2f. Minutes CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 18, 1989
Mayor Chrtiel called the reeting to order at 7:30 p.m.. The reeting was opened
' with the Pledge to the Flag.
COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Chmiel, Councilman Boyt, Councilman Workman,
Councilwoman Dirtier and ODuncilman Johnson
STAFF PRESENT: Don Ashworth,, Gary, Warren, Dave Hempel, Todd Gerhardt, Paul ,
Krauss, Jim. Chaffee, and Roger Knutson
RECYCLING PRIZE DRAWING: Mayor
Chmiel drew the name for the Recycling Prize.
' APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilman Johnson roved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to
approve the agenda with the following additions to Council Presentations: Mayor
Chmiel added an item for the Alliance for a Drug Free Minnesota; Councilman Boyt
' wanted to discuss Moon Valley, the Police Study CDrv.ittee, the Appeal of the
Board of Adjustments and Appeals and the resignation of Candy Takkunen from the
Public Safety Commission. All voted in favor of the agenda as mended and the
motion carried.
CONSENT AGENDA: Councilwoman Dirtier moved, Councilman Workman seconded to
approve the following Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's
reca►rendations:
a. Resolution #89-137: Accept Utility Improvements in South Lotus Villas
Addition.
b. Resolution #89-138: Accept Roadway Improvements in Lake Susan Hills West,
Phases I and II.
' c. Resolution #89-139: Accept Utility and Roadway Improvements to Knrvers
Point Addition.
' d. Minnewashta Highlands:
1) Approve Plans and Specifications
2) Approve Revised Development Contract
e. Vineland Forest Addition:
1) Final Plat Approval
2) Approve Plans and Specifications
' 3) Approve Development Contract
g. Approval of 1990 Joint Powers Agreement Prosecution Contract, Carver County.
k. Tabled per the applicant's request for Preliminary and Final Plat Approval,
Crossroads Plaza Addition.
1. Approval of Accounts.
11
1
City Council Meeting - December 18; 1989
m. City Council Minutes dated December 4, 1989
Planning Commission Minutes dated December 6, 1989
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Councilman Johnson: Can v
I ask Gary a question. I wasn't able to get a hold of
him today because of my schedule of meetings.
Mayor Chmiel: Sure.
' Councilman Johnson: In our standard conditions on development contracts which
is Attachment B to all of the development contracts, is there anything requiring
a professional engineer certify the completion of a project?
Gary Warren: There's a requirement that a professional engineer sign the plans
that are submitted. As far as the certification, we ask for the developer to
certify to the City that the improvements have been completed. Typically he has
the engineer do that but there's nothing that requires an engineer to certify.
Councilman Johnson: Because they don't on a, b, c, d.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, right.
' Councilman Johnson: In fact one says certify satisfactorily.
Gary Warren: Yeah, they always use weasle words even when you want that
Councilman Johnson: .. .it was done this way. This is one more little piece.
Gary Warren: With us changing to city inspection of the projects now, actually
they're relying on us almost more than their own engineers now to certify. We
only bring a project in for acceptance after we are satisfied that it is done.
Councilman Johnson: I'd like to talk about that later.
1
(F) AMENDMENT TO CITY CODE REGARDING EXTENDING HOURS FOR SUNDAY SALES, FINAL
IIREADING.
.Councilman Boyt: Okay, Roger's checking something out for me. I would like to
ask that we try to find someway to accommodate people for this particular New
II Year's Eve but not change every Sunday in the year. My reason for that is that
we've talked a good bit in the last few months about drug awareness and drug
free zones and one thing and another and yet that time period after midnight is
1 one of the highest incidences of DWI's. I don't think we should be contributing
to that.
' Councilman Workman: Isn't this a state law though?
Mayor Chmiel: It is a state law.
IICouncilman Boyt: We can be more restrictive and we have been right along. I
don't see the point. For one request for one night, why do we change it for the
whole year?
2
,City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
11
Councilwoman rimier: We can be more but we can't be less? I
Mayor Crmiel: I don't know Bill. I made a point of calling all the businesses
in town that have licenses and I know that in same instances in other cities,
same didn't want to extend those hours. Same of the people that I talked to
would not extend those house. They're not going to keep them but they would
like to see that availability if something were to come up as such with holidays
being on Sundays. I guess I don't particularly object to that if they want to
have that. The Riveria says they close by 12:00 or even before with the New
Year's celebration. A few of the others do the sane thing so I guess that I
don't feel that our people within the community are going to be contributing
anymore to that. In fact the last hour that they're going to have at the Dinner
Theatre, they're going to be serving strictly coffee.
Councilman Boyt: Well I think that's terrific. I think that they have no
problem, then with stopping this at midnight. Why should we be attracting people
into Chanhassen or keeping then here and drinking until 1:00 in the morning? It
seems like it's counter to all the things that we're trying to do. I don't want
to belabor the point. I would like to vote on it and I'd like to see it amended
to read 12:00 with the exception being, I could even live with the exception of
when holidays strike on a Sunday if we want to extend it but I think this is a
common practice to do this every Sunday. We're encouraging something that we
don't want to encourage.
Councilman Johnson: There's only 3 holidays that don't hit on Mondays basically
that I can think of offhand. Christmas and New Years and 4th of Judy.
