d. The connection between the private cul de sac to Lots 1-4, Block 3 and the public
lateral within Street D.
e. East of Lot 7, Block 4.
f. North of Lots 11-13, Block 5.
g. West of and between Lots 2 and 3, Block 6.
17. The plat must be signed by a Land Surveyor registered in the State of Minnesota.
18. A minimum 75-foot long rock construction entrance must be shown on the plans.
19. Tree preservation fencing must be installed at the limits of tree removal.
20. An easement is required from the appropriate property owner for any off-site grading.
21. If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will
be required to supply the City with detailed haul routes.
22. Utility services for the buildings must be shown on the final utility plan. Sanitary services
must be 6-inch PVC and water service must be 1-inch copper, Type K.
23. Each new lot is subject to the sanitary sewer and water hookup charges. The 2005 trunk
hookup charge is $1,458 for sanitary sewer and $2,955 for watermain. Sanitary sewer and
watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel at the time of building
permit issuance. All of these charges are based on the number of SAC units assigned by the
Met Council and are due at the time of building permit issuance.
City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005
21
24. Upon project completion, the developer must submit inspection/soil reports certifying that
the private streets were built to a 7-ton design.
25. All of the utility improvements are required to be constructed in accordance with the City's
latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. The applicant is also required to
enter into a development contract with the City and supply the necessary financial security in
the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee installation of the improvements and
the conditions of final plat approval. The applicant must be aware that all public utility
improvements will require a preconstruction meeting before building permit issuance.
26. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies will be required prior to construction,
including but not limited to MPCA, Department of Health, Carver County and Watershed
District.
27. The benchmark used to complete the site survey must be shown on the grading plan.
28. Intersection neckdowns are limited to public street intersections only.
Park and Recreation Recommended Conditions of Approval
29. Full park dedication fees shall be collected per city ordinance in lieu of requiring parkland
dedication.
30. The trails on both the north and south sides of collector road “A” are widened to 10 feet.
31. The internal or private trail north of Block 1 be designed subject to staff approval to allow
convenient access to the Bluff Creek Corridor.
32. Other internal or private trails connecting residents to amenities within the PUD be enhanced.
Wetland Alteration Permit Recommended Conditions of Approval
33. Wetland replacement shall occur in a manner consistent with the Minnesota Wetland
Conservation Act (MR 8420).
34. The applicant shall work with staff to address comments received from the reviewing
agencies, including conducting MnRAMs for impacted and replacement wetlands for use in
sequencing flexibility for impacts on wetlands A, D, E, J and L. Details regarding the
stabilization of areas upslope of mitigation area M2 shall be included in the replacement
plan. More detailed plans for mitigation areas M1 and M2, including cross-sections, shall be
submitted. The applicant shall consider restorations of wetlands A, F and G for new wetland
credit. The applicant must receive approval of a wetland replacement plan prior to or
concurrent with final plat approval and prior to wetland impacts occurring.
35. A five-year wetland replacement monitoring plan shall be submitted. The replacement
monitoring plan shall include a detailed management plan for invasive non-native species,
City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005
22
particularly hybrid cattail, purple loosestrife and reed canary grass. The plans shall show
fixed photo monitoring points for the replacement wetland. The applicant shall provide proof
of recording of a Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants for Replacement Wetland.
36. A wetland buffer 16.5 to 20 feet in width (with a minimum average of 16.5 feet) shall be
maintained around all wetlands, with the exception of Basin C. A wetland buffer 20 to 30
feet in width (with a minimum average of 20 feet) shall be maintained around Basin C.
Wetland buffer areas shall be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City’s
wetland ordinance. The applicant shall install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of
City staff, before construction begins and must pay the City $20 per sign.
37. All structures shall be set back 40 feet from the edge of the wetland buffer. The wetland buffer
setback should be shown on the plans.
38. The applicant shall submit a letter of credit equal to 110% of the cost of the wetland creation
(including grading and seeding) to ensure the design standards for the replacement wetland
are met. The letter of credit shall be effective for no less than five years from the date of
final plat approval. The applicant shall submit a cost estimate for wetland creation (including
grading and seeding) so the City can calculate the amount of the wetland creation letter of
credit.
39. Clay diversions shall be used to divert runoff around the wetlands on the south side of the
development to the temporary sediment basins downslope of them.
Water Resources Subdivision Recommended Conditions of Approval
40. Bluff areas (i.e., slope greater than or equal to 30% and a rise in slope of at least 25 feet
above the toe) shall be preserved. In addition, all structures shall maintain a 30-foot setback
from the bluff and no grading may occur within the bluff impact zone (i.e., the bluff and land
located within 20 feet from the top of a bluff).
41. No alterations are allowed within the primary corridor or within the first 20 feet of the
setback from the primary corridor. All structures shall meet the 40-foot setback from the
primary corridor.
42. A copy of the LOMA shall be submitted to the City prior to alterations within the floodplain.
In lieu of a LOMA, the applicant shall obtain a conditional use permit for alterations within
the floodplain.
43. The developer shall determine the base flood elevation (100-year) to ensure that the
structures will meet all floodplain elevation requirements.
44. The grade stabilization structure at the north end of Basin A is in disrepair and shall be
replaced. Before the development incorporates this structure into the permanent storm water
management system, the structure shall be assessed and a plan proposed and approved by the
city for the repair or replacement of the structure, as well as long term maintenance. The
City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005
23
applicant shall work with the property owner to the north to get permission to repair or
replace the structure.
45. Drainage and utility easements with a minimum width of 20 feet shall be provided over all
existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, buffer areas used as PVC and storm water
infrastructure.
46. A complete Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be in place before
applying for and receiving NPDES construction permit coverage from the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency (MPCA).
47. Minimization of the amount of exposed soils on the site is needed; phasing of the
development shall limit the disturbed areas open.
48. All emergency overflows need temporary and permanent stabilization and shall be shown in
a detail or on the SWPPP. Energy dissipation (riprap and geotextile fabric) shall be installed
within 24 hours of installation of flared end sections and outlet structures.
49. Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3:1. All
exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round,
according to the following table of slopes and time frames:
Type of Slope Time (Maximum time an area can
Steeper than 3:1 7 days remain open when the area
10:1 to 3:1 14 days is not actively being worked.)
Flatter than 10:1 21 days
50. These areas include constructed storm water management pond side slopes, and any exposed
soil areas with a positive slope to a storm water conveyance system, such as a curb and gutter
system, storm sewer inlet, temporary or permanent drainage ditch or other natural or man
made systems that discharge to a surface water.
51. Temporary sediment basins shall be constructed and could be located in the proposed
permanent storm water pond locations. If Pond A does not get excavated prior to disturbing
the contributing area; a temporary basin shall be constructed approximately in the areas of
Street D and Lot 5, Block 3. Temporary basins shall be labeled on the SWPPP. A detail
shall be provided for the temporary outlet structures for the temporary basins. Clay berms
shall be used to temporarily divert runoff from the construction site to the temporary basins
prior to discharge. Additionally the clay diversions shall be used to divert runoff around the
wetlands on the south side of the development to the temporary sediment basins downslope
of them.
52. Chanhassen Type 2, Heavy Duty silt fence shall be used around all wetlands, streams, creeks,
bluffs and ravines; Chanhassen Type 1 silt fence shall be used around the remaining areas.
The inlet control (for area inlets, not curbside) detail shall be mono-mono heavy duty
machine sliced silt fence with 4 foot maximum spacing for metal T-posts. A rock berm
City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005
24
placed around the silt fence shall be at least 2 feet wide and 1 foot high of 1½ -inch clear
rock. Wimco-type inlet controls shall be installed in all inlets through out the project within
24 hours of inlet installation. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include
daily street scraping and street sweeping as-needed.
53. At this time, the estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat
recording, is $288,050.
54. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g.,
Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Construction Permit), Minnesota Department of
Natural Resources (dewatering permit), and Army Corps of Engineers) and comply with their
conditions of approval.
Forestry Recommended Conditions of Approval
55. Tree protection fencing shall be installed prior to construction around all areas designated for
preservation.
56. A walk-through inspection of the silt/tree preservation fence shall be required prior to
construction.
57. A turf plan shall be submitted to the city indicating the location of sod and seeding areas.
58. Dedication of Outlot A and B shall be made to the city or a conservation easement shall be
established over said outlots.
Inspections and Fire Marshal Recommended Conditions of Approval
59. A 10-foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e. street lamps, trees,
shrubs, bushes, Xcel Energy, Qwest, cable TV, and transformer boxes. This is to ensure that
fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to
Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1.
60. There are a number of additional fire hydrants required and some will be re-located.
61. Fire apparatus access roads and water supply for fire protection is required to be installed.
Such protection shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the time of
construction except when approved alternate methods of protection are provided.
62. Temporary street signs shall be installed on street intersection when construction of the new
roadway allows passage by vehicles. Pursuant to 2002 Minnesota Fire Code Section 501.4.
63. No burning permits will be issued for trees to be removed. Trees and shrubs must either be
removed from site or chipped.
City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005
25
64. Submit street names to Chanhassen Building Official and Chanhassen Fire Marshal for
review and approval. The Chanhassen Building Official and Fire Marshal will determine
which streets will need naming.
65. “No parking fire lane” signs will be required. Contact the Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact
location of signs to be installed.
66. Submit cul-de-sac design dimensions to City Engineer and Fire Marshal for review and
approval.
Building Recommended Conditions of Approval
67. Accessibility will have to be provided to all portions of the development and a percentage of
the units may also be required to be accessible or adaptable in accordance with Minnesota
State Building Code Chapter 1341. Further information is needed to determine these
requirements.
68. Buildings over 8,500 sq. ft. in size must be protected with an automatic fire protection
system. The State of Minnesota is in the process of revising Chapter 1306 of the Minnesota
State Building Code regarding fire protection systems. It is not yet entirely clear how these
changes will affect residential construction. It is important that the developer meet with the
Inspections Division prior to final design to determine what ramifications, if any, the new
requirements will have on the project.
69. The developer must submit a list of proposed street names and an addressing plan for review
and approval prior to final plat of the property.
70. Demolition permits must be obtained before demolishing any structures on the site.
71. A final grading plan and soils report must be to the Inspections Division before permits can
be issued.
72. Walls and projections within 3 feet of property lines are required to be of one-hour fire-
resistive construction.
73. The buildings will be required to be designed by an architect and engineer as determined by
the Building Official.
74. The developer and or their agent shall meet with the Inspections Division as early as possible
to discuss plan review and permit procedures.”
All voted in favor, except Councilwoman Tjornhom who opposed and the motion carried
with a vote of 4 to 1.
Kevin Clark: Mayor, council. Thank you for your confidence and for staff’s continued guidance
and collaboration with us and we look forward to bringing this before you as a final plat.
City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005
26
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. We look forward to the development as well. Thank you.
COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS:
Mayor Furlong: That completes our items of new business. We move now to council
presentations. Any comments or discussion?
Councilman Peterson: Mr. Mayor, just kind of a general update on Southwest Metro Transit.
We are continuing to struggle for funding with, between the State and the Feds. We’ve got a
dozen or so buses we’re struggling to find financing with. Met Council, depending upon what
day you literally ask them and who you ask, it’s been a continually ongoing challenge and saga
as to whether or not what funds are going to be there. They have buses that are literally pending
being built in an assembly line with yet to be funded so it doesn’t put us into a crisis situation but
we’ve got buses that are 2 or 3 years past their normal life cycle so we’re, we are anxiously
awaiting a formal decision from Met Council. It actually should come within the next week or
so. So hopefully by the next, by the next meeting we’ll, I’ll give you positive feedback. The
good thing and the thing you might have already presumed is that our ridership continues to go
up exponentially with gas prices and so our lot, park and ride lots are full and our buses are full,
which is a good thing because that means their cars are off the streets. So, but I look forward to
giving you better feedback hopefully in 2 weeks.
Mayor Furlong: Very good, thank you.
Councilman Lundquist: So what’s the restocking fee on a bus?
Councilman Peterson: More than you want to know.
Mayor Furlong: More than 15%?
Todd Gerhardt: Is it an interim, you know a couple of months? 6 months? A year? You’re not
getting any direction probably.
Councilman Peterson: Yeah. Nobody wants to put their initial on a multi million dollar
agreement when the funding is just, everybody is trying to grab funding and that’s, it’s who’s
screaming the loudest and we’re starting to echo in the chamber now so.
Todd Gerhardt: So there was no commitment guarantee that this is part of the request right now.
Councilman Peterson: That’s correct. Funds were allocated under some of the last bonding and
some of the last decisions, but they weren’t allocated yet so the allocation that we’re dealing with
now, the funds are there. It’s a matter of whether.
Todd Gerhardt: Determining the allocation out to the different opt out communities.
Councilman Peterson: Exactly.
City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005
27
Mayor Furlong: Any other council presentations? Or discussion among council members. No?
Very good.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS:
Todd Gerhardt: Again the rains came last Wednesday. I spent approximately 4 to 5 hours out
coordinating volunteer firemen, utility workers, and saving a basement and comforting a few of
our residents here in the community. Some of the key things that we found out of that is that we
did order a pump, approximately $5,000. 4 inch submersible pump that if the pond does rise
again we don’t have to wait an hour and a half for a pump to arrive from Victoria or Carver. So
there, we had the need the following day off of Yosemite also where we started to see water rise
into an individual’s basement so we were able to pump that one out also. The other thing, the
pond off of Longacres Drive and Moccasin, we found that we’ve really got to get into that storm
water pond and make sure it’s cleaned out. We saw reed grasses that clogged the outlet which
really made the water rise in that pond. We’ll also be re-looking at storm water calc’s that went
along with the Longacres neighborhood and how that compared with the Yoberry, Highcrest
Meadows, just to give some people comfort. Also give us some direction, if we need to make
some modifications to that pond and maybe the size of the outlet as it discharges out of the pond.
We also found that, we have to look at some of our other emergency outlet areas. There’s been
some additional grading and filling of those areas so we’ve got to make sure that those are
operable and one of the areas was over in Stone Creek neighborhood that got fairly close to
several people in that neighborhood so I think we’ve temporarily fixed that one in cleaning out,
or digging a ditch to allow the pond to drain, but I know the water is still flowing. Talked to a
resident today over there and they were amazed how much water is still flowing through the
system. I will e-mail out to you calculations on the amount of rainfall that we’ve seen. Right
now I believe it was over 8 ½ inches in the last 2 months and I think we average somewhere
around 3 to 4 for this time of year so we’re about 230% above normal averages for rainfall right
now. We are continuing to meet with the Longacres neighborhood. Stone Creek and resolving
those issues. Reassuring them that we are watching it when the heavy rains come. We had
utility workers, they were out flooding and occasionally went back. I think we got some more
rain at 3:00 and watched it so they are concerned in the area. I do have to take my hat off to Bill
Coffman. He was out there in the rain. He’s the developer for Yoberry, Highcrest Meadows
development and has spent over $100,000 of the development money in correcting water damage
that occurred in their basements in that area so, and again he met with the, we had a meeting
today with probably 4 or 5 residents from the Longacres to reassure them. Tell them what our
next steps are. They’ve also stepped up their construction. I think they brought in an additional
crew working Saturday’s now so spending overtime in getting those streets and storm water
basins in. He is thinking about a third crew right now and so he is putting the effort in and
spending money to get this work done. We don’t believe that we’ll have enough decent weather
to get streets in but we will be able to get the storm water system in and the ponds installed prior
to winter, or closing for winter construction.
Councilman Peterson: Isn’t that somewhat problematic to get a storm water system ready but
you’ve got Class V that’s just going to drain into it?
City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005
28
Todd Gerhardt: We’ve got letters of credit. The key thing is to get those catch basins in. You
will get sediment that will go in there and go into the pond but we typically make them clean the
pond out to the elevation that’s approved in the plan. So they’re aware of that. But Pinehurst
development off of Galpin and Lake Lucy were able to get partial storm water ponding in and I
drove by that development on Wednesday night and it was, I’d say probably 2 to 4 inches of
overflowing on Manchester Road. The last storm it went over and silted in quite a bit of the
neighborhood. The storm water catch basins that they had at that entrance worked and the water
did not overflow the road, and so it will work even though the road bed isn’t in. But you will
have problems with silt going into their storm water ponds and we’ll make sure that they clean
that out before we take them back.
Mayor Furlong: Can we, in that regard too. If they don’t have the streets in before construction
season closes, is it worth while or I guess I would ask, you know can we walk the site with them
and if we need to double up on silt fencing and some of the drainage areas or things in
anticipation of trying to reinforce containment on that site going into the winter, winter snows
and then specifically the spring thaws. To make sure that we’re comfortable. I mean it’s good to
hear that Mr. Coffman is cooperating and obviously he is and so I don’t think it would be a
problem with him too but just making sure that we can double up as much as we can.
Todd Gerhardt: They had, where they have those areas rough graded, I’d say they’ve got 20% of
the fiber blanket down. We’ve talked to them today about trying to get the fastest growing rye
grass, oats, whatever it might be to establish, get some cover on there. Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency will, has a requirement that you have to have your entire site mulched before
November 15th, or December 1st. One of those two dates. If not, fines can be levied and so they
will have to have that mulch and seeded before let’s say December 1st, and I know that they have
levied fines in other developments in the Twin City area for not having that done. And as the silt
fence, we had discussions that they will be hauling some dirt and hauling Class V in for the road
bed and reassured them that they have a double later of silt fence but again the amount of water
that came just knocks that down so we asked them to make sure when they’re done hauling, that
that silt fence is re-established after work hours.
Mayor Furlong: Yeah, I don’t think anybody’s anticipating similar rainfall but it’s happened
twice. It could happen 3 times. And just given the, you know if we get a winter with heavy
snow and we get a January thaw or other things that can happen and have happened in the past,
doing what we can to try to contain any problems. Or eliminate them.
Todd Gerhardt: I can tell you working with Carver County Water and Soil District, I’m trying to
think of the gentleman’s name. Yeah, and he is doing an excellent job of inspecting all our
projects. I think he’s here, if not daily at least once a week he’s inspecting all our projects, plus
our building inspectors monitor all the silt fence and won’t hesitate to issue stop work orders if
they’re not installed or repaired. With that, that’s all I have.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. I guess one comment too, for Mr. Gerhardt and others. I know that
during this last storm you were out there personally in the Longacres neighborhood and
requested the help of the fire department. We all saw the picture in the paper and we appreciate
City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005
29
your taking a specific personal interest and doing what we can while the rain was coming, still
coming down, helping residents so thank you for that.
Todd Gerhardt: Sure.
Mayor Furlong: And we also thank the fire department and everyone else, the city crew. The
city public works department that they were out there in the rain trying to minimize any
problems while this was occurring so thank you.
Todd Gerhardt: I think we had a strong presence in the neighborhood. I don’t know if anybody
got to sleep at 10:00 but our volunteer fire department does a great job. Not only did they help
there. We had 2 fires, one at the cinema, a house fire and also a medical so they were taxed that
evening too so.
Mayor Furlong: Well we appreciate their efforts and we’ll extend that to the Chief next time we
see him as well.
Todd Gerhardt: I will.
Councilman Lundquist: Mr. Gerhardt, is the Sierra and Conestoga area, they’re still on the list of
having overflows as well?
Todd Gerhardt: They are on our list and that one is, didn’t forget it. We haven’t even tried to
tackle that one yet. We’ve got to figure something out there. That’s a difficult one. If you’ve
got any ideas I’m lost on that one so.
Councilman Lundquist: …it was still sitting there from the first time…
Todd Gerhardt: Well, we’ve got to work on that one. That is on our list and not that the other
ones are higher priority than that one because I think that one is definitely going to be a
continuing problem and we’ve got to figure something out there.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Any other questions for Mr. Gerhardt or staff?
CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION.
Councilman Lundquist: Mr. Mayor, on that correspondence I would echo your congratulations
to Mr. Iskierka on his Eagle Scout project. As you said us Eagle Scouts have to stick together.
Mayor Furlong: Absolutely. I could start including the fact that you’re also an Eagle Scout in
those letters.
Councilman Lundquist: Just having known the task, it’s good to have young people that come
out and do those things in the community too so.
City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005
30
Mayor Furlong: Excellent, thank you. Any other discussion on the correspondence packet or
questions? Seeing none, we will continue our work session was recessed and we will continue
our work session meeting prior to the meeting this evening. Our council meeting. If there’s
nothing else to come before the council this evening is there a motion to adjourn?
Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman Labatt seconded to adjourn the meeting. All
voted in favor and the motion carried. The City Council meeting was adjourned at 8:25
p.m..
Submitted by Todd Gerhardt
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
CHANHASSEN PARK AND
RECREATION COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
SUMMARY MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 27, 2005
Chairman Stolar called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m..
MEMBERS PRESENT: Glenn Stolar, Jack Spizale, Tom Kelly, Paula Atkins, Ann Murphy,
Steve Scharfenberg and Kevin Dillon
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman, Park and Rec Director; Jerry Ruegemer, Recreation
Superintendent; Dale Gregory, Park Superintendent; and Tom Knowles, Recreation Center
Manager
PUBLIC PRESENT:
Lori Strand 8557 Chanhassen Hills So.
Annette Stock-Lind 8104 Dakota Lane
Theo Kelderman 8620 Chanhassen Hills Drive
Daniel Brechko 8038 Dakota Lane
Traci Yavas 8102 Dakota Lane
Michelle Laurent 8115 Erie Circle
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: The agenda was approved as amended to include the reading of a
letter from Marty Walsh, Carver County Park Director regarding item 3, an update from Carver
County Parks concerning the off leash dog area proposal at Lake Minnewashta Regional Park.
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: Tony Schiller presented an update and slide show on the
Miracle Kids Triathlon and gave suggestions for things to do differently next year. Chairman
Stolar concurred with the idea of having multiple sites. Commissioner Kelly commented that the
packet pick-up on Friday was really well organized.
Michelle Laurent, 8115 Erie Circle, along with other neighbors, requested that an ice skating rink
be reinstated at Rice Marsh Lake Park this winter. Chairman Stolar stated this item would be
discussed under new business. Lori Strand, 8557 Chanhassen Hills Drive South, representing the
Chanhassen Hills Park neighborhood, requested that an ice skating rink be reinstated in their
neighborhood. Dan Brechko, 8038 Dakota Lane, representing the Chanhassen Estates
neighborhood, requested an ice skating rink in their park. Traci Yavas, 8102 Dakota Lane also
expressed her support of the request for an ice skating rink in the Chanhassen Estates
neighborhood. Annette Stock-Lind, 8104 Dakota Lane has two sons, 7 and 9 years old who play
hockey. She also requested that ice skating rinks be reinstated into the neighborhood park and
explained how the new playground equipment has brought their neighborhood closer together.
Theo Kelderman, 8620 Chanhassen Hills Drive moved to Chanhassen a year ago from Virginia
Park and Rec Commission Summary – September 27, 2005
2
and has heard great stories about ice skating rinks in Minnesota so he and his family would like
the chance to skate.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Murphy moved, Kelly seconded to approve the verbatim and
summary minutes of the Park and Recreation Commission meeting dated August 23, 2005
as presented.
The agenda was amended to discuss neighborhood ice skating rinks at this point.
DISCUSSION OF NEIGHBORHOOD ICE SKATING RINKS.
Chairman Stolar asked Todd Hoffman to provide background information on previous actions
taking by the Park and Recreation Commission regarding this issue. Commissioner Dillon asked
for clarification of the budget savings and daily operations for rink maintenance. Chairman
Stolar asked if there were different levels of effort that could be used in maintenance of the
different rinks. Dale Gregory explained the process for flooding rinks initially and how the
maintenance schedule works throughout the season. Commissioner Murphy asked if attendance
numbers are being recorded on the rinks that are currently open. Chairman Stolar asked for
clarification on past rink flooding. Commissioner Dillon asked for clarification on what’s being
requested. Todd Hoffman stated the commission could direct staff to prepare a recommendation
or the commission could make a motion and forward it to the City Council for their
consideration. Commissioner Kelly suggested doing a pilot program of monitoring usage on a
few neighborhood rinks to gauge use. Chairman Stolar directed staff to bring this item back at
the next Park and Recreation Commission meeting with data and a recommendation.
2005 LAKE ANN CONCESSION/BOAT RENTAL EVALUATION.
Jerry Ruegemer presented the revenues and expenses for the Lake Ann Park concession sales for
2005. He noted he will be requesting new boats in the 2006 budget and will be putting the food
sales out for bid for next season. Chairman Stolar suggested adding a fall kayak tour, similar to
what Three Rivers Park District offered on Lake Minnetonka.
UPDATE FROM CARVER COUNTY PARKS CONCERNING OFF LEASH DOG AREA
PROPOSAL AT LAKE MINNEWASHTA REGIONAL PARK.
Todd Hoffman read a letter from Marty Walsh, Carver County Park Director explaining where
the County stands on this proposal.
RECREATION PROGRAM REPORTS:
2005 DAVE HUFFMAN 5K RACE. Jerry Ruegemer provided an evaluation of the race and
proposed changes for next year.
2005 HALLOWEEN PARTY PREVIEW. Jerry Ruegemer provided information on the
upcoming Halloween party which will be held on Saturday, October 29th from 5:30 to 7:30 p.m..
Park and Rec Commission Summary – September 27, 2005
3
RECREATION CENTER REPORT. Todd Hoffman introduced Tom Knowles, the newly
appointed Recreation Center Manager. Mr. Knowles provided his background information and a
summary of what’s happening at the rec center. Commissioner Murphy asked about the status of
the aerobics classes. Commissioner Scharfenberg asked about the impact of Lifetime Fitness.
SENIOR CENTER REPORT. There were no questions or concerns with the senior center
report.
PARK AND TRAIL MAINTENANCE REPORT. Dale Gregory presented his report on the
status of the playground replacement projects and what projects need to be completed this fall
and winter.
2005 PLAYGROUND REPLACEMENT PROJECTS. Todd Hoffman noted that Dale
Gregory had already talked about this item and would take any questions. He also noted that
Mayor Furlong talked about the 2005 playground replacement projects in his State of the City
Address.
2005 TRAIL PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM. Todd Hoffman explained how
the pavement management program works and an update on the work to the Minnewashta
Parkway trail and Lake Lucy Road trail. Commissioner Kelly asked for clarification on what
happens to trails such as the one along Highway 101 south of Highway 5 which will be
abandoned when 212 is built.
COMMISSION MEMBER COMMITTEE REPORTS:
OFF LEASH DOG AREA RECOMMENDATION. Commissioner Murphy presented the
committee’s recommendation to donate $30,000 to the Carver County effort at the Minnewashta
site along with setting aside $20,000 for the Lake Ann Park site. Chairman Stolar asked about
the timing for a decision. Commissioner Dillon asked if consideration had been given to the
people that currently use Lake Ann Park and their feelings of having a dog park in their park.
The commission discussed a time line for holding meetings to gather public input and possible
recommendations to City Council.
SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT TASK FORCE COMMITTEE REPORT.
Chairman Stolar presented an update on the 2 meetings he has attended and how it impacts the
park system.
Spizale moved, Dillon seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion
carried. The meeting was adjourned.
Submitted by Todd Hoffman
Park and Rec Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim
CHANHASSEN PARK AND
RECREATION COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 27, 2005
Chairman Stolar called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m..
MEMBERS PRESENT: Glenn Stolar, Jack Spizale, Tom Kelly, Paula Atkins, Ann Murphy,
Steve Scharfenberg and Kevin Dillon
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman, Park and Rec Director; Jerry Ruegemer, Recreation
Superintendent; Dale Gregory, Park Superintendent; and Tom Knowles, Recreation Center
Manager
PUBLIC PRESENT:
Lori Strand 8557 Chanhassen Hills So.
Annette Stock-Lind 8104 Dakota Lane
Theo Kelderman 8620 Chanhassen Hills Drive
Daniel Brechko 8038 Dakota Lane
Traci Yavas 8102 Dakota Lane
Michelle Laurent 8115 Erie Circle
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: The agenda was approved as amended to include the reading of a
letter from Marty Walsh, Carver County Park Director regarding item 3, an Update from Carver
County Parks concerning off leash dog area proposal at Lake Minnewashta Regional Park.
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS:
Stolar: We have with us Tony Schiller who is the, is it the Director of the Miracles of Mitch
Triathlon?
Tony Schiller: I guess so.
Stolar: Executive Director I believe.
Tony Schiller: No, we don’t need executive.
Stolar: We’ll have Mr. Schiller present to us and thank you for coming and talking to us about
this event.
Tony Schiller: Yeah. I brought along some slides and it might be kind of fun to just view those
if anybody’s interested while we visit a little bit and I’d be happy to just make this very informal.
I’ve changed the, of course this was the second year. When we first came to all of you, I believe
Park and Rec Commission – September 27, 2005
2
it was February of last year and so in the two years we’ve kind of carried the idea of what this
was to fruition. I think we’ve maxed out Lake Ann Park. The idea now is if we’re going to
grow, it’s going to be to more sites rather than to more volume or more space at Lake Ann. I’m
not sure of the exact numbers that we had in the park but we were pretty full. I think really it
cuts it out of the park. We ended up with 700 kids racing and a, this is Jordan who happens to be
the number one fundraiser for the second year in the row. Jordan raised over $5,000 and so some
of these are duplicate pictures I just threw in the piece but anyway. At this point I haven’t seen
the official numbers. We are over $100,000 net though to the foundation so it’s by far the
foundation’s biggest fund raiser. I think we netted more foundation in this year’s race than they
had netted in their whole existence so with everything combined, so now the challenge is to get
the whole gang to appreciate the little jewel that they had in terms of their energies and efforts
because they make a lot of energy, or put out a lot of energy and effort to other things. This has
been just amazing in terms of what we’ve accomplished. The football team of course is involved
and tons and tons of volunteers. I think we had over, well over 300 volunteers counting the
football team so we had Minnetonka and also the Mayor Lutheran football team was there and
they were helping the kids get started on the bike, which was really helpful because they had to
climb uphill to get started. Another one that was involved, Cargill brought over 100 people to
work and they were amazing, plus they were a major contributor of cash, so everything that
played out, I think it really carried out to our total vision. Now the question is really what do we
make of this thing? What do we do with it? And so right now I think the sky’s the limit
although we’ve also tacked out what can be achieved with 100% volunteers so I think there’s a
very good possibility that we could I think reduce the effort that was put out this year. Have one
event and probably come close to the same quality and the same volume of people involved.
Same revenues and all that with slightly reduced effort and maybe that can be achieved with all
volunteers to grow at this point in additional sites and, or even make this one significantly bigger
to tie up all the loose ends. I think we’re going to have to look at some alternative scenarios for,
especially for your’s truly. I figured I put in oh, at least half a year dedicated to 100% time on
this and I want to stay married. You have to look at a way to make a living during that period of
time so, but it’s been a labor of love and we accomplished something pretty neat. And for those
of you who were, you know were not involved in the race, the theme is kids race for kids who
can’t. I think we struck gold with that and there’s some kind of magic having all the kids and
realizing they’re doing something for people other than themselves and kids that are less
fortunate. The cancer kids and it just seems to be this energized day that I’ve never been
involved with anything quite like it in terms of feel good. I’ve been to events all over the world
and over 600 competitions and I’ve never been associated with anything where the people are
just so glad they were there and so I was in those people that were trying to leave the park early,
and I think maybe one resident along the way. I did by the way stop over to see Mike on
Wednesday before the race and visited with him for a while and let him know what was up and
what the timeframe was and I assured him that I fully understood if it was necessary for him to
leave during that time or come and go. But encouraged him if at all possible to leave beforehand
or return afterwards and my understanding is both he and his wife took off right in the middle of
it and came back right in the middle of it so, and were apparently bothered that we were there,
which I’m not really sure what to do if that you know scenario plays out again. I guess but that
seems to be the only I guess resident on the course that seems to be bothered, had to go and so
we tried to cover that base as well. Tried to think if there’s, the only other thing is and I think
Todd felt this pretty clearly too is that we’re just going to make it really, really clear in the future
Park and Rec Commission – September 27, 2005
3
that anyone who’s entering the park with their vehicle before the race, that they know they can’t
leave until the race is over because it turned out to be probably about 3 dozen or so vehicles
trying to get out right away, which is a little mind boggling to me because these same people I’m
sure spent hours and hours and hours at youth events all the time but for some reason they had to
leave this one very early in the process so, which we just would not let them leave. Some of
them were ornery about it but everyone’s pretty cooperative, so that’s a challenge that Lake Ann
Park is, the road in and the road out is the raceway so, if you’re at Nokomis, if you have people
walking by, they’re getting in their cars and drive away but here if they’re inside the park, we
need them to stay there so we just need to do a little better job of I think communicating that so.
Those are the big, I guess the big ah ah’s. Other than that I suppose one other big ah ah would be
that on Friday it is a huge set up date and it worked out fine. We would do some things
differently but we were there until about 2:00-3:00 in the morning setting up and I think we’d
request to probably get access to the park pretty much and organized or rented the event say from
noon on Friday because it really is about a 8 hour project with a big team to get set up, so
whereas, and again it wasn’t a problem. There was other events going on. We, I think everyone
cooperated and, but I think it’s a nuisance for them to have all us come marching in on a
company picnic and so I think, just thinking ahead, that might be something we would request is
a noon on kind of reservation for us for set up since it’s such a big event. That’s about it. I had
just overview. Thank you.
Stolar: Thanks. I know Tom’s kid, and I don’t know if anyone else’s, and my kid both
participated in this again. Second year in a row for both of them and we also got a friend who
decided to join in too who lives in Plymouth and they loved it. They just, they loved it. So it
was a great event again. It’d be great to have multiple sites so that it can grow.
Tony Schiller: Well I think the logic there is, is that I think that this site is perfect for about
maybe 75 or 80% of what we had. I think we can manage that. Car traffic. Flow. Everything
would be a little bit, the size of the transition area I think would work out really well. And we’d
be turned away…we’re going to fill up fast so we’d be turning away a lot of kids. The idea
would be to have two more or maybe one more and again looking at other sites right now and
then I think our natural place of, I guess our perfect number would be probably about 500 to 600
kids and I think that’s what we’d get without much effort and a lot of the kids that are doing this,
coming from a long ways off are going to do that at ones that are closer to home.
Stolar: Yeah, I think 500 or 600 would be about right. Or maybe, I don’t know, this doesn’t
seem as easy to do or, spreading it over a couple days because I know one thing some of the
older kids had to wait around a long time before they could start but you know those are little
things as you grow. It’s growing pains.
Tony Schiller: One of the things that I’m considering is having the older kids go first and the
down side or the challenge with that is, that it would put more kids on the course at the same
time. I think it would create much more of an exciting race so the big issue there is safety so,
because they’re doing two laps. The other kids are doing one and so then they’re all merging
and finishing at the same time. But if we can do it and create a safe roadway, that would really
enhance I think the flow of the day. Shorten the amount of time we’re racing. Have everybody
finishing together with big crowds.
Park and Rec Commission – September 27, 2005
4
Stolar: Yeah, I think that would help for the older kids because it was kind of diminished for the
older kids. They didn’t have as many people cheering them on.
Tony Schiller: There’s no doubt.
Stolar: Actually I also noted, I think it was the Chaska Dance Team had a whole crew of people
participating.
Tony Schiller: Yes they did.
Stolar: That was really nice of them because they’re, I saw them helping a lot of the little kids
before hand and that was a nice thing with the football team so I think that that was great that
those groups get involved.
Kelly: What kind of breakdown did you get between 7-10 and 11 and 14? I looks like it’s
almost 2 or 3, 3 to 1.
Tony Schiller: It’s really not.
Kelly: Is it closest?
Tony Schiller: Well 7 to 10 is only four groups and then 11 to 17 ends up being more ages. But
I would say…so we were pretty impressed with the distribution. The number one group is 12.
Huge numbers in the 12 year olds, and then we got really small 11’s. Big 10’s. Really small 9’s.
Big 8’s and 7’s, so for some reason the 9’s and 11’s, you know the odd numbers didn’t show up.
Stolar: Well next year you’ll have a lot of 9’s because all the 8’s will be doing it again.
Tony Schiller: Something that’s really interesting is, from a fundraising standpoint, is that we
reached, what was it? We reached 500 kids by, I think it was by July 20th or whatever it was.
And those 500 kids raised 90% of the money. So the kids that, the additional 200 plus kids that
came in, actually it should be 90 plus. It’s like 97% so the additional 200 plus kids almost raised
nothing, so it’s almost, it’s kind of interesting with the ones that get involved early are the ones
that are fully involved. The ones that come in at the last minute, they’re usually the ones it
seemed like, they have the most complaints about this or about that and they weren’t really
involved in it for the same reason and the spirit of it a little more oriented to it as a race, which is
fine too. So that was kind of interesting, the statistical scenario. So I think fundraising, if you’re
going to get kids involved in fundraising, get them involved early, early in the game versus late
in the game because they’ll raise more money.