Mayor Crmiel: Any other discussion?
Councilwoman Dirtier: I gue ss my question is, th is is only on Sundays? They're
open until 1:00 on every other day. I guess Bill's point is a good one but if
that's the purpose, then we'd have to do a whole lot of work to maybe restrict
every other day as well. I don't see just the Sunday, the significance of just
the Sunday.
Councilman Johnson: With the recent change in the state law, it allows them to
go to 1:00 a.m.? This is the last legislature or something.
Mayor Crdel: Right. That's the legislature. I
Councilman Johnson: And it's up to us whether we want to implement that or not.
Mayor Cr iel: I didn't get any objections of course from businesses themselves.
Councilman Boyt: Well that figures. '
Mayor r-iel: That's not true. There were some businesses I know in other
communities that didn't want to see it because they didn't want to put that
additional hour in.
Councilman Johnson: lhey didn't want to feel like they had to compete. So what
that does is, if other communities around us don't have the hour and we do have
the hour, that brings more traffic, more problems into our town. I kind of
agree with Bill. We can just limit this, put an exception on the holidays.
3
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
11
Don Ashworth: I don't know if I would agree though. If I may Mr. Mayor. Like
the Riveria. They do close early so whether or not a person's coming from
Excelsior- or not, they're going to be closed at 12:00.
Councilman Boyt: Well maybe you're saying there's no need for this in the first
place. Places are already closing.
Don Ashworth: I think the Riveria might be a good example of one that would
like to be able to stay open until 1:00 on New Year's Eve.
Councilman Boyt: But we can easily allow for a holiday situation without having
II to do this every Sunday of the year. Like I said, this isn't something that we
have to take a great deal of time about. Maybe to handle this and see if an
amendment would pass and I would make a motion for an amendment to Section 10-
1 101, Subd. 5 to read that with the exception of holidays falling on Monday.
Mayor Chmiel: Falling on Sunday.
ICouncilman Boyt: Okay, I'll accept Sunday if that's the appropriate way.
Exception of holidays falling on Sunday that Sunday liquor service be restricted
from 10:00 a.m. until 12:00 a.m..
ICouncilman Johnson: Midnight?
' Mayor C1v iel: 12:00 p.m.?
Councilman Boyt: Well it's a.m., p.m. is noon I believe. And that on those
holidays it would be from 10:00 a.m. until 1:00 a.m..
IICouncilman Johnson: I'll second that.
Councilwoman Dinner: Could I ask Bill just a question? Bill, what do you think
is the difference between Sunday and every other day of the week?
II Councilman Boyt: Well I guess the big one is that we're increasing something
that I don't think we should increase. I'm not going to get on the band wagon
that says we should restrict drinking hours the rest of the week but I am saying
that I don't think we should be increasing and this is increasing.
I .Councilwoman Dirtier: So it's not because it's Sunday.
Councilman Boyt: No. It's another hour and I don't see the need to increase
the opportunity for people to drink another hour.
Councilman Johnson: If the state law changed to 2:00 a.m. the other days, I'd
' be against extending of our hours until 2:00 a.m.. 1:00 a.m. I think would be
sufficient.
ICouncilman Workman: What was the state legislature's intent with this?
Councilman Boyt: Good question.
IIRoger Knutson: All I can tell you is what they wrote.
' 4
City Council Meeting - December 18; 1989
I
Councilwoman Dirtier: What did they write?
• Roger Knutson: That you can do this. You can extend the hours until 1:00 on
Sunday.
Councilwoman Dirtier: They gave no reason? '
Roger Knutson: I'm not privy to the debate. I wasn't there but I assume the
liquor industry said that, they realized that the New Year's was coming up and
I'm sure that was on people's nand as part of it.
Mayor Chmiel: Any further discussion? Hearing none I'll call the motion.
Councilman Boyt moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to amend the City Code
regarding hours for Sunday Sales from 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 midnight except when
holidays fall on Sundays which will be from 10:00 a.m. to 1:00 a.m.. Councilman
Boyt and Councilman Johnson voted in favor. Mayor ai iel, Councilman Workman
and Councilwoman Dimler voted in opposition and the motion failed with a vote of
2 to 3.
Mayor Chmiel: We've got to go back in for a motion. We have to get a motion '
that passes.
Councilman Workman: I move approval of item, (f) . '
Councilwoman Dirtier: Second.
4
Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to approve the Amendment
to the City Code regarding extending hours for Sunday Sales, Final Reading as
presented. All voted in favor except Councilman Boyt and Councilman Johnson who
opposed and the motion carried with a vote of 3 to 2.
N. SET 1990 CITY COUNCIL MEETING SCHEDULE. '
Councilman Boyt: I think this is a topic that we should be discussing. All of
us should be looking at our calendars. November, December, those changes are
far enough out that I can adjust my calendar to fit those but if we make this
change in May, I miss both those meetings.
Councilman Johnson: Why don't we move to Tuesday the 29th in May? The second '
Monday and then just rove it to the day after Memorial Day.
Councilman Workman: I wouldn't be any mood to be reading 6 inches of paperwork '
on Memorial Day weekend. And I don't think staff is going to be thinking about
putting one together before Memmorial weekend.
Councilman Boyt: Well, if they're going to get it together for the 18th, they
could just as easily carry that over and do all their work for the 18th and give
it to us on the 29th:;' You could actually have one a whole week ahead Tom.
5 1
11
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
Councilman Workman: I'd be willing to do it the Thursday before. I tell you
what, it's difficult with a busy schedule to...
Councilwoman Dirler: That will conflict with your HRA wouldn't it?
' Don Ashworth: No, there shouldn't be a problem with HRA. That should be the
21st of June.
Councilman Boyt: It's just that I'm out the 7th, the 18th and 21st. Those 3
weeks. When I set that up I knew I was going to miss one meeting but I knew I
was going to hit the other one and I thought well, I can take that 3 weeks out
IIof the country. But now when you're moving the schedule, I miss than, both.
Don Ashworth: If you go to the fourth, it's almost a month between meetings.
The 7th through the 4th.
1 Councilman Johnson: No, it'd be the 14th. It'd be the second.
IDon Ashworth: Oh, so you'd go the 14th for your second meeting.
Councilman Johnson: For the first meeting.
IDon Ashworth: You'd move the first one to the 14th?
Councilman Johnson: Yeah, because that's the second Monday.
ICouncilman Workman: Why not move it to Thursday the 31st?
Councilwoman Dialer: That's my anniversary. No way.
Councilman Boyt: Well let's do the 30th then.
IICouncilwoman Dialer: That's Memorial Day weekend isn't it?
Councilman Workman: No, it's after Memorial. So just move the one then?
IICouncilman Boyt: Yeah. I'm going to pass one of then; no matter what you do but
I'd sure like to get half of it in.
' Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, the 29th or 30th would be alright as far as I'm concerned
too.
Councilman Workman: 30th. Why did we want the 31st?
Councilwoman Dialer: That's my anniversary.
IDon Ashworth: Okay, it's the 14th and then 30th?
Mayor Chmael: No, the 7th.
IICouncilman Johnson: Why change the 7th? The second Monday is the 14th.
ICouncilwoman Dirler: So you want to go with the 14th and 30th?
Mayor Chmiel: 14th and 30th. Okay.
' 6
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989 '
Councilman Johnson: That way we keep it at least every other week part of it I
Todd Gerhardt: Is that a Planning Commission night? Are you talking May?
Councilwoman Dimler: That is a Wednesday, you're right. '
Councilman Workman: No, it's not. It's the fifth Wednesday of the month. '
Mayor Chmiel: So that should be alright. Shouldn't be any conflicts.
Councilman Boyt: Well I would move approval N with the May dates changed to the II
14th and 30th.
Councilman Johnson: Second. '
Councilman Workman: I think were the Council can decide to go to the National
League of Cities Conference in December, that that date might conflict wouldn't
it?
Councilwoman Disrler: Is it in December?
Councilman Johnson: I have a schedule right here. '
Councilman Boyt: It's usually in November sa',etime. '
Councilman Johnson: December 1-5. t 1
Mayor Chmiel: So the 3rd would be a conflict as well. '
Councilman Johnson: Instead of having it on Christmas Eve we could move it to
Tuesday, Christmas Day. '
Mayor C r iel: Okay Jay, you can be here.
Councilman Workman: Have a big meeting the 10th and not one on the 24th? '
Councilman Boyt: Quite possibly you could be dealing with a lame duck Council.
Maybe one is enough. '
•
Councilman Johnson: That's the way it was a year or so ago. If I remember
right, the year Bill and I were caring in almost no decisions were made. They
tabled just almost everything.
Mayor Chriiel: Just the 17th. Delete the 3rd and just have it on the 17th.
Councilman Workman: Cc meet the 10th. Oh, meet the 17th?
Mayor Chra.el: Just the 17th and delete the 3rd. '
Councilman Johnson: Why don't we move to the 10th because that makes it, that
• would be 4 weeks.
Mayor C riel: 10th? Okay. Did you make motion Bill?
7
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
Councilman Bout: Yeah.
Councilman Johnson: But we're changing December 10th also?
Councilman Boyt: December 10th.
Councilman Boyt moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to approve the amended 1990
City Council meeting schedule changing the meeting dates in May to the 14th and
30th and only one meeting in December on the 10th. All voted in favor and the
motion carried.
VISITORS PRESENTATIONS:
PRESENTATION REGARDING CAMP TANADOONA, BOB BERGAN, SITE MANAGER.
Bob Bergan: Good evening. I'm glad I could get on your calendar. I'm Director
of camping operations for Minneapolis Council of Camp Fire. I'm also the site
manager for a 105 acre site that's located here in the City of Chanhassen.
Looking at the map over there, there's a Tanadoona Drive that goes up to TH 41
' and we own that whole area. Over 2,000 feet of lakeshore and go from there to
the right now to TH 41. We own that whole area right there going along there
partly adjacent to the Regional Park. I moved into the community here about 2
years ago and I ended up working, I was a teacher in South Washington County and
I ended up working for Camp Fire on a part time basis and since then they've
hired me to be the site manager and director of camping. One of my taskp is to
make a community awareness, improve the community awareness of our camp and what
' we have to offer for the youth in the community. We serve Minneapolis area and
all the surrounding suburbs and we have over 1,200 children that go to our camp
in the surnertime in the form of resident camp or from Super Day Camp. Now how
' can the camp help you in the community? We have a facility out there that's not
used very much. 9 months out of the year we have rental groups that cane out.