Stolar: Actually my son is interested in trying to be the number one fund raiser so he’s going to
put it in our holiday letter asking people for money this Christmas already for.
Tony Schiller: Well we’re going to have some things lined up a little earlier. I guess I should, a
natural transition here would be to say that it’s, I think it’s our intention to come back and do it
Park and Rec Commission – September 27, 2005
5
again. I don’t know if we need to go through a formal process at this point to get those
approvals. If we’re starting that now or.
Stolar: And you have the date already, I saw it in the web site.
Tony Schiller: Yes, the 19th. We’re doing to make it traditional. Use the third Saturday of
August. And fortunately for the park, once again it’s…much quieter time at the beach.
Stolar: Other questions? Comments?
Kelly: I thought the race was great but I also thought that the packet pick-up on Friday was
really well organized. I mean I didn’t know you guys were there until 2:00 setting things up but
from an outsider’s view, I mean it was really, you really had a nice process of people getting
their numbers and everything on Friday. I thought that was a great.
Tony Schiller: Well it’s a great team and they go crazy with it. That’s another thing that we, I
think we would learn. We’d probably have the registration at the very top hill as you come over.
Form a transition. One of the things we have is we try to set up transition and we have all those
people and so some of the…and I think we have all those people parked up above so then we
could have that area to really start setting up and keep them out. Shorten the timeframe
somehow. Because we had a number of cars, everyone came and dumped into those lower
parking lot to register and there was a burden. We couldn’t set anything up until they all left so
it was one of those oversights. How do you set up with everybody parking there so, but I’ll keep
learning I guess.
Stolar: I also, I don’t know if you have any feedback. The practice sessions that you had. I
thought that those were good. I did hear for the swimming one, the lifeguards were caught off
guard a little bit. They didn’t know about that. At least they were saying that. I could hear them
talking about it, because they didn’t realize you were going to have so many people at the beach,
but I thought that they were good for the kids because it helped, at least for the friend of our’s
that had never done it before, he felt more comfortable than the day of the race and it made it a
lot smoother for him.
Tony Schiller: All the kids seemed to enjoy those, and the swim one was just, we just weren’t
prepared for the numbers. Who knew 125 kids wanted to practice, and that was my most I guess
touching surprise of the whole thing is the number that were just fully involved and they came
each week. But you’re, you know tremendous feedback about do that again and it’s true, getting
them out there…pretty neat. And then I guess as far as that goes, we quickly as you remember,
we quickly organized there. Our bus people were pretty amazing and it was very safe. The
lifeguards were, were caught off guard, just like most. They didn’t even know, it’s a learning
lesson for me too. That they didn’t even know that there was a race coming up when I talked to
them that night. They said we’re miracle kids and they said what’s miracle kids? So I guess we
need to probably have some kind of a better communication with that aspect of it.
Stolar: But I thought the practices were a great idea though because there was a lot of people
there for those.
Park and Rec Commission – September 27, 2005
6
Tony Schiller: Yeah. Yeah, well it answered a lot of questions, so I don’t know… I also have
some posters if anyone wants to take a poster home. So it’s kind of fun.
Stolar: Well thank you for giving us a great event.
Tony Schiller: For the record, at this point is there a follow-up process we need to begin to, you
know to I guess get approval going again or are we basically?
Hoffman: We’ll sit down and go through a public gathering permit so, put the date on.
Tony Schiller: So, do I need to do something myself or is that kind of in the works?
Hoffman: We just need to talk and get it started.
Tony Schiller: Okay.
Stolar: From a commission standpoint we’d just love to hear from you, you know before the
race and promote it and I think it’s been a great event for the city and I think great event for the
park. Like you say, a lot of people who have never seen that park came out there and saw it and
thought it was great. So thank you Tony. Appreciate it. Are there any other visitor
presentations from members of the audience?
Michelle Laurent: I think we all represent the same issue. My name is Michelle Laurent and I’m
from, I live on Erie Circle next to the Rice Marsh Lake Park and we’re just here with regard to a
request for redoing the skating rink at that park in the winter. I know that they were stopped due
to budget several years ago and the demographics of our neighborhood have changed. We’ve
got lots of little kids that would like to use the ice skating rink and when we had it, it was used
all the time. So that and also the fact that our school now finishes an hour earlier so they have
more, they can actually play in the daylight now. They’ll be home around 3:00 so we’ve got a
list of interested families that have signed a list that just says, you know we’ve got children that
are of the age that would like to skate and we’re really interested in utilizing our park all year
round. So thanks.
Stolar: Thank you. If you don’t mind staying there. I just want to ask if anyone has any
questions. Michelle and I, as well as other members of the neighborhood have talked about this
and I asked that they come and talk to the commission. We also received a note, as you guys can
see in your packet from Chanhassen Hills. It seems that the playground structures brought out
neighborhood interests in their parks more recognizable interest that they want to look at this.
Todd, when are we going to be talking about the skating rink season? In our October meeting?
Ruegemer: Well typically we had discussed that in the August meeting in the past. A motion
was made last year that we would revisit the addition of rinks only as requested and needed.
You know August kind of came and went and there wasn’t any request so therefore it was not
put on the agenda for that so.
Park and Rec Commission – September 27, 2005
7
Stolar: Okay. So in relation to this, would any member of the commission, and I don’t mean to
put you on the spot. Do you think we should discuss it in October or is it more appropriate to
talk about it now and put it on the agenda?
Ruegemer: Well certainly it’d be timelier to do it at this meeting so we could get information
into the city newsletter.
Stolar: Okay. What I’d like to do then, if there’s no objection is why don’t we put this under
new business. 2., or 2A or however you want to number it, and we’ll talk about it. I’m not, just
to caution you on it. There’s a lot more probably that has to go into this that the staff will have
to prepare for it but at least we can bring it up and then if we have to, follow up on the following,
on the October meeting. Because I know Dale you might have to look into some things also.
Not to put you on the spot but I did ask that they come in. I think this is something, we did say
we’d bring it up if the neighborhoods asked us to. Okay, thank you. So if you want to stick
around, it won’t be very long.
Michelle Laurent: Okay. Do you want my list of people?
Stolar: You can give it to Todd.
Audience: …like to talk?
Stolar: Come on, it’s open.
Lori Strand: I’m just taking, my name is Lori Strand and I live by the Chanhassen Hills Park.
We just moved here last year and it was, we were disappointed. Someone said there’s an ice rink
at the Chanhassen Hills Park and we found out later that that had been changed. The one thing I
was surprised at in the e-mail from Martha Newell was the cost to flood the rink, even without
the warming house and I just wonder how that breaks down. The $3,000 to $5,000. If that’s
accurate.
Hoffman: Labor. They flood it on a daily basis.
Lori Strand: Oh on a daily basis, okay. And I know, my husband and I it would be okay, we live
very close so we wouldn’t need the warming house part if that helps at all. We just would be
very excited. We have two little boys that would like to skate nearby there so that’s it.
Stolar: Anyone else?
Dan Brechko: Hi. My name’s Dan Brechko. I also live in the Chanhassen Estates
neighborhood. I’m new to the area. I’ve been here about a year and a half. Moved up here from
South Carolina. I grew up in New York. Experienced winters as a kid growing up. We always
thought how great that was. Had the opportunity over the past couple of years to do business in
Minnesota and just talking to the people I worked with up here, they’re saying Minnesotans
really enjoy winter and it’s great, all the kids learn to play hockey and it’s a good time so that
was part of my reason to come up here was to get winter back into my life and to the life of my
Park and Rec Commission – September 27, 2005
8
children. And then moving into a neighborhood and we had this great park. Been using it a lot
and to find out that you know back in the old days when there was a lot of money, all the parks
had skating rinks. It was great. All the kids played hockey but now with budget cuts, I mean
everything’s a little tighter with money, it doesn’t happen as often so I just would like to have
that opportunity to have a park, skating rink in our neighborhood. Thank you for your
consideration.
Stolar: Thank you.
Traci Yavas: Hi, I’m Tracy Yavas and I live in the Chanhassen Estates neighborhood also and
we’ve lived there about 8 months. I have a 5 year old and a 3 year old and before we moved into
this neighborhood we lived in Chaska and we did have a neighborhood ice skating rink that we
used regularly. We moved in the spring so we didn’t miss it last year but we’re really going to
be looking for something this year so I hope that it would be nice if we had something this winter
to use without having to drive somewhere because that really is just so nice to be able to walk
down and get out and skate and we would really enjoy that. Thanks.
Annette Stock-Lind: Hi. I’m Annette Stock-Lind and I live at 8104 Dakota Lane and the same
park that we’re talking about, Rice Marsh, and what’s been really fun in the last couple years. I
have a 7 and 9 year old boys, and they’re hockey players so do I need to say more? No, I will
but the, I’ve been in the neighborhood for almost 15 years and I’ve seen the skating rink be used
when it was there and now that we have sons that are hockey players and they wouldn’t be down
there when kids are not playing hockey, as far as using their sticks and pucks. I mean we’d be
very careful about that, but just skating in general and using the park and one of the things that’s
really cool this year that happened was we had the opportunity to get new equipment in our park,
and that was just wonderful and we’ve had play nights on Friday nights that we go around and
get people to come on Friday nights at 7:00 and then again on, I’m not around during the week
but I know for the families that are, they went down on Tuesday mornings as well. So the park
has seen a significant usage increase, as well as the kids love it and it’s gotten the neighborhood
really close. That month that it was closed when we couldn’t play on it was terrible, okay. We
had to keep our kids off the equipment for 30-40 days, I don’t know what it was but, and what
was really, really nice too, we had two picnics in the park. One the day we built it and then the
one follow up one when we had, we had leftover food from the vendor so we had another picnic
and the mayor stopped by, which was really great too so all the neighbors got to meet the mayor.
Oh, was he there? I didn’t mean to but I’m glad you were there. It was a fun event and it was
just really great to see all the kids playing. And they were also very enthusiastic the day we were
building it. Todd was there, and you know just wanted to help in every way that they could and
they really appreciate the park so if we can get the rink back, it would be a great thing. Thank
you.
Theo Kelderman: I guess it’s my turn. My name is Theo Kelderman and I moved to
Chanhassen a year ago from Virginia where we would be lucky if we’d get to skate one day a
year. I’ve heard great stories about ice skating rinks up here so I would really, I would love to
have a chance to skate, and so would my kids. And we really do like the park, the new park in
Chanhassen Hills. Thank you.
Park and Rec Commission – September 27, 2005
9
Stolar: Thank you. So like I said we’ll have this item for discussion and appreciate the
comments and your taking the time to come out. Any other?
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Murphy moved, Kelly seconded to approve the verbatim and
summary minutes of the Park and Recreation Commission meeting dated August 23, 2005
as presented.
DISCUSSION OF NEIGHBORHOOD ICE SKATING RINKS.
Ruegemer: Chair Stolar, if you would like to move item 2A up, in the interest of the audience,
we certainly would, I would be okay with that if you would like.
Stolar: That would be great. Thank you very much. So let’s actually talk about the ice rinks
now. Item 2A under new business, and I guess the first, Todd would you want to provide some
background so that we have the appropriate context for our guests to understand both what you
experienced. What we saw and then what the commission did, as Jerry had highlighted.
Hoffman: Absolutely. Thank you Chair Stolar. Ice rinks and neighborhood ice rinks,
neighborhood hockey rinks, they have a long standing tradition in Minnesota, in cold climates.
You think back to the days of your childhood and ice rinks were everywhere. They were down
the street and they were highly… Rink rats was a popular term and kids spent a lot of their
waking hours after school down at the rink playing outdoor hockey. Slowly that trend has paved
the way or the advent of more sporting leagues, association, indoor hockey rinks but that long
standing tradition of having outdoor flooded rinks was maintained in a variety of communities
around the metropolitan area, and in outstate Minnesota. As an association of service providers
we started having a conversation about the fact that we still flood all these rinks but we’re seeing
diminished use at outdoor rinks and what should you do to try to maintain that use? General
consensus was that you should maintain rinks where you have hockey boards, warming houses
and lights because this is a winter activity and you have limited time during the daylight to skate.
So as Chanhassen continued to face budgetary downturns, doing more with less, we took a look
at our ice skating program and said, let’s do an evaluation on the sites that we currently flood,
and some of the sites that were closed include Chanhassen Hills, Rice Marsh Lake Park, both of
the, we have audience members representing this evening. Carver Beach Park, Meadow Green
Park, Pheasant Hill Park, Minnewashta Heights Park, and those were all pleasure skating rinks. I
don’t know if I missed any Dale as I went down that list.
Gregory: Sunset Ridge.
Hoffman: Sunset Ridge was closed?
Gregory: Yep.
Hoffman: So those were all closed. To give you an example, Jerry’s going to start handing out
the numbers. They’re hard to keep track of them, provide them to the audience as well, but it’s
listed on the second sheet of these numbers that Jerry’s handing out. In 1997 the community
approved a referendum and one of the items that was included as a hockey light for, a skating
Park and Rec Commission – September 27, 2005
10
light for Chanhassen Hills. Not a hockey rink but just a pleasure rink, and that was again
because the rink was removed from Chanhassen Hills. The neighborhood came in and said we
would like to try to have the rink back. We talked about at that time what would improve
attendance and they thought, talked about a light and then putting a portable warming house
down there. A couple of the warming houses that we use are a satellite office building so it’s a
tin shed on wheels. It’s typically used as a construction shack, office and we bring them in for
warming houses. They worked very well for that. So we installed the light at Chanhassen Hills.
Brought down a warming house and then once Jerry hands these out and you flip to the second
page you’ll see some attendance numbers. Do you know what year this is? 1999-2000 season.
Chanhassen Recreation Center was just over 2,100 visits. City Center Park 1,300 visits. North
Lotus Lake, 900 visits. Roundhouse Park, just under 500 at 492 and then Chanhassen Hills 263
visits. So you can see we added the light. We added the warming house back at that time and it
did not, the response in the neighborhood and the usage was not there. And it comes down to
basically how much effort and money are you going to put into these facilities versus the use that
you’re going to realize on an annual basis each winter. The time that goes into flooding a
pleasure rink, these are a ballfield or a piece of grass is all labor costs, and then obviously you’re
using water. We pump city water into trucks and then flood all those rinks and so you’re using a
natural resource for recreation and then also the labor that goes into it to maintain those on a
daily basis. Typically to start the rinks up we flood all night long or 24 hours a day if we can in
three shifts. So there’s a great big start up time. And then there’s a daily maintenance schedule
that goes into these rinks. Where we have seasonal melts where they melt down, then there’s
some additional start up time to get them up and running again because often times we have had,
once or twice during the season, and if you’re not seeing the use on the rinks, it is hard to justify
the replacement of those facilities in the parks. The rinks that we have kept include a hockey
rink and a pleasure rink at City Center Park with a portable warming house that we bring up, and
those facilities are lighted. The hockey rink and a pleasure rink at North Lotus Lake Park with a
portable warming house. Two hockey rinks and a pleasure rink out at the Recreation Center,
which are fully lit and then there’s the permanent warming house out at the Recreation Center.
And then a pleasure rink out at Roundhouse with the round house building being used as a
warming house, so we have those rinks located generally centrally throughout the community in
strategic locations asking people to drive to those locations if they cannot access… Dale is our
park maintenance foreman and it’s his crew out there flooding on a daily basis so if we can
answer any questions.
Stolar: Okay. First I guess any questions from the commission of Todd or Dale?
Hoffman: Or Jerry who operates the rinks.
Kelly: There was a year, I can’t remember which year it was, that we were going to do a test.
That we were going to actually have the commission members go out on weekends and actually
see what the attendance was going to be like at some of these pleasure rinks to determine going
forward if you wanted to close those rinks or not. Was that my mistake, was that test never
completed because it was so warm that winter that we never flooded the rinks in the first place?
Hoffman: Correct.
Park and Rec Commission – September 27, 2005
11
Kelly: You remember what year, was that 2000?
Stolar: Paula, Jack and I had just joined so it was about 2001-2002. No, 2002-2003?
Spizale: I think so.
Stolar: Either that year or the following year.
Kelly: So those rinks closed that year and then we made the decision not to even open them the
next year. I don’t think we received, we received minimal responses from the neighborhoods
because the rinks weren’t open. You didn’t get a lot of calls the following winter either.
Ruegemer: No, because I think the following winter was warm as well. So I think people were
kind of…warm again. It wasn’t conducive to flooding ice and therefore it was passed by.
Stolar: Any other?
Dillon: How much were budget dollars saved when we made the decision to not open a few of
the rinks?
Hoffman: Dollars really saved or invested in other activities throughout the park district? Much
of that labor was just diverted to doing other things. So you’re not flooding ice rinks, you’re
doing other things throughout the winter to maintain your system.
Dillon: Dale, if we went back to flooding those pleasure rinks again, would you have, would you
need one person and how many man hours would that take during the course of the day to do all
those rinks?
Gregory: You mean extra man, or extra manpower?
Dillon: Or would you have to take, I mean would you designate one person who you’d normally
have working doing other stuff, would one person be doing that kind of as a full time or even
half?
Gregory: Well when we go on a day to day basis, when we do our rinks, we send out two
tractors to sweep and we send out a couple of guys, about 3 guys coming behind it to do all the
shoveling, blowing the rinks and everything else. And the other 2 guys do the flooding for us.
So we basically use our whole crew of 7 people on a day to day basis. And on a, when we do it
in the daytime it takes probably until about 1:00. We start at 7:00 in the morning and by 1:00
we’re running around to all rinks and that just to get them cleaned up again and ready for the
next day.
Hoffman: And that’s the rinks that we currently maintain.
Gregory: Correct.
Park and Rec Commission – September 27, 2005
12
Dillon: Okay, so that’s just our current. So if we added all these other pleasure rinks it would be
significantly more time?
Gregory: It would be more time if those, the pleasure rinks, the tractors and that all go and
sweeping all of that so we wouldn’t have to actually have to shovel but we’d still have to take a
set of tractors around so in that sense it takes a good day for our crew to do that.
Dillon: And do you flood every day?
Gregory: At the beginning of the year we do. We don’t really slow down on flooding until later
on. We try to keep building up as much as we can. When we flood, start flooding, it takes us
about a week. If we can have a week of straight flooding, 24 hours a day, we’ll have good ice.
And after that we will try to flood as much as we can because if we get one warm day, we start
losing it right away so the better base we can get built up.
Stolar: Other questions? I guess I have one. Are there levels of effort? One of the things that
we’ve talked about off and on in this whole discussion is there a different level of effort that can
be done to these rinks knowing that there’s a risk involved in the quality of the rinks, depending
on the weather and some other conditions, that’s kind of an inbetween? So to start them we
know you have to focus on it but for example slowing down the maintenance of them or.
Gregory: Well actually we do that. Like when we were maintaining the other rinks and that, we
would, our initial flooding, yeah we’d be doing…flooding and really trying to do a good job.
Later in the year we would take and actually break off the recreational rinks and we’d only hit
them on Monday, Wednesday and Friday’s. And we’d skip those 2 days and if they weren’t
used very much we didn’t even go out and do them. That’s where we were starting to see, the
guys would go out and sweep and they’d get out there and there’s, you know there was no use on
it and that so we started…and doing the flooding at night. At that point they weren’t being used
much.
Stolar: Paula.
Atkins: How many, I was wondering how many pleasure rinks there are that we eliminated.
Hoffman: 7 we eliminated.
Atkins: Because I think we had the discussion about continuing to keep a couple, but then how
do we choose which ones. I think that was the.
Stolar: For the record the audience is waving their hands.
Atkins: …a couple years ago and I was about to suggest that again.
Stolar: That was what we talked about is there a way to keep some open.
Hoffman: Or re-open.
Park and Rec Commission – September 27, 2005
13
Stolar: Re-open. And I would further add to that, is there a way to do it on a pilot basis to see
what the usage is, and if there are lower cost ways of maintaining them for trade, and then also
understanding the trade off’s, so we understand that, though sometimes they give the appearance
of having endless time and energy, your staff is great. They don’t have endless time and energy.
Gregory: Well a lot of it depends on snow. If we get snow here and there, but then we’ve got to
go out and do every one of them. Then we’re back to cleaning them off and flooding them
again. So I mean even if we do them 2 days a week and that, if we get rain, or snow the other
days and that, we’re still maintaining them.
Stolar: And you mean plowing them off.
Gregory: Plowing them off, right.
Stolar: Which is a question of, is that something the neighborhood can, in a pilot program,
adopt. The rink and. I mean we talked about that. I think when we were talking about closing
them, what things the neighborhoods might be able to take on to do. And if it’s snowing, if we
get to it great. If we don’t, they can shovel it off themselves. Obviously 12 inches of snow
makes it a little bit more difficult.
Hoffman: Yeah, that’s always a slippery slope because once you put the note in and if there’s an
expectation that you’re maintaining the rinks uptown. Why isn’t our rink maintained? And
people will call. It’s difficult to say we’re going to give you a rink but you’re going to have to
do half the maintenance.
Stolar: There were some hands raised.
Audience: Yeah, I was just going to say a light snow I think the neighborhood could take care of
it. I think if it were a heavy snow.
Stolar: And Dale, just to make sure we have the perspective. What would your perspective be
for any, I mean we aren’t talking that we’re doing this necessarily but if we did ask the pleasure
rink to be open, what things would your team not be able to get to that you had in mind, since we
are already kind of getting towards that point in time.
Gregory: Well some of it gets to the maintenance of our equipment, which we do in the winter
time. We do building of soccer goals in the winter time for Jerry. I don’t have a list of
everything we’re doing in the winter time this year and that but it’s just basically an ongoing
maintenance items.
Hoffman: Primarily, probably the biggest shift would be from maintenance of the trails. So
typically we get, ice comes first and then trails follow. Typical day in the winter time.
Gregory: Typical day, if we get snow would come, the elementary school and the rec center
would be plowed and I have 2 trucks out doing trails in the morning, around the schools and that.
Park and Rec Commission – September 27, 2005
14
That area, that we have it plowed so the kids can walk to school. On a snow day like that, we
will spend pretty much the whole day trying to get all our trails open. As soon as the guys are
done with the rec center plowing, then they head for the skating rinks. And they’ll start plowing
those out and sending the tractors out. On a day we get snow, we probably wouldn’t even get the
chance to flood rinks. I mean we’re lucky to get them opened up by the end of the day, and we’d
end up going back the next day to re-sweeping and then start flooding.
Stolar: And the flooding, you do it til, how many weeks do you do it or you try to do it
throughout the whole season?
Gregory: We do it through the whole season. We will flood, when we start flooding we’re
flooding with 2 trucks going 24 hours a day and like I say, if we can get 7 days, it’s great. After
we get into our regular maintenance and that, we’ll have one truck that will flood strictly every
day from when we sweep, he’ll be flooding all day long trying to build up rinks.
Stolar: Other thoughts? Any.
Murphy: How often do we evaluate the rinks that we’re currently maintaining and flooding as
far as their attendance because it looks like some of these numbers are, there’s variations in some
of the ones that we currently have open. I’m looking at Roundhouse.
Hoffman: Well we keep the numbers annually and the Roundhouse, obviously always the lowest
attendance. It’s maintained in the current system because it’s isolated on the western half of our
community so we were trying to serve that specific neighborhood west of Lake Minnewashta.
Gregory: One other thing that’s kind of played into some of this and that is, I’ve kept records of
when we opened rinks and when we closed them. I think I’ve got it for the last 15-18 years and
that. Back 10 years ago and 7 years ago we always had our rinks open anywhere from a week
before Christmas, before Christmas for sure. Now it’s getting to the point where we can’t even,
the weather is changing and we can’t get them open even, I mean they’re done with school
break, winter break and that and we don’t have the rinks open anymore. So I mean they’re
missing a big part of when the kids can really use them. And it’s all weather related. We can’t
get out there until it’s cold enough.
Stolar: When was the last time you had a good solid, you put it in before the holiday break and it
stayed open.
Gregory: As far as staying open, it hasn’t. I mean we’ve had some where it really got cold.
We’d go out there and we’d flood for maybe 3 days and all of a sudden we get a warm spell and
then we sit there again and wait until after Christmas and New Year’s before we get going again.
So it’s really, it’s kind of difficult and that. It used to get cold and stay that way so we could
keep going. It doesn’t work that way.
Stolar: What has been the most consistent time you’ve had where the rinks have been able to stay
in January basically? In January 2nd and been able to stay most of January?
Park and Rec Commission – September 27, 2005
15
Gregory: Consistently January. We’ve had some January’s where we’ve actually closed for a
week in January too and we open. Again I don’t have the numbers with me and that. I didn’t
realize we’d talk about it.
Stolar: yeah, and usually you get those to us.
Gregory: Yeah, and I do have them and that. You can kind of look at it to see what’s happening.
Kelly: Do you remember what the date is for our pleasure rinks? When they, isn’t it a city
policy or a rec policy that after a certain date if the rinks haven’t been started, they will not be
open all season?
Hoffman: Correct.
Ruegemer: Yeah, something like the 12th of January I believe.
Kelly: Okay.
Stolar: It might have even been last year where it got warm and we decided it just wasn’t worth
redoing. Was that last year or 2 years ago?
Gregory: Two years ago.
Stolar: Two years ago. It got warm and we decided the season would be too short to even.
Gregory: Right, by the time we’d get them back in shape again you only have a week or so left
before it’d start again.
Dillon: Help me out. So what’s our goal here? I mean it sounds like we’ve got some capacity
issues in terms of being able to support more rinks, so even if we say like by…we want to open
more rinks, well it doesn’t do us, I mean that’s not going to get it done necessarily. There’s
another, other things that have to be done then. Other people hired or equipment or something
like that.
Stolar: I think it’s deferred activity on other things is what it comes down to.
Hoffman: For the most part, with the exception of, if you have warming houses or attendants,
those are a budgeting issue.
Stolar: Right, but just to flood the rinks it would mean, slower addressing of trails and delayed
addressing of some maintenance. You know that’s done during the off season for some other
areas.
Hoffman: It’s a policy issue. If you want to recommend today that the City Council authorize
the flooding of the 7 rinks that were deleted, you can do that and send that up to the council for
Park and Rec Commission – September 27, 2005
16
their consideration. Or if you want us to write a recommendation for your consideration at your
next meeting, we’ll do that.
Stolar: Would that be too late for Dale’s planning purposes if we, I mean we’re getting close to
getting late in the game here but, if we asked you. I’m just, if we asked staff to come back to us
with some thoughts given this discussion and the citizen input of what we could or could not do,
and we did it in our October meeting, would that be sufficient time? If we were to ask?
Hoffman: Sure. What Jerry was talking about earlier is we’re missing deadlines for some
printing for some publicity.
Stolar: And when did that go out?
Ruegemer: It’s gathering input right now and scheduled to go out about the first part of
November.
Kelly: It’s not necessarily an all or nothing thing though. We don’t need to do all 7. We could
just do 2. I guess my mind, 2 or 3 years ago the commission was of the mind set to do a pilot test
to see you know how really well kind of these neighborhood rinks are and we never got the
opportunity to do it because of weather so, I mean given capacity issues and, you know I
wouldn’t mind having an opportunity to actually do that maybe on a subset of the original 7
rinks. To help with the capacity issue and to make sure that, because I think your group does just
a fantastic job with the trails. I think the trails get plowed faster than the streets. And I wouldn’t
want to see that really, I wouldn’t want to see that really affected that much but I think that’s
just, I think our trails even in the winter are probably our number one asset that we bring to the
community. So, but I would be willing to not go all the way with 7 of the rinks but maybe try to
put in a pilot program with a few.
Stolar: Building on that, I agree and I think that was what we had intended a couple years ago
when we talked about it. It would not again to do wholesale. Let’s do all 7 again but to have
some pilots of some neighborhoods, because we talked about, and it’s one thing to talk about is
changing demographics of neighborhoods. If the neighborhood started getting older kids, less
likely that they’re going to be using it. If they’re getting to 13’s getting to more organized things
as you talked about whereas if they had the, I don’t know what the right age is but let’s say the 5
to 8 year old group, that starts getting more usage. So we want to be able to have that option to
maybe adjust where we put things. We also, I do have another question related to that and that
is, does it help to take potentially one of the, we have 3 or 4 pleasure rinks out here currently
being done. Did that help at all so, and I’m not proposing this but for example would it help if
you didn’t have to do North Lotus pleasure. You just did a base rink there.
Gregory: It isn’t going to make too much difference because we’re up there anyway. And if we
take a pleasure rink off and that, that’s minimal because it’s a matter of plowing it off with a
truck or sweeping it off and…per person. The hockey rinks are the big ones. I mean that’s
where we’ve got to go in and shovel everything by hand. That’s where it takes the time. So like
I say, the pleasure rink at a hockey, you know one of those areas isn’t going to make much
difference to do that.
Park and Rec Commission – September 27, 2005
17
Stolar: Okay.
Atkins: That was my question.
Stolar: I don’t know, look for other comments or Tom, if you wanted to put a motion on the
table. It is new business. We’re allowed to do that.
Kelly: So are we ready to recommend something to City Council or are we ready to actually,
maybe ask staff to go back and actually see how many man hours they estimate would go into
maintaining a pleasure rink. Just to kind of get you know if we do 1, 2, 3 to how many hours are
we talking about?
Stolar: What would be the impact of a subset? Let me seek a consensus. Would that be
something that we’d be interested in getting from the staff? Just an understanding, knowing that
we wouldn’t be able to publicize it in the standard brochures, given the timing.
Ruegemer: It could go on the city web site.
Stolar: City web site plus maybe you know we’ll call the press or whatever, Villager… Is that
something the commission would like to see?
Murphy: Just to clarify, we’re talking about just flooding the rinks, not a warming house with an
attendant?
Stolar: Let’s clarify that. I would say that’s my intention is that, you know if we can go with a
minimalist approach. The easiest approach of piloting a couple of rinks, pleasure rinks in some
of these neighborhood parks, and then one of the things Todd mentioned, we as a commission at
that time had said we would take turns looking at the rink. Trying to tag how many people were
actually there…
Kelly: We even went so far as.
Stolar: A schedule, right.
Kelly: Of which commissioners would go to which rinks on which weekend days.
Stolar: I think Todd what we’re looking for you is just an understanding. Does that make sense?
And then with all fairness to the people in this meeting. Yes, you’re here and you’re proactive
and I appreciate that. I do think we need to publish it on an agenda though to allow some
discussion if other communities wish to participate in the discussion. But that doesn’t mean, I’m
looking to staff to make some suggestions potentially on which ones to…
Hoffman: You could get this many people from every neighborhood coming asking for rinks.
Now I’m not sure how we’re going to classify which one leads to subset and which one does not.
Pheasant Hill was very interested in a rink 3-4 years ago when we started that discussion so.
Park and Rec Commission – September 27, 2005
18
Stolar: But we’re going to have to make a choice if we do this, correct?
Hoffman: The easiest one to pick is Chanhassen Hills because we have a light there. So…
Gregory: But you have to turn it on manually so that was turned on when we had a warming
house.
Hoffman: By the attendant. We could install a timer if we wanted to do that.
Stolar: Well why don’t we just say under the impact of doing them and again the commission at
the next meeting will have to make some choices of do we do it and if so, where do we do it?
Kelly: Is that something you can, is it possible to put together an estimate of hours it would take
per rink per week?
Gregory: It’d be tough per rink. We did it, I’ve got estimates on when we were doing all the
rinks and when we started doing the ones we are now, so I’ve got cost estimates on what we
spend to do all of them and the other ones, and actually man hours and everything. Got that
broken out but I don’t have it broken down by rink. That would be tough.
Kelly: If you divide it by 7 like a reasonable estimate or not?
Gregory: Not really because the ones where you have the hockey rinks and everything else we
spend a lot more time there than at the neighborhood ones.
Stolar: If I can just try and summarize. We’re asking staff to come back to us next meeting with
just an outline of recommendation or perspective of doing this pilot of having a couple of rinks,
neighborhood rinks without a warming house or any other extra features but to be able to have
some pleasure skating rinks at a couple neighborhood parks. And then also with that we would
review a schedule with the commission members will help review. Is there anything else you
want from us? Do you want us to say which parks now or should we leave that for that
discussion?
Hoffman: No, I think we’ll come back with a per rink estimate. And we’ll publish it so other
people can come forward if they’d like. One thing to remember is that right now we’ve got
fairly clean lines. Rice, or excuse me. Roundhouse and North Lotus are classified as
neighborhood parks but we treat them a little bit differently because of their location in the
community so they’re almost sub, they’re small community parks if you would. So we brought
community parks presently, City Center, Roundhouse, the rec center and North Lotus. All of the
other rinks that we’re talking about are classified as neighborhood, true neighborhood rinks
where it’s just a pure pleasure skating, so it’s going to be difficult to say you’re going to put 3,
pick these 3. You could say we’re going to pick these 3 in a pilot and see if they work or they
don’t work. Then you have to establish some criteria. Well what is going to be the standard that
you’re going to base it on because if you look back in the years, for instance when Chan Hills
was around 2000-2001, 2001-2002, these are like 5 hour shifts we’re talking about and if you get
Park and Rec Commission – September 27, 2005
19
into January, February, March, you’re talking a lot of 0’s when not a single person came to that
rink for 5 hours day after day. 0 after 0 after 0 after 0, and this was a warming house, a beautiful
sheet of ice and a light shining on that rink. And so if you believe that things have changed that
much from those days, from 2000-2001.
Stolar: I guess that’s one of the bases we can use is that we have some statistics there to be able
to compare against and see what usages, knowing that we aren’t going to do a full boat of a
warming house. The light is still a question but, and I also want to see what we can consider as a
minimalist approach. I mean it’s, to not do it every you know if we do it once a week, right?
Maybe flood it once a week. There are risks and that’s what I don’t, I know you know better but
it would be, you know if we do it once a week, what it costs us to do, it may not be as great of ice
but if it works. That’s the other thing I want to understand about, if we pilot it, are we also going
to pilot different approaches to the rinks.
Gregory: Then you may also want to consider if we get the warm days and everything else
where they really fall back, that you may want to stop, eliminate them right away. A lot of these
are put on infields. A line ballfields and if the sun comes out, they start to go real quick. So I
mean that’s another thing to think about is if they do start getting bad, you may want to just call
them right away then and, otherwise we’re going to be spending several nights of over time
trying to get these things back in shape.
Stolar: …I’m looking to you because you have to tell us what makes sense for your team, but
yet maybe we get the standard rinks done. Once they’re done, we start looking at these, which
also can be if it stays warm up until January 10th, then you’re not doing at all like we have for the
other rinks…because we just couldn’t get them done. So I do want to consider, there’s options
with a minimalist approach too. One that has these type of criteria so that we aren’t spending a
lot.
Dillon: The total number of parks that could potentially qualify for this?
Hoffman: A dozen-15 probably.
Ruegemer: I think we had 14 or 15 rinks before we had reduced the number…8 or 9.
Stolar: So we have these 7 right, that would be the neighborhood ones.
Hoffman: Then there are other neighborhood parks that have been added since the time that we
have eliminated rinks that would still qualify for being a neighborhood and having a location
where you could put one.
Stolar: Was that, so to wrap up consensus if we can have some options and you know if the
options, say in your analysis you come back and you want to recommend to the commission that
we just not do a pilot, please feel free to do that. We’re looking to you for guidance. What we
did in the original discussion to eliminate these neighborhood pleasure rinks we said we want to
potentially look in the future at doing a pilot and counting. Okay?
Park and Rec Commission – September 27, 2005
20
Scharfenberg: You don’t ever clear Lake Ann do we? For skating.
Hoffman: No.
Spizale: I’ve got one comment as I sit and think about it. Unfortunately if you don’t have a
light, you only get the time after school before it gets dark, which is what? 2 hours. And
Saturday and Sunday, which isn’t much time to skate.
Scharfenberg: And I understand the concern with, that Chan Elementary now is the early start
time, early finish time. However, Bluff Creek isn’t. Bluff Creek now gets out at 4:30, so some
of those kids that are on that west end elementary, they’re not going to have a chance to skate
because otherwise if you go up to the rec center, because those, all those parks, those kids will be
getting home at 4:30 and there won’t be any light.
Spizale: So basically we’re talking Saturday-Sunday. Whereas our other rinks are lit with
warming houses. I’d look to have a neighborhood rink too but I basically drive my kids to a
place where we have lights and a warming house and we can spend the evening.