Church groups. Men's groups. Ladies groups. Minnetonka Teachers cane out for
workshops during the day. We have some food service and we are building up our
environmental education programs. What I'd like to do tonight is just to let
you know that we're there. If you can think of a use or have some information
of other agencies that could use our facility, we would appreciate it. For
II years, or for the last 65 years we've been out there and basically everybody
knows us as Campfire girls. Well 1974 the government wanted some agencies to go
` co-ed. The Girl Scouts said no way. The Boy Scouts said no way and Campfire
basically said sure. We're here to serve all the youth so that's what they did.
But since then it's been an uphill battle to let people know that we are out
there for boys and girls. In fact, in Chanhassen here at the local sports shop,
the map for Lake Minnewashta has us labeled as a Girl Scout Camp so even though
we've been there for 65 years, we haven't had a chance, in fact Campfire's never
had anybody really to do much promoting for the camp. Partly because they
didn't know if they wanted to and we have same special programs that I'd like to
II just tell you a little bit about. One's called self reliance. That's to help
kids build up their self esteem and also learn to do things for themself. We
have another program in Campfire called Teen Suicide Prevention and we work with
teenagers in a preventative mode. Not after the fact. To teach them how to
look around them and observe their friends and stuff and how they can help them
prevent suicide. Also we have a real special program called Special Sitters.
We teach youth in the community, primary youth groups, teenagers and that that
8
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
are interested in being babysitters for kids that are handicapped. Hearing
impaired, sight impaired and these programs, all of our programs are open to the
community. We serve several thousand kids every year that are non-Campfire
vetoers. So those are the two vain things that I wanted to get across to you
tonight is one, we're there to help in the community in whatever way we can and
we are open to the community. We're not self contained or just there for our
own membership. A little bit about the camp.. Like I said, it's 65 years old
but it also was the home for Governor Lynn. He was Governor of Minnesota in
1898 to 1901 and we have the summer have out there. I left it on the desk up
there if you want to pass that around. The top picture shows, there's an older
picture of Governor Lynn's mansion. The bottom picture, one of them there shows
his horse barn. Those were the only two buildings that were on the campsite
when we purchased it 65 years ago. Since then we have 14 cabins and several
other out buildings. We have a front 40 acres that has like 15 campsites in it
so we do tenting besides the cabins itself. So are there any questions?
Councilman Johnson: I have a couple. You're talking about facilities for the
teachers to meet and stuff like that. You have some meeting facilities there?
Bob Bergan: Yes. We have a dining hall that will hold about 150 people. I
have a custodian or caretaker and a cook that's on hand to serve just about
anything you would like. In fact I have the American Legion, just recently the
American Legion of Chanhassen and the Lion's Club of Chanhassen has agreed to
co-sponsor the camp and to help us out there in the forms of some financial
assistance and also sate volunteer help and they're coning out for a dinner
in January to look over our facilities and see what they can do to help us and
then also talk about how we can help them.
Councilman Johnson: There's groups always trying to find meeting facilities in
this town and it's good to know that there is something like that and you do, so
this can be leased out?
Bob Bergan: Sure. And Governor Lynn's mansion for example, it's not as fancy '
as it used to be. It's kind of been Menard's. Paneling you know over the walls
but it does have 4 bedrooms and we can sleep 16 there. It has a kitchnette and
that we do rent that out in the off season and we have another lodge that sleeps
28 so we do have same winter facilities. In fact Robbinsdale school canes out
for 4 days in February for environmental education and we provide a naturalist
to work with their group. '
Councilman Johnson: Do you have any sports facilities? Baseball fields, soccer
fields, whatever?
Bob Bergan: We have a large field that we use for sports plus in the summertime
of course we have 2,000 feet of lakeshore that kind of helps. We do have a
cross country ski trail. All we need now is snow. A couple of bog lands. We
get to walk through the swamp in the summer for environmental education and 2
wetland areas and 2 wildlife areas. Lots of deer and pheasants. Any other
questions? '
Mayor C'hmiel: I guess you answered my question when you said you'd be able to
serve anyone. I thought I heard you say something about serving youth in that
specific area. '
9
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
Bob Bergan: Our main goal in Campfire is to serve youth and to work with youth.
'!b help that feel better about themselves. Give them a chance to succeed.
IICouncilman Johnson: If you get money from parents using your facility, you'll
be glad to use that to help the youth?
IIBob Bergen: Yes. Renting out to the Minnetonka teachers for example for
workshop does not fit our main goals but it does help pay the bills.
Mayor ardel: Good. Any other discussion?
Councilman Johnson: Good to know. Thanks for coning.
Mayor Cbmiel: Are there any other visitor presentations?
I Bill Loebl: Bill Loebl, 7197 Frontier Trail. Mr. Mayor and members of the
Council. With regard to the proposed rebuilding of Frontier Trail. Several
methods were discussed for assessing the homeowners for their share of the cost.