Murphy: But I think you do see the majority of the use, at least up here on the weekends. At
Chan Rec. I don’t see that, especially when it’s cold. I don’t see that many people out at night
skating up here.
Hoffman: We’ll bring it back… We’ll talk about a cost per rink and talk about all the locations
that potentially could be flooded. Some of the past history of the rinks and we’ll let you.
Stolar: I’m just going to throw out, one of my considerations we talked about this has always
been geography and proximity questions too. You know is there a longer drive for this group of
people which has been some of the stuff…with Roundhouse and North Lotus. There’s a large
population there that has a further distance to get over to the central rinks.
Hoffman: Okay, thanks.
Stolar: Thank you. Thank you for coming. We appreciate it and obviously you’re more than
welcome to join us again next month. I’ll apologize to make you come twice but this is a hard
decision for us, as you can tell. There’s a lot of process gone into in these past years but I do
appreciate you taking the time, and it will be on the agenda. Thanks.
2005 LAKE ANN CONCESSION/BOAT RENTAL EVALUATION.
Ruegemer: Thank you Chair Stolar. We did have a warmer summer this year, which was
certainly helpful. We did have however with the, some of the other things that were going on
with the increased general re-cost and increase in price, it seems like Coca Cola keeps going up
about every other month here and that made it tough to make a profit on that which was tough. I
know we had a lot of people coming down where it seemed like we needed coverage and staff
down there but it seemed like a lot of people were buying or purchasing down at the concession
stand. So we can take a look at looking at all the equipment and rental…stuff again and food
Park and Rec Commission – September 27, 2005
21
rates again to possibly raise those to increase our revenue source coming in for that. One of the
things that was difficult this summer certainly was, we have an aging fleet of watercraft and it
seemed like 1 to 3 possibly might have been down on a daily basis. It seemed like Dale’s park
maintenance staff were down there daily trying to put chains back on or re=bend rudders. Fix
steering. Peddles. A lot of the type of things where you know we’ve been open for quite a while
now and things are just kind of wearing out. Currently in the ’06 budget I do have monies in
there for a new paddle boat to try to replace and that is, it is in still at this point but certainly the
council has that option to eliminate that if they would like to but, that made it tough. You can
see kind of the number of boat rentals from 2004 to 2005. We actually went down on a warmer
summer, and that was really due to, a large part of having a lot of the watercraft kind of non-
operational I guess at that point so, that really made it a little bit difficult. And you know a lot of
people do like the service down there that we do provide. We certainly are going to investigate
looking ahead to next year. You know possibly expanding the hours you know an hour or so
from 6:00 to 7:00 to see if we can keep generating revenue that way to cover staff time. That
would provide longer boat rentals and that sort of thing. We’re going to investigate that a little
bit more. We certainly look for new ways to cut cost. I think one thing I’m going to do next
year is put an RFP out for the kind of food items to see if we can get some better pricing from
some companies and food vendors. The Coca Cola contract we’re locked in to 2007 so I can’t
do that necessarily for the soft drink portion of that but certainly the other components to that.
Ice cream. You know candy bars. Nacho chips, that sort of thing. We can get maybe some new
pricing. Maybe a little competition wouldn’t hurt, and would help our bottom line with that.
Still I think the biggest thing is keep it simple down there. Quick point of sale so it’s easier for
staff to keep up with one line. We have had Minnetonka Explorers come down quite a bit.
Different YMCA’s. Daycare facilities. School groups come down. We have basically you
know it goes from 0 to 100 kids so that’s why I really did need a lot of coverage during the
course of summer, and certainly look to eliminate or send home staff as much as we could but
with, Dale’s in the same boat kind of we all are. We have to keep paying our seasonal help more
to get qualified applicants to apply so we’re kind of escalating labor costs and steady or you
know steady revenues and something’s got to give here so that’s kind of where we were at for
the summer. It did help having a warmer summer again certainly and that helped everybody’s
operation I think from not only our’s but other communities as well. Kind of the back page is
kind of a total of all the boat rentals and the paddle boats, that sort of thing. Expenditure’s kind
of broken down per vendor. Total wages and total number of hours. We did kind of a
breakdown of all that. I did also include kind of an analysis from our concession manager, Nick
Hawthorne about kind of what was the, kind of the main items as far as you know nacho chips or
snack items, candy, ice cream, that sort of thing which was helpful I think to get perspective on
kind of what’s popular and what’s not popular at the concession stand at Lake Ann. Also just
kind of a breakdown of our total daily sales. Kind of where we’re at for boat rental and how
much sales tax we need to pay the Minnesota Revenue Department so that’s kind of all included.
Also kind of the boat rentals on a daily basis.
Stolar: Questions for Jerry.
Spizale: It looks great. I just noticed in here, I think the math on the total boat rentals is off.
Kelly: 2004 right? For 2004. I think it’s actually less than 2005.
Park and Rec Commission – September 27, 2005
22
Spizale: Right. By far.
Ruegemer: We’ll take a look at that.
Spizale: So you think about getting new paddle boats then?
Ruegemer: Well I certainly would like to. It seemed like the one that we’ve got a lot of trouble
with is one of our oldest in the fleet. The Sea Rider. The white Sea Rider and also that yellow
kind of… Those are two of the original paddle boats that we have. It seemed like steering is a
constant problem with those and you know, and the rest of the boats they get a lot of use and…
careful with them as they might be at their cabin or other types of places and a lot of our aqua
cycles and stuff we’ve had there from the mid 90’s. ’95-96. Probably the newest ones.
Probably what, ’01 or ’02. Some of the bigger, larger kind of 4 by 4’s I think is what they call
them. And that’s what I have in the budget for next year is a brand new aqua cycle with kind of
a bigger pontoon. The 4 person or those bigger ones seem to be the most popular and they’re
more stable for people that are using those. We had a little trouble with one this summer tip over
on some people so. If we can eliminate those type of situations it’d be easier for us. For our
operation.
Spizale: Jerry, what does a bigger one rent for?
Ruegemer: It’s $10 an hour.
Spizale: Compared to the smaller?
Ruegemer: They’re all the same. Yeah, we used to fix our rates on quarter hour. We used to
have kind of a grid. You know here’s your price. It just seemed like going flat, hourly rate was
better for us. It kind of, it was easier for the concession staff to keep track of. It seemed like a
majority of the rates, the rental rates were, they weren’t going a quarter hour or half hour. They
were an hour or more so that was where we certainly we could spike our revenue a little bit and
that helped initially but now maybe it’d be time to possibly raise those again.
Stolar: Questions?
Hoffman: ...buying a new boat is that they never pay for themselves. In fact…
Stolar: I guess one of my questions would be, this is part of a recreation service too so do we
budget the loss or do we try to budget…
Hoffman: No, we budget the loss.
Stolar: Yeah, because it’s part of a recreation service. Plus the investment of new boats is part
of the budget. I am in favor of the kayaks.
Park and Rec Commission – September 27, 2005
23
Ruegemer: Well and that’s really you know, we’d like to use those monies maybe to buy a
cheaper paddle boat of some kind and reallocate some of those dollars to a kayak or two. We
certainly could take a look at that as well.
Stolar: I’ll trust your judgment but we put those away for the fall, right?
Ruegemer: Yeah, they’re out shortly after…
Stolar: …because there was Three Rivers just this past weekend did a fall kayak tour on Lake
Minnetonka. My wife went on it and said it was wonderful. So I don’t know how easy
something like that would be from a recreational program standpoint and like a recreational
canoe trip program if you would pay significantly more than just the rental rate and ask someone
to just guide them on a trip around Lake Ann in the fall. Catch the colors and just bring them out
for the one day. But something worth looking at for next fall too. They really liked it.
Murphy: Some other resorts too, if you go up to like Ely and you use the kayaks, they’re more
per hour than the paddle boats or the paddle boats are a little cheaper so the kayaks would be
more.
Stolar: Something to think about in the future that might be worth beyond just the rentals in the
summer but to use them as a programming tool. Okay. Alright. So there was no action for us to
take on this, correct? It was just a report.
UPDATE FROM CARVER COUNTY PARKS CONCERNING OFF LEASH DOG AREA
PROPOSAL AT LAKE MINNEWASHTA REGIONAL PARK.
Stolar: Old business we deleted. We’ll talk about in the reports. Or in the commission.
Hoffman: Just if I could read Marty’s letter at this time. In keeping with the item. Originally I
talked to Marty Walsh and asked him if he’d be interested in coming. He expressed that he
would. And then he called back later and he sent an e-mail in the interim. He said Todd, I asked
him what the $40,000 would purchase. The initial investment. That was a question that came
up. He said the initial $40,000 would be used to provide the basic site clean-up, fencing, parking
and we talked about site clean-up. Cleaning up what they had to dig to make it a dog park.
Fencing, parking, trail construction and signage. The cost estimates for these items if the work is
contracted is approximately $75,000. We would also work to include the pond feature in the first
phase which is estimated at $2,000. We are intending to do a good portion of the work ourselves
which would bring the estimated cost down considerably. In order to apply our labor force we
are looking at doing the work if weather conditions would permit during the fall, winter or early
spring time work program. Realistically it may be difficult to accomplish a large portion of the
project during the summer with our activities. Other activities. However we would continue to
work on the project as time would allow. If there are not further contributions by others,
meaning either the city or Shorewood, their $10,000, the County parks department would
continue to seek funding for the off leash area. I cannot say when additional features would be
added. Only that a request for funding…on an annual basis. So that was the initial response.
Then he just said, until we know more information he doesn’t feel that it’s necessary to come and
Park and Rec Commission – September 27, 2005
24
talk to you again. He’d be giving you basically the same report that you heard 8 or 10 months
ago.
Stolar: Any questions? Okay.
RECREATION PROGRAM REPORTS:
2005 DAVE HUFFMAN 5K RACE.
Ruegemer: First of all I want to thank all the commissioners that worked on it, either
participating or helping or there visiting the event that day. We did have a very nice day for the
event. Heard many positive comments about the new course, except for the last hill. Little hard
Tom? But I think people really enjoyed the new course. It provided some new challenges for
the runners. Made it probably easier from a logistical standpoint as far as managing traffic flow.
Closing down the downtown area. We certainly seemed to have less of an impact of people
going to the post office or to a bank. That we didn’t have downtown closed as long as we have
in the past so that certainly was one of our goals. To not kind of impede on that Saturday
morning errands run for our community. Got through town real quick. It was real picturesque to
go through Frontier Trail, along the lake. I think it gave it kind of a nice feel that you could see
the lake inbetween houses every now and again and the runners felt safe being on neighborhood
types of roads or thoroughfares. We had very good coverage from city staff, park maintenance,
street department, utilities and also from the Carver County Sheriff’s Department so we really
did provide a very safe course this year. You know being our first year, we really wanted to kind
of step that up again just to make sure that people kind of knew where they going. It was
different starting on grass versus on the kind of asphalt as we have in the past. I think people
liked starting and finishing from the same location. It was probably easier for us to kind of
manage. That way we didn’t have to worry about kind of the logistics of buses dropping off or
getting turned around at Lake Ann Park and that sort of thing, so it really, from our aspect, from
the race committee’s standpoint I think everything was nice to do that at one location. City
Center Park. You know plenty of opportunity to large areas for gathering. Plenty of places to
put up tents. We have power in all the right places. We can eliminate the noise of the generator
so there’s a lot of positives for hosting the event here. It was certainly scheduled ahead of time
to have the soccer games and that not going on at the same time, which certainly was a plus.
Possibly looking ahead to next year. Looking at possibly starting the race on Kerber Boulevard
and heading south between kind of the library and Byerly’s on Kerber Boulevard. And then
heading east on West 78th Street versus at Market Boulevard. That way it may be easier doing it
that way to accommodate some of the wheelchair entries. We still have hard surfaces for all of
our wheelchair entries. We had 3 this year, which is the first time we’ve had wheelchair entries,
which was great. And they were really quality wheelchair racers that participated this year. The
first one that came across the finish line at about 19 minutes, which was very good. Very fast.
So just to do that, looking at possibly looking at that. We certainly would impact the kind of the
main street channel a little bit more but we could kind of get through town pretty quick that way
as well so the race committee will take a look at that. It was nice to have the kids race kind of in
that general area. We upped slightly. Our numbers were about 103 kids participating in that this
year, which is a good number. We started I think with about 35 or 40 a couple years ago so that
number seems to increase a little bit every year. So that was good. Certainly looking for new
Park and Rec Commission – September 27, 2005
25
ways to kind of rejuvenate and revitalize. With the new year, moving it to a different location,
we kind of get people used to that area again and I think the race committee’s intention to stick
with now this course for a while and kind of see what people thought about it. We heard a lot of
good comments about it and everything just really seemed to kind of for the most part overflow
pretty good. We reduced the number of t-shirts we have so we don’t have any left over this year,
so we tried to cut costs as much as we could. To try to donate as much away as we could. We
increased our contributions, the number of contributions. …around $2,000 but we also
contributed this year, actually we did about 25 I think. Here to Hurricane Katrina. The Red
Cross. We gave a $500.00 scholarship to the Chanhassen Chamber of Commerce this year to
give to a student for next year. Part of the student scholarship’s program for that, so there’s
some different areas where we try to kind of spread the money out. Have more of a purpose or
kind of a broader sense I guess within our community. So we ended up about, roughly about 307
which is down about 20 or 30 runners from last year. The race committee kind of went around
the table and you know, we came up with 30 plus that we know of that didn’t, that participated in
the first 3, 4, 5 years but had something going this year so you know, I think we could probably
do a better job on getting information out there and getting those people back in again.
Stolar: Questions?
Kelly: I guess the only thing I was going to ask is, besides flattening the hills, the only other part
of the course that I thought was a little tough was at the very beginning. That first right hand
turn, or left hand turn as you’re coming off the grass, because everyone is still pretty much
bunched up and I think that was probably kind of a clog, but it sounds like if you change the
course, that will go away. I thought it was great. Great day and I really liked having it end at
City Center Park because it makes a more enjoyable I think. Your kids run I thought was a lot
better than it was over at, they’re not running through weeds and on wobbly bridges… I have no
one to complain about that but myself because that was my idea for the run so. But I thought it
was great. Thanks a lot.
Stolar: Thanks, and thanks to commission members who either volunteered or several runners.
The entire Hoffman family ran. One we know didn’t.
Hoffman: Mike, yeah. And my daughter who cannot. She’s in cross country.
Kelly: She can’t because she’s in cross country?
Hoffman: No. High School League rules.
2005 HALLOWEEN PARTY PREVIEW.
Ruegemer: Just kind of an FYI. Kind of give the dates out there for the commission. The date
is coming up Saturday, October 29th. 5:30 to 7:30 at the Chan Rec Center. We’ll pull out the
same types of games and stuff again. I know staff has been talking about kind of adding and
kind of come up with a couple new ideas. We’re going to try to refigurate the flying witch
picture thing from a couple years ago so, so staff’s excited about that. We’ll be doing that again,
also looking to add a couple different things to the scary room if you will. I know Corey’s been
Park and Rec Commission – September 27, 2005
26
in contact with the KEY Club again to get a number of students again volunteering for that. So it
should be a good event again. I know Corey’s been busy distributing flyers to all the area
schools. Both School District 112 and Minnetonka school district to kind of get that information
out there for that, so things are progressing. I do have a volunteer list for tonight that Corey had
given to me. Corey’s note here, I need costume, candy distributors or registration table
volunteers so if you want to focus on those two areas we can fill in with KEY Club members.
With that there’s kind of the refreshment area or the scary hallway. They seem to like the kind
of the scary area where they can dress up and pass out candy to the kids coming through that
area. And we’ll supplement KEY Club members also for the games in the gyms and help out
with the general hayride information and sort of thing so.
Stolar: Just a quick question. We’ve talked about this before. Target you know never really
donated things, or made it easy for us on these types of events. With Cub Foods coming in the
area, is there any chance that they might be more inclined to participate?
Ruegemer: One phone call. You bet.
Kelly: Target does a lot.
Stolar: Yeah, in their general Target Foundation. Not specifically for Halloween. But I think
that’s something to think about with Cub new in the neighborhood, if they want to use it as a
promotional vehicle for that.
Ruegemer: And certainly we’d give them exclusive rights and they can be the official candy
supplier for the event.
Kelly: It was great last year having that one person with the backpack full of candy running
down. Helping us refill our candy. That helped out tremendously.
Ruegemer: That’s happened quite a few years. Charlie, our senior advisor for the Halloween
party, has always done a great job with that. He loads up his backpack and just.
Kelly: Yeah, he always seems to find you just as you’re running out.
Ruegemer: Yep, Charlie’s got it very good. He’s got a huge heart for Halloween.
Stolar: Okay, thanks and we’ll send the list around.
RECREATION CENTER REPORT.
Stolar: Real quick, Rec Center report. Before we do that, will you make an introduction please.
Hoffman: I certainly will. Members of the commission I’d like to introduce Tom Knowles as
our newly appointed Recreation Center Manager. Tom has worked for the city for 8 years as
facility supervisor out at the building and with Susan’s departure, we put Tom through a grueling
one month interview process and he successfully came out on top so here’s Tom and I’ll let him
Park and Rec Commission – September 27, 2005
27
introduce himself. Tell the commission a little bit about his background and who he is and then
he’ll go through his report.
Knowles: Well thank you Todd. He’s pretty much hit on the highlights. I do have an
educational background in park and recreation administration that is serving me well. Prior to
coming on board here at the Chan Rec Center I was also employed at the Northwest Health
Clubs for about 9 years in the gym programming area so I feel pretty comfortable in the whole
area of rec programming and facility management and so forth. Currently I’m getting up to
speed on the administrative details that come with the managerial status that I now have and been
very pleasantly surprised and pleased by the help I’ve gotten from city staff across the board,
both in the recreation department and city staff in general. It’s coming along. It’s a huge
learning process but it’s something that I very much welcome the opportunity and it’s something
that I’ve hoped for a long time to get involved in something like this so I’m very excited about it.
I want to stress my thoughts that I’m going to do everything I can in the weeks and months ahead
to justify the confidence that’s been bestowed upon me and I’ve been very thankful for the
opportunity so thank you very much.
Stolar: Thank you and welcome and congratulations. And I guess if you would like to make
your report.
Knowles: Well my report is kind of short and sweet this time. Basically a reflection that we are
in fact up and operating again after our closure period at the end of August. Hours are stated
again. We’re back open on Sundays as we always have been, except in the summer. Staffing
has been…and our programming season is off and running and fairly encouraging. Our two
largest programs, the Dance for Fun and our preschool soccer program are showing very good
numbers as well, so we’re pretty encouraged about the programming so far this fall. I think it’s
been mentioned that our winter programming has gone in for data processing. We’ll have
another good programming season in winter I’m sure. Thank you.
Stolar: Any questions for Tom?
Murphy: Are the aerobic classes continuing to drop or is that?
Knowles: We’re having some trouble, both staffing the aerobics classes and drawing numbers.
We’ve had to eliminate a couple of our classes that we had previously offered. I think that that’s
one area that we may be getting hurt a little bit by Lifetime’s presence. I’m pretty sure their
aerobics classes are free to their members so it isn’t any extra expense, so we may be getting hurt
a little bit there and I think we’re probably, I’d like to find another instructor to try to bolster
some of the classes but I think again, Lifetime coming on board. They’ve probably hired up a
half dozen or more instructors and it gets harder and harder to find people, so the impact from
Lifetime is I think maybe noticeable there probably more so than our other areas of operation.
Scharfenberg: That was one of my questions. Since Lifetime has been in, has there been
fluctuation in terms of numbers? In terms of use of the facility and that.
Park and Rec Commission – September 27, 2005
28
Knowles: My feeling is that the recreation center has a core group of 200 to 250 regular users
that are in there a lot. For fitness classes, fitness room, open gym times. I don’t think those
people are going to go away. We’ve seen them coming back already since we’ve re-opened.
The areas that we might get nicked a little bit in is like in the aerobics. People are interested in
aquatics. We don’t have anything to offer those people. But I think our core group of people are
going to stay with us. Also the other thing I’m encouraged about is I see a lot of bookings
coming in for our meeting rooms. I don’t anticipate any changes in that area. In fact I’m
booking several reservations every day so I’m encouraged by the usage I see there so. You know
I think the entire environment’s getting a little competitive. I mean you think about since we’ve
opened up, they’ve opened a facility in Waconia. They’ve opened a facility in Victoria.
They’ve expanded now in Chaska so I mean it’s a tough environment. But I really think that
we’re going to hold our own. I think our daily fee structure here is a big plus for us. I really do
think we’re going to hold our own. I really do.
Hoffman: And a good portion of our business is unpaid to begin with, so athletic associations,
many of our customers walk in the door seeking, expecting a community facility that they paid
for and now they have access to, so we’ll maintain that. The building, the recreation center was
really built for public meeting space. Those four community rooms, that’s what the original
intention was, and then we added on a gym and a fitness room and our aerobics room, and our
primary cash driver is the fitness room and the aerobics room… We still think, as Tom stated,
we’re going to have those core users but some of the specific areas, aerobics fluctuated even
before Lifetime and now with Lifetime and Chaska picking things up there, and also our personal
training. Personal trainer has left to go to Lifetime and so we’re still looking at picking that area
up as well. There are still customers that are interested in going to Lifetime and they find the
recreation center very comfortable for what they would like to see, so we’re confident. As a
department, as a city we appreciate that Lifetime is here. We think it’s a good service for our
residents. So we don’t always characterize it as a competitive environment. It’s just we’re going
to find our nitch and continue to serve those customers that want to come to the rec center.
Knowles: If I can just add to that a little bit. I don’t think there’s anything necessarily mutually
exclusive about a membership at Lifetime and using the recreation center. In past years I’ve
found that a lot of people who’ve expressed that they’re members at Flagship or Northwest come
to our facility from time to time because it’s easier. More convenient, whatever. I think we’ll
see the same thing at Lifetime, and that’s why I think our daily fee structure I think is just a big,
big plus right now. I don’t know if there’s ever been a discussion of having a membership
structure out there but I would strongly discourage that notion. I think the daily fee structure is a
big plus for us.
Stolar: Okay, thank you.
SENIOR CENTER REPORT.
Stolar: Senior Center. Do we want to just ask questions if there’s any consensus? Any
questions or comments about the senior center report?
Park and Rec Commission – September 27, 2005
29
PARK AND TRAIL MAINTENANCE REPORT.
Stolar: Sorry Dale, sorry to make you wait so long and put you in the spotlight early. If you
wouldn’t mind doing your park and trail report.
Gregory: Thank you. Well, the end of summer is coming way too quick for our department.
We’ve got a lot of jobs to do and that and I don’t know if we’re going to get them all done.
We’ve lost most of our summer help already and that. All the kids have gone back to college. I
do have 3 senior guys again this year that are mowing grass for us, but the grass isn’t cooperating
either. They were having a tough time staying ahead of it. Soccer fields, some of them are not
as good as I’d like to see them at. They’re getting too long and that, and we just can’t get around
to everything with those 3 guys. They’re doing the best we can. Actually I was out there riding
the lawn mower…but I’d say we’re plugging away at it and that. Just park staff and that, we’ve
got 22 soccer fields up and running this year and we also got 2 football fields going. Those 2, I
mean those are a weekly maintenance and that. We’ve got to stripe those once a week and that’s
a full day’s job. A guy will come in at 6:00 in the morning…stripe and it will take him all day to
do that. We were able to take Bandimere number 2 soccer field out which is going to help. We
over seeded that thing and it’s coming along real nice so that will be in good shape for next
summer again. Little bit on the playgrounds. Currently we have Curry Farms, North Lotus,
Chanhassen Hills, Rice Marsh and Minnewashta that have the border in. Playground is in and
the wood chips and everything and they’re playable for the kids. We have not done any
restoration around at all yet. We haven’t had the chance to do that yet. Currently my crew is
working at Lake Susan. We poured the concrete for the border at Lake Susan yesterday, the last
2 days. Thursday they’re coming in to pour the center part of it and that will be ready to start
installing play equipment. I think the play equipment was scheduled to leave the factory
yesterday or today or tomorrow, so we’re hoping to see it Friday or Monday. The guy that’s the
contractor that’s doing our concrete work, he’s already moved from the one. He’s moving now
to the little play structure. He’s going to have that one ready to go too in the next few days.
He’s going to pour concrete on there I think like Monday or Tuesday. So we’re going to be able
to move right into them and that. The thing that’s really pushing us is the poured in place. It has
to be put in before the temperature hit a certain temperature at night or they don’t want to put it
in. And we’re looking at trying to get our part of it all done for those two structures within 2
weeks, and our thinking on this is it will still be okay to do it. If we run into rain days and
everything else, it’s going to be tough. I’ve talked to my foreman and that today and that will
work for some of the projects and everything we’ve got left and that. We may be asking some of
the guys to work later in the evening or some of them actually expressed interest, they might
even work on a weekend if we had to and so we’re going to do what we need to do to get these
in. So anyway they’re coming along. And along with the playgrounds and that I really need to
thank my crew and that because they did take several weekends and spent their time on
weekends and that putting in play equipment. They were impressed with the help they had.
They had a lot of help and they said that they really did a good job. The volunteers so, they were
impressed by their work. Trail wise, this year we re-did the Minnewashta Park trail. I was out
there today. It is just about done. It’s about 99% done. They’ve got the trail all done and all the
handicap gutter wraps are in. The one section where they had to take a retaining wall out…a big
stump and lower the trail, they were grading and everything today so it looks like we should be
blacktopping here in the next day or two and that if everything goes, so we’re getting it all ready
Park and Rec Commission – September 27, 2005
30
so then that will be completely finished. That part of it out there. Other than that, like I say,
we’re just kind of going along with everything like that and I sat down the other day and talked
with the guys and that and came up with a list of things that we have to do yet this fall. We’ve
got, I’ve got a list of 25 things, including all the playgrounds we have to take care of and that,
but along with just all of our fall maintenance stuff. I mean from taking buoys in to piers in to
docks in to you name it and that, so that’s why we’re looking, we’ve got a lot to do before we
freeze up here and that, and I’m hoping we’re going to get the majority of it done.
Hoffman: We’re still adding Dale.
Gregory: I know, you keep adding too. And then Jill, she’s getting a list together for us for this
winter ready and that. I mean we talked about our winter things. We’ve got Dutch Elm disease
we haven’t touched a tree this year yet and they’ve got a list of that stuff coming up for us and,
for this winter, so that’s sort of a winter job and also all of our trails again this winter so. That
goes along with our winter maintenance and that with our skating rinks and everything else too.
So that is all I have. If anybody has any questions.
Stolar: Thank you Dale. And can’t echo enough the gratitude to your team for all they did for
the, in general but then also specifically with the playgrounds. Just a tremendous job.
Gregory: And really we were lucky because we had four playgrounds and we have four
beautiful weekends.
Stolar: Thanks. Anything else for Dale?
ADMINISTRATIVE:
2005 PLAYGROUND REPLACEMENT PROJECTS.
Hoffman: Unless there’s any questions from the commission I’ll just leave the report as it
stands. Dale talked about it. We continue to work hard. Try to get them restored. Seeded and
sodded. It’s a challenge both with our work load and then also with weather, but we’ll do what
we can.
Stolar: And hopefully we won’t need another report like this for quite a while. Done for a
while.
Hoffman: It’s been a great project. The Mayor mentioned it today at his State of the City
address specifically that the summer of 2005 playground project was a big initiative for the
community and so the fact that we’re holding the line on taxes in the community does not mean
that the projects are not getting completed. That new equipment is not coming into the parks and
I think the Mayor visited a couple of these sites as well and I think he felt very, he enjoyed the
project and he enjoyed the process.
Park and Rec Commission – September 27, 2005
31
2005 TRAIL PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM.
Stolar: Did you want to talk about anything additional?
Hoffman: I included this trail, we have 42 miles of trails that need to be taken care of on an
annual basis. If you let all 42 miles of trails continue to age, you’ll just start losing chunks and
when I say chunk, you’ll lose 3 or 4 miles a year as the community ages. So we have a
pavement management system put in place for both our roads and our trails. We work with our
engineering department to have trails included as a part of that. We have evaluated with our staff
every section of trail. Every lineal foot of trail in the community. That’s entered into a data base
which spews out an annual, or a yearly basis, which trails are in the worst condition based on
their analysis. Then we take a look at those. Put those into the budget and this year it was about
$50,000 out of the pavement management program that went to Minnewashta and if you see the
budget number that came in, it was $66,753. We had some additional budgeting money in there
to make that happen, and so for that $66,000 we had that entire trail spruced up. Overlaid. They
included now, whenever we touch a second trail, we have to put in a truncated domes at the
concrete, all the intersections. So when you have a ped ramp and you get transition from street
to trail, you have to put in the concrete transition with a truncated dome. Little domes, and so the
same…folks can know the transition between street grade and trail grade, and if you look at that,
those are a lot of them, fairly reasonable. There’s 20 of those. $500 a piece, that’s $10,000 for
the project. And if you take a look at trails in the overall portion of the project, while the trail
did come in under the $50,000. It was $46,000 on this sheet with all of the different contractors.
GMH Asphalt came in at $46,000 where the engineer’s estimate was $66,000. And then if you
look at the total program, it’s a million 4. So Lake Lucy Road that you’re seeing out there today
is a $740,000 investment in the community, which by the way also includes a very nice trail that
was built as an off street trail rather than on street. People are already starting to appreciate that
trail so just something to keep you informed on what’s going on with pavement management
construction.
Stolar: Thanks Todd. I think Kevin you put it best where next year seems to be the theme trails.
Hoffman: Is the trails.
Stolar: It seems to me you’re welcome to think.
Dillon: It’s a good investment.
Kelly: Can I ask you a question about the trails in terms of maintenance? 101 north, I’m sorry,
south of Highway 5 which will probably be called old 101 once 212, once the new 101. What
happens to trails like that where right now they’re on a thoroughfare but after 212 comes through
and 101 gets straighten, does that, do we still maintain those trails as well because that now
becomes a less used road, does that trail kind of lose some of it’s priority? Or will it be
destroyed?
Hoffman: It will be destroyed. Portions of it. As you travel south of the barn right now on 101,
on the trail, it will, the trail will continue down past the entrance of Chanhassen Hills, and then it
Park and Rec Commission – September 27, 2005
32
will be cut off. Terminated. You’ll have a big highway in front of you. No more trail but that
trail’s going to turn right and head down behind the sound wall, down behind Chanhassen Hills.
And then connect back up over to the other entrance to Chan Hills off of Lyman.
Kelly: Okay.
Hoffman: Alright, so that one will be diverted. Where it gets chopped off coming north, down
near Bandimere, it gets chopped off right there at 101 where it meets the S curve, that will go up
and over a bridge and then right up to town so there’s going to be some things that are transition.
I’ve got a map upstairs on the wall if you’d be interested. We’ve got maps of the 101 gap project
which includes all the underpasses and new trails, and you can take a look at it after the meeting.
Kelly: Thanks.
COMMISSION MEMBER COMMITTEE REPORTS:
OFF LEASH DOG AREA RECOMMENDATION.
Murphy: Okay, the off leash dog area committee, which consists of Jack and myself, would like
to make a recommendation based on more research and discussion, we would like to recommend
that the $30,000 which is part of the funding for the off leash dog area, we donate $30,000 to the
Carver County effort at the Minnewashta site. And the reason we believe that is because we
believe the site is the best site we’re going to have in this area and the fact that they do have a
plan in place, although we know it’s not perfectly down to the last dollar. They do have a site
plan and they have gone through the process of planning, determining what features are going to
be there and how they’re going to implement those. So that we believe is the best use of our
$30,000. And we are also setting aside $20,000 for the Lake Ann site that we had discussed.
Stolar: Any questions?
Dillon: Is $20,000 enough to get the Lake Ann site done or started? Is that all that will be
required to do that?
Murphy: That all has to be determined yet. We do not know that.
Hoffman: It’s primarily fencing cost at that location so, we can run those numbers.
Atkins: Which site is at Lake Ann?
Hoffman: The woods.
Murphy: The woods…
Spizale: So when Dale has the time he could do the chips.
Murphy: And take trees out.
Park and Rec Commission – September 27, 2005
33
Stolar: Can we scoop up the chips that flooded away over at Curry Farms.
Gregory: I don’t know, did you hear that we, down at Chanhassen Hills, that that wood chips out
there flooded out of that. They had a water holding pond there that flooded and all the heavy
water and everything else that came through that, it washed them out of there and they went
north, past the holding pond into the neighbor’s yard. We had two yards that were solid wood
chips. Perfect wood chips. Almost from their lot line and they came in front of the house and
they came out about 75 feet and there was a perfect line there. They just, right there they had
about this thick. So we spent a day in there raking wood chips and taking them back over there.
I never would have though it was going to happen.
Hoffman: And then Curry Farms...
Spizale: I think back to the dog park, I guess one time we thought it’d be really nice to have one
really nice dog park which we talked about. But we also thought it’d be nice to have a dog park
where the people are. You know that would be the Lake Ann one. Hopefully they’ll get
something going so we can get the Minnewashta one started. I think we’re all anxious to get a
dog park in the city. So we thought diverting the money in those two areas. We have yet to find
out what it’d cost to fence Lake Ann and to get that started, but then it’d probably have to be
started and maybe built through the next couple years.
Gregory: There’s going to be some labor there just in, and even size of fence and that. I mean
you’re going to want trails, walking trails through there. There’s going to be some clean-up of
the woods itself.
Spizale: That’s where you come in Dale.
Gregory: Should I put that on my list too?
Spizale: Number one.
Gregory: No, Lake Susan Park is still number one.
Spizale: You know and that’s kind of with the Lake Ann one, Ann and I both walked that and it
is, there is a really nice natural path going through and yet it does need some clearing. It does
need some chips. It does need some work but.
Gregory: We made a trail through there several years ago where we were actually in there
cutting down all the Dutch Elm disease trees, and there is a kind of a loop trail but it’s never
really been maintained.
Hoffman: My initial thought is that fencing the whole area would be considerably more than
$20,000. So then you’re going to be left with the decision well, do you even start or do you
make it smaller?
Park and Rec Commission – September 27, 2005
34
Spizale: The whole area is how many acres? The whole square.
Hoffman: The whole woods at Lake Ann, is probably 20 acres in size. That day that we walked
with the commission it ended up being 3 or 4 acres…
Spizale: So what do you think it’d cost to fence?
Hoffman: It’s easy to find out the numbers. We’re talking a 6 foot chain link fence for that area,
it’d be significant. I’ll send you an e-mail…
Stolar: And this is something we wouldn’t even be pursuing though until some point next year,
of looking at what we want to do, correct? It’s not something that’s immediate on the docket.
Hoffman: Well in the CIP is $50,000 for dog parks.
Stolar: Right.
Hoffman: How you want to spend that is yet to be determined. It would be a future
recommendation. Once an item gets into the CIP, if the council approves your $50,000
recommendation for a dog park, they still have to approve any expenditures. So we can do some
research for you when you talk about what it would cost you at Lake Ann. Then you could make
further decisions as the year goes on and then if you wanted to, let’s say it cost $40,000 for Lake
Ann, you decide you want to do Lake Ann and drop Carver, you can do that but we’ll bring that
information.
Stolar: From a recommendation perspective though, I’d like to kind of just get consensus on,
how we want to pursue it and then add direction. Then at a future meeting, I’m not sure we have
a specific time line that we need, talk about what it would take to do Lake Ann, and then also at a
future meeting, and what you have with Marty, at some point getting an update from them. Do
we have?
Dillon: Well just a little more discussion. I mean I know that there’s probably a lot of people
out there that have had dogs that they would welcome a dog park closer into the city, you know
like the Lake Ann location but there’s a lot of people that use Lake Ann that don’t have dogs and
would they welcome the dog park in their park? I mean I don’t know do we know? I mean
because I for one might object.
Spizale: It’s pretty separate though.
Murphy: The reason we chose that site out of, compared to Lake Susan and some of the other
parks, it is set apart. The parking is set. The parking lot divides it from the ballfields. It’s across
the road from the ballfields so there is a separateness to it. But you don’t see other sites in the
park.
Dillon: Right, I think I’m, I know the parking lot that you’re talking about. I mean there’s still a
lot of overflow parking that happens there.
Park and Rec Commission – September 27, 2005
35
Hoffman: Commissioner Dillon is right. There are going to be people that don’t like it.
Absolutely. Many people will like it. People that don’t like it.