One or two people spoke in favor of the unit type of assessment. The consulting
I engineer, Bill Engelhardt, spoke in favor of the front footage method of
assessment because it is the historical way of assessing and is the most easily
defendable in the courts. I would like to present to you a petition signed by
I 60 of my neighbors who are in favor of the front foot method of assessment.
These 60 signatures represent 33 of the 47 households involved in this project.
As you can see, this is a clear majority in favor of the front foot method of
I assessment. Incidentally, in contacting these people many of them expressed the
opinion that they would rather delay the project until a fund is established by
the City to pay for the rebuilding of the road. Most of you campaigned dh the
promise to listen more to the people than had been the case in the past." Here's
II an opportunity to make good on your promise and use the front foot method for
assessment purposes as the overwhelming majority favors. We request that the
City Council go on record in support of the front foot method of assessment. If
IIyou have any questions, I'll be glad to try and answer them. Thank you.
Councilman Johnson: Bill, do you know how many people on that petition would,
Ithat signed your petition, benefit by the per parcel method?
Bill Loebl: Everybody would lose.
ICouncilman Johnson: Everybody on your petition would lose?
Bill Loebl: Yes. Would have to pay more.
ICouncilman Johnson: Would have to pay more. Okay. So if you went to the per
parcel method, the people who are paying more now, the minority who are footing
a larger portion of the bill, their bill would be equalized over the entire 47
Ifamilies?
Bill Loebl: Yes. 60 people would lose and whatever it is, 20 or so would gain.
IIMayor Chmiel: How many total parcels were there?
Gary Warren: I don't recall off the top of my head. You said you had 47.
• That's according to the list from Bill
Bill Loebl: 47 hares. That cco ng Eng
10
I
City Council Meeting - December 18; 1989
Councilman Johnson: That's about right from what I remember. They're saying
something in the teens would benefit from a per unit assessment because they
have very large front footages and still only one driveway and then the majority
of the people benefit from this front foot method. The majority of the people
benefit at the cost of the minority.
Bill Loebl: Correct.
Mayor Q iel: Any other discussion? Bill, what we'll probably do is, at sane '
time get this on our agenda and have it discussed then at Council.
Bill Loebi: Thank you. I want to present you with this. '
Mayor Chmiel: Are there any additional visitor presentations? Please state
your name and address. I
Jerry Boshane: My name is Jerry Boshane. I live at 240 Flying Cloud Drive.
For anybody in the audience that doesn't know where that is, that's Highway 169
TH 212 on the highway. First I would like to say thank you to the entire City
Council for putting up with me for the last few weeks with all my phone calls
and inquiries and so on concerning these matters that I'd like to talk about. I
have two items that I would like to discuss. The first is the Moon Valley Sand
and Gravel Pit. We have a concern in our immediate neighborhood but I think the
concern goes well beyond our neighborhood and encompasses the entire city of
Chanhassen regarding the Moon Valley Sand and Gravel Pit. I don't know how many
of you folks from the City Council have been down there to actually visit this
- site and see what's going on but if you are not aware, the pit is Zing expanded
--continually and in the last several years since new owners have bought the pit,
-- it has been expanding at a rather rapid pace. unbeknownst to me and apparently
quite a number of other people in this city and same of the people on the
Council here, they have also started an additional pit north of the original
pit. It's my understanding that they purchased this land north of the original
pit. Went ahead and just started mining this additional land without permits.
Without approval. Without any knowledge in effect by the City Council or anyone
within the City so I'm here tonight to plead with the City Council and the City
of Chanhassen to please do something about this unrestricted mining of the land
down there at Moon Valley. If you folks have ever been down in that area, it is
an absolute gorgeous, beautiful piece of land. That entire river valley area of
canyons and ravines and creeks and so on that has not yet been spoiled by
mankind. At the rate this pit is expanding, it probably will be in short order.
There is a rather selfish concern on my part about this whole operation. We
live just west of the Moon Valley operation itself, within literally a stone's '
throw. It has been brought to our attention that the land between my property
and the Moon Valley land and gravel operation is being considered being sold to
the Moon Valley Sand and Gravel. It would be my contention that the only reason
these people would want to buy that lard is to continue expanding the sand and
gravel pit. Now if that happens, they will be going right into a natural spring
fed creek which flows into the newly acquired wildlife area on the south side of
the highway which flows into the Minnesota River. So I think the ramifications
here are more than just a sand and gravel pit that is being expanded
relentlessly inside of the city limits but I think it also goes into an
environmental issues 'concerning the DNR, the EPA, the polluted Minnesota River '
and the like. I would like to ask that the City Council upon recommendation and
approval have this whole matter looked into and a definite time frame or a
11 1
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
definte date set up so that this whole mutter can be resolved. As you know, you
start getting into the bureaucratic morass and things start taking time and time
and time. Spring is really not too far away. As soon as the roads are opened
up, this pit is going to be into full operation again and if they are as
unrestricted as they have been in the last 3 years, that whole valley area is
' going to be completely leveled. Now also too I would like to request concerning
that same operation, that the City consider contacting the EQB and asking about
a possible environmental assessment worksheet being done on that whole project.