Stolar: It would be my understanding though, what this is doing is saying, this is kind of an idea
and a framework. What we specifically talk about doing something at Lake Ann, we will make
it an agenda item that would be open for public. It would be a published agenda item that would
be open for public input. So there isn’t a let’s go ahead and make it a dog park. This is what the
committee has found is the best area. Then to take it to the next step includes estimates and then
an agenda item that actually says, here’s what we’re proposing. Citizens do you have input? Is
that what you’re wondering?
Dillon: Yeah. I think we need to do that.
Stolar: We still have stuff to do. I would think so Todd. I mean I would think that we can jump
right from here to, even if we came in with the cost going without putting it on an agenda.
Hoffman: Yeah…public hearings. Park commission…true public hearings but we have public
meetings and…
Stolar: Other questions?
Dillon: If we’re going to, if we’re going to approve the recommendation on the Lake
Minnewashta site and we say approve the $30,000, and that goes to the council then, as long as
they’re approving what the $50,000 in CIP money?
Hoffman: Correct, yes. This may be, make a recommendation to the council may be a little bit
premature at this time because they haven’t approved the $50,000. You might want to sit on this
until January and see what the council does.
Stolar: This is just a recommendation from the committee. I think this will spawn action once
we see what the CIP is. That sounds like forced consensus but yeah okay, does this make sense
based on we saw Lake Susan. We talked about putting signage in neighborhood parks. We
talked about whether we want Carver or not. What Jack and Ann have come up and saying,
based on all of that research what seems the best is joining with Carver at Minnewashta and look
at Lake Ann.
Scharfenberg: I would guess I threw out the question, is the $30,000 going to be enough? I
mean we don’t know what they’ve talked about doing the work themselves.
Murphy: Well they have another 10 from Shorewood.
Scharfenberg: Right, I understand that, right. Right, but is that 40 going to be enough to do even
the basic amenities? What if we approve 30. We’ve got the 10, that’s 40 but they say you know
what, it really is going to cost us 50. And we’ve taken that and we’ve said 30.
Park and Rec Commission – September 27, 2005
36
Murphy: We’re going on their estimates.
Hoffman: Yeah, we’re working on what they brought to the table. Whether they need 40 to
start.
Stolar: And I think that’s a valid point. Again we’re going to take this and then when Carver
actually comes back and says, here’s exactly what we need. Can we have your money? That’s
when we’ll know and if it does come back at 40, then yeah we’ll make a choice. We might say
well yeah, let’s go ahead and do 40 there and for Lake Ann, now we may do 0 and then we may
come in at 40.
Murphy: Right. I mean we had the same questions but we only have estimates from Carver
right now.
Stolar: So that’s what this assumption is. That doesn’t mean that’s what our final decisions.
Hoffman: …from what I understand he told us was that the $40,000 and then in his e-mail, he
doesn’t know what exactly that’s going to get him but it’s going to open the park so it may or
may not, depending on how far…
Stolar: So I think first of all thank Jack and Ann for carrying the ball on this, and I know Ann
you did a lot of research. I don’t think we need action. I think this is just a guiding principle and
without objection then I’ll take, for lack of a better term, closure of the committee’s
recommendation and then we’ll take this forward, like we told Todd. Look at the costs at Lake
Ann and follow through with Marty to see what the actual costs would be at Minnewashta.
Dillon: So I guess I’m still kind of confused. What is the time table that we, we’re tabling this
until?
Stolar: A few things have to happen. Council has to approve the CIP of 50 grand.
Dillon: And that would occur when?
(There was a tape change at this point in the discussion.)
Stolar: Based on that, if there’s no change, the next step would be at some point in the spring,
late winter or early spring, because I do think we need to get Marty in here and you and I talked
about this. So he says okay, so here’s what I’m going to do with the money. With all the
caveats…people are available, as long as it doesn’t rain, as long as we don’t have to close
Minnewashta Beach, whatever he wants to put on a caveat of it, and here’s where we, what we
think we can have by doing it ourselves with this time table. At that point I think we need a
recommendation directly of saying, based on what you told us Marty, City Council can you
please approve the money. Is that correct Todd? Does that, at that time we then say, in addition,
concurrent with that, Todd’s going to give us some estimates.
Hoffman: …you’re still in the research stage. We’re just trying to design.
Park and Rec Commission – September 27, 2005
37
Stolar: But it’s much narrower. It’s not, well what can we do at Lake Susan? What can we do
at Lotus? What can we do here? Lake Ann and Minnewashta, that’s what we’re going to look
at.
Kelly: Based on what Marty said about not being able to do much in the summer, it’s very
optimistic to say that the dog park could be opened at Minnewashta in the summer of 2006. If
our City Council wouldn’t recommend…can give money to Carver in January or February, so
it’d be optimistic to say that there’d be something at Minnewashta in summer 2006?
Stolar: Oh yeah. I would say if we can get it in 2006, that’d be good. It’d probably be more like
late fall as the earliest. From what I read in his memo.
Dillon: Do we want to make sure then that we have somebody at the council meeting in
December to talk about that? I mean if questions arise.
Hoffman: You have the schedule so.
Stolar: If anyone needs a copy of the schedule, we should have somebody there. Now in all
fairness right Ann, if you feel that’s something you should be at, maybe you can swap with
someone. Or Jack, one of the two of you from that committee.
Spizale: Maybe we should both be there.
Stolar: So if you want to do that and whoever’s scheduled for the meeting when it comes up, we
can swap it out.
Scharfenberg: I don’t know that I ever got that schedule.
Hoffman: Okay. It’s the City Council schedule and then when you are scheduled, if there are
items on the council agenda pertaining to park and rec, you are mailed or delivered an agenda
and the items.
Stolar: Two of the times I’ve had to do it, nothing ever came but. Great. Anything else then?
SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT TASK FORCE COMMITTEE REPORT.
Stolar: I’m on that. It’s very interesting, especially with the massive rains we’ve had recently.
Brought together some interesting information. What I’ll do is I’ll just send an e-mail. There are
a couple of documents that Lori Haak had put together that I thought were very interesting
describing some of the issues related to water management. It is very technical. I’ve learned a
lot more about water than I ever thought I would learn. But I will bring forth to you anything
that we need to. Right now the only impact on parks that I’ve seen come about in the discussion,
we’ve had 2 meetings so far, is one of the things they’re talking about is better water
management through the use of natural plantings versus some of the grasses and things that
people put in. And one of the discussions was, should we be doing that as a showcase in our
Park and Rec Commission – September 27, 2005
38
downtown to start with. So we consider having where we have grass, maybe put some natural
flowers or plant growth there that wouldn’t need care and also do better surface water
management. That’s really the only thing that’s come up so far and it would be great to set an
example then of here’s the types of plantings that are better for water management. So as that
comes about and if it starts coming through our recommendations, I’ll let you know. Any other
items? If not, we’ll move to adjourn and we’ll have Jack do the next meeting so we can do it a
lot quicker.
Hoffman: Any questions on the correspondence?
Stolar: Okay, motion to adjourn?
Spizale moved, Dillon seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion
carried. The meeting was adjourned.
Submitted by Todd Hoffman
Park and Rec Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim
MEMORANDUM
TO: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager
FROM: Justin Miller, Assistant City Manager
DATE: September 30, 2005
RE: 2006 Law Enforcement Contract
BACKGROUND
Attached to this report is the proposed 2006 Contract for Police Services with
Carver County Sheriff’s Office. In following the practice established for the 2005
contract, the City of Chanhassen will be contracting for full-time equivalents
(FTEs). The proposed contract for 2006 will include 13 sworn officers divided
into the following structure:
· 10 FTE Patrol Deputies @ $88,230.92 $882,309.20
· 5 FTE Deputy Night Differential Pay @ $1,179.10 $5,895.50
· 2 FTE Patrol Corporals @ $89,550.92 $179,101.84
· 2 FTE Corporal Night Differential @ $1,179.10 $2,358.20
· 1 FTE Liaison Sergeant @ $99,710.41 $99,710.41
Total $1,169,375.15
The night differential is required for any officers working a majority of their shift
after 3:00 pm.
This proposed contract calls for the same number of officers as in 2005, but with
one change. Instead of only having one corporal to supervise the deputies at
night, staff is proposing to replace one deputy with an additional corporal. This
will mean that a corporal will be present for each night shift, instead of only half
the night shifts, as is the current practice.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Chanhassen City Council approve the attached contract
for police services with the Carver County Sheriff’s Office in the amount of
$1,169,375.15 for 2006 policing services. This action requires a majority of the
city council for approval.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager
FROM: Paul Oehme, Dir. of Public Works/City Engineer
DATE: October 24, 2005
SUBJ: Approve Plans & Specifications; Authorize Advertisement for Bids
for Well Nos. 10 & 11 – Project No. 04-08A
REQUESTED ACTION
Approve plans and specifications and authorize advertisement for bids for Well Nos.
10 & 11, Project No. 04-08A.
BACKGROUND
On August 22, 2005, Council approved a contract for engineering services for Well
Nos. 10 and 11.
On July 22, 2005, a pump test report was competed for the wells.
In May, 2004, in conjunction with the East Water Treatment Plant project, a Lotus
Lake Well Siting Study was conducted. This study helped identify the near- and
long-term water needs for the City. It also reinforced the need for a new well to help
meet the current demands. The proposed well improvements are anticipated to meet
the demands of the City until 2010. The new wells will be treated at the east water
treatment plant. The electrical controls for the wells were included in the east water
treatment plant contract so no new external panels will be required. Also, the raw
watermains for the two wells were included in the treatment plant contract. The
construction contract for Well Nos. 10 & 11 includes drilling and furnishing the
pump equipment necessary for wells. Staff would like to have both wells operational
by the time the east water treatment plant is operational so the plant does not have to
be reset in the future due to changes in the chemistry of the raw water. Also, by
having more water treated at the treatment plant, less untreated water will be
distributed into the system for an average day demand event.
The consultant has completed the plans and specifications for the two wells. A copy
of the project documents is available in the Engineering Department.
Funding for the project was identified in the 2004 CIP - W002&3, and was included
in the 2005 water rate study. Funding of the project is planned for by using revenue
bonds.
c: Marcus Thomas, Bolton & Menk, Inc.
g:\eng\public\04-08a well 10 & 11\bkgd 102405 apv ps auth add.doc
MEMORANDUM
TO: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager
FROM: Todd Hoffman, Park & Recreation Director
DATE: October 19, 2005
SUBJ: Accept $1000 Donation from the Chanhassen Chamber to Assist
with the Old Village Hall Courtyard, Painting and Landscaping
Improvements
This past month, the City initiated a major remodeling project involving the Old
Village Hall courtyard. The village hall building is home to the Chanhassen
Chamber Offices. To assist financially in the improvement project, the
Chamber elected to make a $1000 contribution toward the project. Ms. Linda
Walton, Executive Director of the Chamber, acting on behalf of the Chamber,
has submitted a check in the amount of $1000 to the City. This significant
contribution is an indicator of the strength of the city’s cooperative relationship
with the Chamber.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council accept this $1000 donation from the
Chanhassen Chamber of Commerce to assist with the improvements around the
Village Hall/Chamber of Commerce building. Upon receiving confirmation of
this recommendation, the attached thank you from the City Council and signed
by Mayor Furlong will be delivered to the Chamber of Commerce. Approval
requires a simple majority vote of those City Council members present.
October 24, 2005
Chanhassen Chamber of Commerce
c/o Linda Walton, Executive Director
391 W 78th Street
P.O. Box 1099
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Dear Linda:
On behalf of the City Council, thank you for the Chamber of Commerce’s
generous contribution of $1,000 towards the courtyard, landscaping and painting
improvements being made at the Old Village Hall/Chamber of Commerce Office.
The Chamber is a valued organization in our community and we appreciate all
that you do. We are very excited, as I know you are, about improving this
historically significant portion of our city.
Again, thank you for your generous contribution. Please do not hesitate to contact
me if I can be of assistance in the future.
Sincerely,
Tom Furlong
Mayor
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor
City Council
FROM: Greg Sticha, Finance Director
DATE: October 18, 2005
SUBJECT: Certification of Delinquent Water and Sewer Accounts
Chanhassen city ordinances provide two methods for collection of delinquent water
and sewer accounts. The ordinance states, “In the event any water service is not paid
within three (3) months after the time it is rendered, the city council may recover said
amount in an action brought in any court of competent jurisdiction, or in the
alternative, may certify the amount due together with penalties to the county auditor to
be collected with other real estate taxes levied against the premises served.”
The procedure for collecting the water and sewer bills is that a bill is generated once a
quarter for each account. If not paid, we then send a letter in the fall (August through
October, depending on which district the account is in) notifying the property owner
of the delinquency and the consequences of non-payment. They are allowed to have a
public hearing to dispute the certification. The list is then sent to the county by
December 1. The list of delinquent properties is available in the Finance Department.
There were no accounts who notified us wishing to dispute these delinquent charges as
of October 18, 2005.
Current practice is to certify the amount due to the property taxes. The city does not
go to court on these small amounts. There are 143 accounts with a total value of
$54,607.88 to be collected this year. This compares to 168 accounts with a total
dollar amount of $59,117.00 last year, and 129 accounts with a value of $60,696.08 in
2003. I believe that at least several accounts will be paid in full by the time that the
final list is established in December. The other accounts will be certified to the county
for collection with a fee of 20% ($20 minimum) added for the administrative costs
incurred. Approval of this item requires a simple majority vote of those city council
members present.
ATTACHMENT
1. List of properties and delinquent amounts.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager
FROM: Mark Littfin, Fire Marshal
DATE: October 19, 2005
SUBJ: Acceptance of $500.00 donation for Chanhassen Fire Prevention Week,
Chanhassen American Legion Post 580
Chanhassen American Legion Post 580 has generously donated $500.00 to the
Chanhassen Fire Department to be used for Fire Prevention Week. This money would
be used for materials and supplies to bring a Fire Prevention program to Kindergarten
through 3rd grade in Chanhassen.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended the City Council accept the Chanhassen American Legion Post 580
contribution of $500.00 to be used for Fire Prevention Week. Staff will send the Legion
a thank you letter.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager
FROM: Gregg Geske- Fire Chief
Sherri Walsh – 1st Assistant Chief
Randy Wahl - 2nd Assistant Chief
Mark Littfin- Fire Marshal
Ed Coppersmith – Training Officer
DATE: October 17, 2005
SUBJ: Monthly City Council update
Fire Department Overview:
Staffing is at 39 active firefighters and 6 on probation as of October 17, 2005; allocation is 45 PTEs.
As of October 1, we were at 462 calls for the year, up 34 from 428 at the same time in 2004. We had
a tremendous turnout for our Open House, weather was on our side. Although we did not count
them, we would estimate the attendance to be around 1,000 to 1,100 people. Since our last report, we
have not had any structure fires, but we were out for some weather related calls and a house struck by
lightning. We assisted the public works department with a water removal call.
Fire Training:
During the month of September, the Fire Department conducted rescue training in the form of triage
training and we also had a refresher on ambulance orientation. The new hire firefighters are doing
well and are midway through their Firefighter I class.
Fire Marshal:
No fires to report. We have been responding to a few false fire alarms. Ed and I follow up on these
calls in an attempt to correct or eliminate the problems. Half of these calls are business alarms and
the other half are residential alarms.
Todd Gerhardt
October 17, 2005
Page 2
Fire Inspections:
We have finished inspections of gas stations, and have started the re-inspection process. Most, if not
all, are fixing or repairing the fire code violations that were discovered during our initial inspections.
Once we have finished our fire prevention week activities, we will prioritize our next group of
businesses to inspect. We have also been accompanying the building inspectors when they do their
annual apartment inspections.
Fire Prevention:
We have just concluded our fire prevention week activities. Numbers will be available on next
month’s report. Briefly, we either visited or had students visit from the four elementary schools as
well as 600 kids from the Early Childhood Center in Chaska. The Fire Department Open House on
October 16 was a huge success. We will have more information on the Open House in next month’s
report.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Greg Sticha, Finance Director
DATE: October 19, 2005
SUBJ: Award of Bid 2005 Bond Issues
BACKGROUND
At the October 10, 2005 Council meeting, the City Council authorized staff to
issue bonds for refunding the 1998A park bonds and to issue bonds for water
system improvements. The refunding bonds are for $2,630,000 and will be
called series 2005C, and the water revenue bonds are for $5,520,000 and will be
called series 2005B.
Ehlers & Associates will perform the bond sale on October 24, 2005, and will
present complete information regarding the bidders and interest rates at that
council meeting. The City Council will then be asked to accept the bids after the
presentation.
Standard and Poor’s will be reviewing our current credit rating of AA- during
the week.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council award the bid for each bond issue to the
lowest responsible bidder as presented by Ehlers’ staff.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager
FROM: Karen Engelhardt, Office Manager
DATE: October 17, 2005
SUBJ: Request for Off-Sale Liquor License, Clawson Business
Enterprises, Inc. dba WineStyles, 600 Market Street, Suite 140
This office has received a request for an off-sale liquor license from Clawson
Business Enterprises, Inc., dba WineStyles. The store will be located in the new
Market Street Station and is approximately 1,500 square feet. This location is
zoned Central Business District (CBD) and off-sale liquor stores are allowed in
this district.
Law Enforcement has completed a background investigation, including criminal
history, driving record, and outstanding warrants on Tara Brennan Clawson, the
sole officer of Clawson Business Enterprises, Inc. No negative comments were
found.
A public hearing notice was sent to all property owners within 500 feet of the
liquor store. Staff has not received any comments from the public.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the off-sale liquor license requested by Clawson
Business Enterprises, Inc. dba WineStyles contingent upon receipt of the liquor
liability insurance certificate and license fee. The license will not be issued until a
certificate of occupancy has been issued for the space.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager
FROM: Paul Oehme, Dir. Of Public Works/City Engineer
DATE: October 24, 2005
SUBJ: Special Assessment Hearing for TH 312/212 Improvements
Project Nos. 03-09-03, 04-05, and 04-06
REQUESTED ACTION (Simple Majority Vote Required)
Staff requests that the City Council holds an assessment hearing and consider a
resolution adopting the Assessment Roll for the TH 312/212 Improvements.
POLICY DECISION/ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED
Prior to the completion of the public hearing, any property owner wishing to
object to their assessment must file a signed written objection or they waive their
right to appeal. The City Council may approve a resolution adopting the
assessment roll, either as submitted or as revised.
BACKGROUND
On February 14, 2005, the City Council ordered the portion of the 2005 MUSA
Improvements to be built in conjunction with the TH 312/212 Project. These
improvements include the following:
1. Roadway improvements as follows:
· Turn lanes on Powers Boulevard at the East-West Collector Roadway.
· Turn lanes on Powers Boulevard for future roadways, south of the south
TH 212 ramp.
· Turn lanes on Pioneer Trail at the future north cul-de-sac across from
Bluff Creek Drive.
· Turn lanes on Pioneer Trail at the South Connector Roadway.
· An additional through lane for the westbound TH 212 off ramp at Powers
Boulevard and the East-West Collector Roadway.
2. A traffic signal at the Powers Boulevard and East-West Collector Roadway
intersection.
3. A stormwater pond at the southeast quadrant of the Lyman Boulevard and
Powers Boulevard intersection.
Todd Gerhardt
October 24, 2005
Page 2
C:\DOCUME~1\karene\LOCALS~1\Temp\Special Assessment Hearing for TH 212 Improvements.doc
4. Trunk watermain improvements as follows:
· Along Pioneer Trial.
· Along Powers Boulevard.
5. Trunk sanitary sewer improvements as follows:
· Along Powers Boulevard.
· Along Pioneer Trail.
These improvements are illustrated on attached Exhibit 1.
There are also some TH 212-related improvements that are proposed to be
assessed to benefiting property owners that are outside the 2005 MUSA
Improvement area. These include the following:
1. Roadway improvements as follows:
· Turn lanes on Lyman Boulevard at old TH 101.
· Signal improvements at TH 101 and Lake Susan Drive.
2. Sanitary sewer and water improvements on Lyman Boulevard at old TH 101.
All of these improvements will be constructed as part of the TH 312/212 design-
build project through a cooperative agreement with MnDOT. MnDOT has
provided costs for all of these improvements consistent with the feasibility study
for the 2005 MUSA Improvements. A majority of these costs are proposed to be
funded through assessments to the benefiting property owners. Bonding for the
assessments will be from the State of Minnesota Loan Agreement the City
approved on April 11, 2005.
On September 26, 2005, the City Council called the assessment hearing for these
improvements. The Notice of Assessment Hearing was published in the
October 6, 2005 edition of the Chanhassen Villager.
ASSESSMENT HEARING PROCEDURE
Staff will provide a brief explanation of the work along with the proposed
assessment amount. Any issues that the City Council wishes to discuss regarding
the project financing is appropriate during the public hearing portion of the
project. Public testimony should be received for the project. The property
owners should be reminded that they must file a written objection with the City
either prior to or during the actual project hearings. Objections after the public
hearing are invalid.
The assessment objection is a request by the property owners for the Council to
review the assessment amount. Staff may have an immediate response to
individual comments, or in some circumstances, the objection should be received
and referred to staff for investigation. The remaining assessment roll should be
Todd Gerhardt
October 24, 2005
Page 3
C:\DOCUME~1\karene\LOCALS~1\Temp\Special Assessment Hearing for TH 212 Improvements.doc
adopted. If the City Council feels the objections cannot be addressed
immediately, a report will be presented to Council on all objections on that
particular project at the next City Council meeting. Council should adopt the
remaining assessment roll at that time in order for the process to stay on schedule.
If there are no objections filed, or if Council feels confident staff’s investigation
will not result in any changes being made to the assessment roll, a motion by the
City Council adopting the assessment roll as prepared is needed for the project.
ASSESSMENT OBJECTIONS
Objections may be filed up to and at the public hearing. At the time of this
submittal, no written objections have been filed. If any written objections are
received prior to the Council meeting, they will be provided to the Council at the
public hearing. Staff comments and recommendations will also be provided at the
public hearing. The City Council may choose to accept the staff recommendation
and either revise the assessment roll or adopt the roll if no action is recommended.
If additional objections are filed either prior to or at the hearing, they should be
received and if necessary referred to staff for investigation and resolution.
SUMMARY OF ASSESSMENT PROJECT
Roadway Improvements
· 100% of the costs for the following roadway improvements will be assessed to
the benefiting property owners:
o Turn lanes on Powers Boulevard for future roadways, south of the
south TH 212 ramp.
o Turn lanes on Pioneer Trail at the future north cul-de-sac across from
Bluff Creek Drive.
o Turn lanes on Pioneer Trail at the South Connector Roadway.
o Turn lanes on Lyman Boulevard.
· 80% of the costs for the following roadway improvements will be assessed to
the benefiting property owners:
o Turn lanes on Powers Boulevard at the East-West Collector Roadway.
The area to be assessed for these improvements is shown on attached Exhibit
2. The City will pay for the remaining 20% of the costs.
· The City will fund 100% of the costs for the following roadway
improvements:
o An additional thru-lane for the westbound TH 212 off ramp at Powers
Boulevard and the East-West Collector Roadway.
Traffic Signals
· 80% of the costs for the traffic signal at the Powers Boulevard and East-West
Collector Roadway intersection will be assessed to the benefiting property
owners. The area to be assessed for these improvements is shown on attached
Exhibit 2. The City will pay for the remaining 20% of the costs.
Todd Gerhardt
October 24, 2005
Page 4
C:\DOCUME~1\karene\LOCALS~1\Temp\Special Assessment Hearing for TH 212 Improvements.doc
· 25% of the costs for the signal improvements at TH 101 and Lake Susan
Drive intersection will be assessed to the benefiting property owners. The
City will pay for the remaining 75% of the costs for these improvements.
Stormwater Pond
· 100% of the costs for the storm water pond improvements will be assessed to
the benefiting property owners. The area to be assessed for the stormwater
pond improvements is shown on attached Exhibit 3.
Trunk Watermain
· The project includes the installation of approximately 9,000 feet of watermain
(8” - 16” diameter) along Powers Boulevard and Pioneer Trail.
· Properties within the project area are proposed to be assessed for the
equivalent cost for the installation of 8” watermain. The area to be assessed
for the trunk watermain is shown on attached Exhibit 4.
· The City will pay for the watermain oversizing costs.
· 100% of the costs for the watermain improvements along Lyman Boulevard
will be assessed to the benefiting property owners.
Trunk Sanitary Sewer
· The project includes the installation of approximately 3,000 feet of sanitary
sewer (15” - 18” diameter) along Powers Boulevard and Pioneer Trail.
· Properties within the project area are proposed to be assessed for the
equivalent cost for the installation of 8” sanitary sewer. The area to be
assessed for the trunk sanitary sewer is shown on attached Exhibit 5.
· The City will pay for the sanitary sewer oversizing costs.
· Properties along Lyman Boulevard will be assessed the equivalent cost for the
installation of 8” sanitary sewer (the proposed sanitary sewer is 21”). The
City will pay for the sanitary sewer oversizing costs.
TERMS OF ASSESSMENT
The assessments in the 2005 MUSA area and the TH 101 and Lyman Boulevard
area are proposed to be assessed over a 7-year period at 6% interest. Properties in
the 2010 MUSA area are proposed to have their assessments deferred until
January, 2010 without interest. The property in Agricultural Preserve in the 2005
MUSA area is proposed to have the sewer and water assessments become
connection charges in the future. The City is not able to assess this property at
this time. The roadway assessments for this property have been spread over the
other benefiting property owners.
Todd Gerhardt
October 24, 2005
Page 5
C:\DOCUME~1\karene\LOCALS~1\Temp\Special Assessment Hearing for TH 212 Improvements.doc
FINANCIAL SUMMARY
The total project cost for these improvements, including engineering and
administrative costs, is $2,632,421.16. The proposed funding allocation is:
Funding Source Total Amount
Assessments $ 1,696,751.81
City Cost $ 935,669.35
Financing for the project will be from the State of Minnesota Loan Agreement the
City approved on April 11, 2005.
RECOMMENDATION
At this time, staff recommends that Council “Approve assessment roll for the TH
312/212 Improvements and adopt resolution for assessments”.
Attachments: 1. Assessment Rolls
2. Exhibit 1 - Project Improvements
3. Exhibit 1A- Project Improvements
3. Exhibit 2 - Roadway and Traffic Signal Assessment Area Map
4. Exhibit 3 - Storm Drainage Assessment Area Map
5. Exhibit 4 - Trunk Watermain Assessment Area Map
6. Exhibit 5 - Trunk Sanitary Sewer Assessment Area Map
c: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director
Jon Horn, Kimley-Horn & Associates
C:\DOCUME~1\karene\LOCALS~1\Temp\Special Assessment Hearing for 2005 MUSA Improvements, Phase I.doc
MEMORANDUM
TO: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager
FROM: Paul Oehme, Dir. Of Public Works/City Engineer
DATE: October 24, 2005
SUBJ: Special Assessment Hearing for 2005 MUSA
Improvements, Phase I - Project 04-05
REQUESTED ACTION (Simple Majority Vote Required)
Staff requests that the City Council hold an assessment hearing for the 2005
MUSA, Phase I, Improvements. Staff requests that the City Council consider a
resolution adopting the Assessment Roll only after staff has obtained the
necessary easements to construct the project.
POLICY DECISION/ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED
The City Council is requested to hold an assessment hearing at this time.
Prior to the completion of the public hearing, any property owner wishing to
object to their assessment must file a signed written objection or they waive their
right to appeal. Staff is requesting the adoption of the assessment role by Council
only after easements for the project area have been obtained. At the time of this
submittal the easements have not been obtained.
BACKGROUND
On February 28, 2005, the City Council ordered the portion of the 2005 MUSA
Improvements that will not be constructed in conjunction with the TH 212
Project. These improvements include various street and utility improvements
within the 2005 MUSA area.
Two separate bid packages are being prepared for the 2005 MUSA Improvements
to allow some of the construction to occur in 2005. The City Council approved
the plans and specifications and authorized advertisement for bids for Bid
Package #1 on September 12, 2005. The following is a description of the
improvements included as a part of Bid Package #1.
Bid Package #1 - Bluff Creek Bridge and Trunk Water Main and Sanitary Sewer
· Installation of trunk watermain along the east side of Bluff Creek between
Lyman Boulevard and the East-West Collector Roadway.
Todd Gerhardt
October 24, 2005
Page 2
· Installation of trunk sanitary sewer along the east side of Bluff Creek between
Lyman Boulevard and the East-West Collector Roadway.
· Construction of a bridge across Bluff Creek including the realignment of a
portion of the creek channel.
These improvements are illustrated on attached Exhibit 1.
These improvements are proposed to be constructed during the late fall/early
winter months of 2005 to take advantage of frozen ground conditions and low
flows in Bluff Creek.
Consistent with the feasibility study and report for the 2005 MUSA
Improvements, a majority of these costs are proposed to be funded through
assessments to the benefiting property owners.
On September 26, 2005 the City Council called the assessment hearing for these
improvements. The Notice of Assessment Hearing was published in the
October 6, 2005 edition of the Chanhassen Villager.
ASSESSMENT HEARING PROCEDURE
Staff will provide a brief explanation of the work along with the proposed
assessment amount. Any issues that the City Council wishes to discuss regarding
the project financing is appropriate during the public hearing portion of the
project. Public testimony should be received for the project. The property
owners should be reminded that they must file a written objection with the City
either prior to or during the actual project hearings. Objections after the public
hearing are invalid.
The assessment objection is a request by the property owners for the Council to
review the assessment amount. Staff may have an immediate response to
individual comments, or in some circumstances, the objection should be received
and referred to staff for investigation. The remaining assessment roll should be
adopted if the easements have been acquired. If the City Council feels the
objections cannot be addressed immediately, a report will be presented to Council
on all objections on that particular project at the next City Council meeting.
City staff is working with the property owners in the project area to obtain
easements for this work. Until these easements have been obtained, the project
cannot move forward. Staff is hopeful these easements will be acquired soon.
Todd Gerhardt
October 24, 2005
Page 3
ASSESSMENT OBJECTIONS
Objections may be filed up to and at the public hearing. At the time of this
submittal, no written objections have been filed. If any written objections are
received prior to the Council meeting, they will be provided to the Council at the
public hearing. Staff comments and recommendations will also be provided at the
public hearing. The City Council may choose to accept the staff recommendation
and either revise the assessment roll or adopt the roll at a future council meeting if
no action is recommended. If additional objections are filed either prior to or at
the hearing, they should be received and if necessary referred to staff for
investigation and resolution.
SUMMARY OF ASSESSMENT PROJECT
Trunk Watermain
· Project includes the installation of approximately 3,000 feet of watermain (8”
- 18” diameter) along the east side of Bluff Creek between Lyman Boulevard
and the East-West Collector Roadway.
· Properties within the project area are proposed to be assessed for the
equivalent cost for the installation of 8” watermain. The area to be assessed
for the trunk watermain is shown on attached Exhibit 2.
· The City will pay for the watermain oversizing costs with Water Utility funds.
Trunk Sanitary Sewer
· Project includes the installation of approximately 3,000 feet of sanitary sewer
(8” - 21” diameter) along the east side of Bluff Creek between Lyman
Boulevard and the East-West Collector Roadway.
· Properties within the project area are proposed to be assessed for the
equivalent cost for the installation of 8” sanitary sewer. The area to be
assessed for the trunk sanitary sewer is shown on attached Exhibit 3.
· The City will pay for the sanitary sewer oversizing costs with Sanitary Sewer
Utility funds.
Roadway/Bridge
· Project includes the construction of a precast concrete arch bridge across Bluff
Creek including the realignment of a portion of the creek channel.
· Properties within the project area are proposed to be assessed for 80% of the
roadway/bridge costs based upon the bridge width required for a typical
residential street. The area to be assessed for the roadway/bridge work is
shown on attached Exhibit 4.
· The City will pay for 20% of the roadway/bridge costs for the additional
bridge width required for the roadway oversizing.
Todd Gerhardt
October 24, 2005
Page 4
ASSESSMENT TERMS
The terms of the assessments are proposed over 7 years at an interest rate of 6%.
Property owners will have 60 days to pay the assessments with out interest after
the adoption of the assessment roll.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY
The construction contract amount is for $1,615,113.00. The total project cost
which includes engineering, soil borings, legal costs, etc. is $2,019,000. The
proposed funding allocation is:
Preliminary
Funding Source Total Project Cost Design Estimate
Assessments $1,613,295.28 $1,772,200
Water Utility Fund
San. Sewer Utility Fund
$102,462.34
$117,007.35
$136,900
$106,500
MSA Fund $186,235.03 $206,600
RECOMMENDATION
At this time, staff recommends that Council “Hold an assessment Hearing for the
2005 MUSA Improvements, Phase I”. Also, staff requests that the City Council
consider a resolution adopting the Assessment Roll only after staff has obtained
the necessary easements to construct the project.
Attachments: 1. Assessment Roll
2. Exhibit 1 - Project Improvements
3. Exhibit 2 - Watermain Assessment Area Map
4. Exhibit 3 - Sanitary Sewer Assessment Area Map
5. Exhibit 4 - Roadway/Bridge Assessment Area Map
c: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director
Jon Horn, Kimley-Horn & Associates
MEMORANDUM
TO: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager
FROM: Paul Oehme, City Engineer/Dir. of Public Works
DATE: October 24, 2005
SUBJ: Award Contract for 2005 MUSA Improvements - Bid Package 1
Project No. 04-05
REQUESTED ACTION
Consider resolution accepting bid and awarding contract for Bluff Creek
Lowlands Public Infrastructure Improvements - Bid Package 1, Project No. 04-05.
The award of the contract should be contingent on adoption of the assessment roll
and obtaining easements.
BACKGROUND
On September 12, 2005, the Council approved plans and specifications and
authorized advertisement for bids for the Bluff Creek Lowlands Public
Infrastructure Improvements – Bid Package 1, Project No. 04-05. The
improvements included as a part of this project are as follows:
· Installation of a 12” trunk watermain along the east side of Bluff Creek
between Lyman Boulevard and the East-West Collector Roadway.
· Installation of a 21” trunk sanitary sewer along the east side of Bluff Creek
between Lyman Boulevard and the East-West Collector Roadway.
· Construction of a precast concrete arch bridge across Bluff Creek including
realignment of a portion of the creek channel.
These improvements are proposed to be constructed during the late fall/early
winter months of 2005 to take advantage of frozen ground conditions and low
flows in Bluff Creek. These improvements are necessary to prepare for the
development of the 2005 MUSA Expansion Area.
Bids were opened for the project on Friday, October 14, 2005 at 11:00 AM. Five
(5) bids were received as follows:
Bidder Amount
Veit & Company, Inc. $1,615,113.00
S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. $1,645,978.72
Utility Systems of America, Inc. $1,670,427.00
Ames Construction, Inc. $1,738,783.00
LaTour Construction, Inc. $1,766,827.39
Engineer’s Estimate $1,760,000.00
Todd Gerhardt
October 24, 2005
Page 2
C:\DOCUME~1\karene\LOCALS~1\Temp\2005 MUSA Award Contract.doc
The bids have been tabulated and an error was found in the bid of Utility Systems
of America, Inc., however, it did not affect the bidding order. All bids were
submitted with proper bid guarantees in the amount of 5% of the bids.
Veit & Company, Inc. was the low bidder with a total bid amount of
$1,615,113.00. The low bid is approximately 8% less than the Engineer’s
Estimate.
Veit & Company, Inc. has not recently completed any similar projects for the
City; however, they have worked with our consulting engineer on similar projects
in other local communities. We believe that they are competent to successfully
complete this project. Award of the project to Veit & Company, Inc. is, therefore,
recommended.
Funding for this project is proposed through a combination of special assessments
to the benefiting properties in the 2005 MUSA area, Water Utility Funds, Sanitary
Sewer Utility Funds and MnDOT State Aid Funds. The proposed financing plan
is summarized in detail in the project feasibility report. Based upon the low bid
cost, the total estimated project cost (including indirect costs) is $2,019,000.
Special assessment amounts for individual property owners have been determined
based upon this total estimated project cost. Any additional projects costs will be
funded through a combination of Water Utility Funds, Sanitary Sewer Utility
Funds and MnDOT State Aid Funds.
Funding for the total project cost is proposed as follows:
Assessments $1,613,295.28
Water Utility Funds $ 102,462.34
Sewer Utility Funds $ 117,007.35
MnDOT State Aid Funds $ 186,235.03
The proposed schedule for the project is as follows:
Award Contract October 24, 2005
Start Construction November 7, 2005
Construction Complete May 12, 2005
Attachments: 1. Exhibit 1 - Project Location Map
2. Resolution
3. CIP Pages
c: Jon Horn, Kimley-Horn & Associates
Veit & Company, Inc.