' It is my understanding from the EQB that the City can do this and under some
circumstances, based on State guidelines, that they not only can do it but they
are required to do it by law. I don't know if the City or anyone else has
looked into this area but I again would recommend that it be done. My second
issue has to do with the Tri-Y, the old Tri-Y Drive In which is located at the
junction of TH 169/212. Again I don't know if anyone in this city is aware but
there was a fire within that structure a number of months ago. The place was
completely gutted. Half of it's burnt out and the structure is still standing.
I would like to ask that steps be taken that that entire structure and area be
leveled and cleaned out. Again, for any of you that have not seen that
particular structure or the Moon Valley Sand and Gravel Pit or have seen either
first hand visits to either of these two places or aerial photographs, I have
taken it upon myself to obtain photographs concerning both of these places and I
will leave them with you people. Does anyone have any questions?
IMayor Chmiel: Terry, you and I have had sane discussions on the phone and I'm
wondering whether Paul has had discussions with you on sane of these things and
II I think you probably know where the City's going with this presently. I am
assuming we've had sane discussions with our attorney as well.
Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, yes. I've talked to the City Attorney and Mr. Boshane
Iand a number of other people over the last month concerning this matter. I
think as you're all aware, basically we have a grandfathered in non-conforming
use down there that has expanded their gravel removal operations dramatically in
the last few years. We became involved last summer when they jumped up to a
site near Pioneer Trail pulling out sane clay material. Roger was involved and
sent then; a letter asking than; to stop. They had a limited amount of dirt they
were pulling out and they have stopped up there for one reason or another and
there are same issues regaining there because they haven't restored anything or
anything else. In talking to Roger, we think there are a number of ways we can
II approach this. A lot of these options involve some risk to the City in terms of
legal exposure. Maybe possibly even breaking new ground in terms of how we
.address this issue. As a non-conforming use, they do have sane rights to
continue and we're not exactly sure at this point which options we'd recommend
to you. We have looked into the EAW approach and we'll do something with that.
At this point we don't think that's going to be the solution here because
they're not asking us for any approvals in addition. We have nothing to trip
II an EAW. We're doing property title searches to find out and date in time what
they did control. When they became non-conforming with the expectation that
they're not allowed to add property at that point. By nature of it's
non-conformity though, gravel pits are different. Are a different animal from
II any other non-conformity. It boils down to a simple fact that a non-conforming
use is not normally allowed to expand. However, it doesn't apply to a gravel
pit because every time you•take a shovel of dirt out, it's bigger than it was 1
I before so by nature of the use, it's a perpetual expansion. Again, Roger is
looking into that and we have been following up as well. We expect to come back
' 12
I
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
1
to the City Council at the second meeting in January with basically a position
paper outlining the options and same recommendations on what to do.
Councilman Boyt: You're saying January 30th or 28th or something like that?
Paul Krauss: Whatever, I don't have a schedule here but whatever it was. '
Gary Warren: 22nd.
Councilman Boyt: Why is it going to take so long? 1
Paul Krauss: We needed to have Roger do the research that was intended with
this. There are some options that are relatively involved and I guess I'll
defer that to Roger.
Roger Knutson: You're looking at options that other states have used...should
never have been used in Minnesota. Trying to make sure it was a Minnesota law.
Try to set up a permitting process is one suggestion, annual permitting process.
It's fairly involved and it's taken a few weeks to accomplish.
Councilman Boyt: This is extremely frustrating given that we started this a
year ago. It's also frustrating in that imagine if any of us were in Terry's
position of living within a stone's throw of this thing and watching it grow. ,
You mentioned something like a 200 foot drop?
Jerry Boshane: On parts of the pit. The original pit, yes.
Councilman Boyt: Do we need to be on firm ground before we launch into what
could be a costly legal battle since we're representing restricting these
people's ability to make money, income. On the other hand, I'd sure think the
City would be remiss if we expand out timewise until the frost is out of the
ground and Eden Prairie is again looking for someplace to grab clay. It's
ironic that Eden Prairie wouldn't let anybody take clay in Eden Prairie to put
in their landfill, but they were happy to see Chanhassen give it up.
Jerry Boshane: I would like to make a comment concerning the EQB. Now when I
talked to the people down there and I talked to them on two different occasions.
The EQB, my understanding of the regulations is that one of these envirormental
assessment worksheets can be started in one of two manners. Now they can either
be undertaken by an appropriate government agency, which in this case would be
the City of Chanhassen or they can be taken independent of a government agency
by the citizens themselves and petitioned to have this worksheet done. Now the
way the rules of the EQB work is that this goes to what they call the
responsible governmental unit. It is my understanding from the EQB that that is
you people. So that we can initiate same of these worksheets ourselves as
citizens by drawing up a petition and handing it over to the City Council or the
City Council can do it themselves. That you really need nothing else to start
this.
Councilman Johnson: I looked into that with Jo Ann. She and I went over the
rules one day on the phone.
(There was a tape malfunction at this point in the discussion.) I
13 1 -
1
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
PUBLIC HEARING: ERSBO ADDITION:
A. FINAL PLAT APPROVAL.
B. PUBLIC HEARING FOR VACATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY AND EASEMENTS.
IC. APPROVAL OF REVISED DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT. 1
Public Present:
IIRichard Ersbo - Applicant
Raman Roos - Representative for Applicant
IIMayor Chmiel: We'll act on each individual. Item (a) , which is a plat
approval. (b) is a public hearing for vacation of right-of-way and easements
II and (c) approval of revised development contract. I said this is a public
hearing. Paul?
I Paul Krauss: Very briefly Mr. Mayor, the applicant is requesting several
approvals relative to the replatting of the Ersbo Addition on Lake Lucy Road.
these include final plat, vacation of underlying plat and right-of-way and
approval of development contract. As you're aware, the City approved a previous
1 plat on this property last year but it was never filed. The current final plat
is consistent with the recommendations. Oh, I'm sorry. It was filed. Back up
there. It was filed but it was never developed. That's why we're vacating the
right-of-way. The final plat that's being requested tonight is consistent with
the recommendations of the City Council and the preliminary plat approval
process. Again, consideration of the development contract is also scheduled for
II tonight's meeting. As far as we can see, there are really no new issues
pertaining to this project and staff is recommending that the plat and vacation
be approved as requested subject to the conditions in the staff report.
II Mayor Chmiel: Is there anyone here who wishes to address this? As I said
before, this is a public hearing.
IICouncilwoman Dialer moved, Councilman Workman seconded to close the public
hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing for the
final plat approval was closed.
Councilman Workman: I move approval.
IICouncilman Johnson: Second. _
Councilman Boyt: That's 3(a)?
Mayor Chmiel: Item 3(a) . We're going to move on each one individually.
Councilman Boyt: Condition number 7. Under City Council recommendations, as
long as we're talking about this thing. It started out as 11 and got moved
under City Council recommendations to 7. I'm sure this is what staff meant to
I say. All trees 10 inches or more in caliper that are removed or damaged, need
to be replaced.
11 Mayor Chmiel: Clarification? Okay.
14
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989 1
Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to approve the final plat
for Ersbo First Addition #87-36 as shown on the plat dated December 4, 1989
subject to the following conditions:
1. Provide final detailed plans of the streets and utility improvements for
approval by the City Engineer.
2. Provide final erosion control plans acceptable to staff. Zvpe III erosion ,
control will be required along the western perimeter of the site adjacent to
the wetland. Prior to the initiation of grading, staff will walk the site
with the developer to mark out trees designated for preservation. Staff
will modify the plans as required to improve tree preservation efforts.
Drainage swales are to be provided around each of the haves. The berm
located in the Lake Lucy Road right-of-way is to be relocated onto Lot 1,
Block 1.
3. Provide final drainage plans for approval by City staff. Watershed District
approval is required.
4. Compliance with the conditions of the Wetland Alteration Permit 488-7.
5. At such time as a new public street is provided to the south of Lake Lucy
Road, the private driveway currently serving the existing home shall be
removed and the driveway shall access to the south off the new public
street.
6. Stake off the trees to be saved at the dripline.
7. All trees 10 inches or more in caliper that are removed or damaged need to
be replaced.
8. A 20 foot wide drainage and utility easement is required across the easterly ,
20 feet of Lot 1, Block 1 and also between Lots 2 and 3, Block 1.
9. The drainage and utility easement located on Lot 6, Block 1 should be '
extended westerly to the west line of Lot 7, Block 1. This easement is
necessary for an outlet pipe from the sediment pond to the wetland lying
west of the plat (see attached) . ,
10. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and
provide the City with the necessary financial sureties to guarantee the
proper installation of these improvements prior to commencement of any
construction or grading.
All voted in favor and the motion carried. '
B. PUBLIC HEARING FOR VACATION CF RIGHT-OF-WAY AND EASEMENTS. '
Mayor Chmiel called the public hearing to order.
Councilman Johnson moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to close the public
hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing on the
vacation of right-of-way and easements was closed.
15
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
II Resolution #89-140: Councilman Johnson moved, Councilman Workman seconded to
approve Vacation Request #89-12 to vacate street right-of-ways and utility
easements as plat of Ersbo Addition. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
r
C. APPROVAL OF REVISED DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT.
IIMayor Ch oriel called the public hearing to order.
Raman Roos: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. Just one comment on the last
r item regards to different areas in the development contract. Under the area of
Security, what we're trying to do is to adjust that amount of that security.
If we can work with staff on that item subject to some bids and the engineering
' estimates we had from Engelhardt who did the original platting. Can we have the
ability to work with staff on that?
Councilwoman Dirtier: Where's your problem?
rRaman Roos: It's quite high. It's about $30,000.00 over.
IIGary Warren: Those numbers came from Bill Engelhardt.
Raman Roos: I have Bill Englehardt's bid with me right now.
IIGary Warren: Unless he's got a new one but.
Councilman Johnson: It'd be easy to say we can give staff the authoritf to
determine the amount of the security. They've already determined it once. It's
going to be changing their minds.
iMayor C7miel: Is that alright?
Gary Warren: Yeah. We'll double check his numbers but.
r Ronan Roos: We had two different guys Engelhardt and I think that's where the
confusion is but I think we can iron that out. The second item then has to do
with, as I understand it from Paul, as far as the DNR we're not going to require
IIthat permit. Am I correct Paul?
Paul Krauss: I don't believe the DNR is going to require a permit no but you've
got to look at where that out structure is going to occur and if they require a
permit, you need that. If they don't, then let us know.
Raman Roos: So I can go by the contract and at least look at that step and
confer with you people as to whether it has to be accomplished or not then?
Councilman Johnson: Should you ask DNR. You should contact DNR.
IIRaman Roos: Absolutely, yes. We were talking last time they said we would not
need the DNR permit but if that'd be so, I will contact...
II
Mayor Ct��iel: Unless you beyond what Paul said.
r
16
r
City Council Meeting - December 18; 1989 1
Paul Krauss: When Raman brought up the security statements I was looking at
that and realized that we may have had a slight oversight here as well. On the
Vineland Forest plat we asked for same security to be devoted to tree
preservation and for replanting. Wle do have a condition or several conditions
relating to that but there are no financial guarantees provided as the
development contract is currently structured. In light of what we did on
Vineland Forest a few minutes ago, it may be appropriate to consider something
like in the order of $5,000.00 to $7,000.00 be allocated for tree removal, tree
replanting. That sort of thing. '
Mayor Ch oriel: Any discussion on that?
Councilman Workman: Can that be included with the discussions with Gary or do
we need to put something?
Paul Krauss: I think as long as you acknowledge that if we can work out a ,
number with Bill Engelhardt's final calculations, if we're allowed to work that
in, we will.
Gary Warren: It should be a line item and then we can work out the number after
that.
Councilman Johnson: There's one thing I want to get clarified here on the DNR
side of things. We are not saying you do not need a DNR permit.
Roman Roos: I understand that Jay. I
Councilman Johnson: Okay. I just want to make it perfectly clear that it is up
to the developer to ask the DNR if he needs a permit and the DNR makes the
determination. We don't make the determination for the DNR. That's kind of
what I heard Paul.
Paul Krauss: That's correct and we would want verification from them one way or '
the other before releasing the project to the work.
Roman Roos: And there's one final comment that Jay has to do with your comment I
to the Planning Commission. Regarding the possible rerouting of another road
parallel to Lake Lucy Road coming on the south side of the property and the tie
in of Lot 1, Block 6 which is the original house to this new roadway if it '
should happen in the future. I think the way the Planning Commission, I think
the way the Minutes read, that we would consider it at that point in time is
quite a ways in the future and surely should not be one of the development
contract items. I don't know how we can handle it.
Paul Krauss: I guess I would disagree with that. What we had said at the last
meeting was that we anticipated same point in the future there's a likelihood of
a road caning through along the south side of the property and in light of that
and a long term desire to have the number of curb cuts up on Lake Lucy Road
limited, that if a road is provided in such a way in the future that we felt it
should be an obligation to turn around the driveway at that time. If a road
cares through in the future and there's no such condition in the development
contract filed against:the property, there's no hook in the property owner at
that time.
17
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
Roman Roos: I don't think the intent is to hook the property owner. I think
the intent is if- it makes economical sense, that the property owner would hook
up to that road but as I said at the Planning Commission and I think at the
Council meeting, Jay you and I discussed this during that meeting. If it's
logical and if it makes sense, naturally the owner of that property would want
to hook up to it Paul. But we've got roughly about 500 foot of blacktop coming
off of Lake Lucy Road that is in in place and being used. It would be a shame
to destroy that kind of road, especially if the grade is very severe on the
other side. In other words, I don't think it should be a condition that we have
to hook up to that road.
Gary Warren: Mr. Mayor?
Mayor Ch iel: Gary.
Gary Warren: This was the same arguments were discussed I believe at the last
City Council meeting and I have the same recollection that Paul has here in that
' we, and the owner Mr. Ersbo was present also and agreed to the fact that we were
interested in limiting curb cuts. I think the way that it was posed is that if
it was feasible to put in that road, that the City would be interested in having
him connect to the new road. The arguments about he's got substantial blacktop
and this and that, were posed. We commented that he would probably have a
shorter driveway and maybe the maintenance costs would offset the whole scenario
but my recollection also is as Paul said. That was a condition of approval.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, I remember that also.
Councilman Johnson: One of the problems is the feasibility side of this fell
II out of the statement. It no longer says if it's feasible you'll do it. It says
you will do it. You shall do it so is there anyway to water it down.
II Paul Krauss: Well it could possibly be modified by leaving the feasibility
determination up to the City Council at such time as the road is made available.
Raman Roos: I think that's fair.
Councilman Johnson: Yes.
Mayor Chriel: I would be too.
Raman Roos: So that's a manor modification to the development contract and I
IIsuppose staff can handle that but I did want to bring it up to the Council.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you.
Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Dirtier seconded to close the Pub lic
hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing on the
revised development contract was closed.
Councilman Johnson: I move approval of item 3(c) with the amount of the
security to be determined'by City Staff. A line added on reforestation or tree
I removal security and replacement security. On it 8(1) being modified to
include the connection, if the City Council at the time of the new road
determines that it is feasible to connect, that he'll connect at that time.
18
City Council Meeting - Decemter 18, 1989
I
Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second? I'll second it.
Councilman Johnson moved, Mayor Chmiel seconded to approve the Revised
Development Contract for Ersbo Addition with the following changes: The amount '
of the security and a security on reforestation or tree removal and replacement
shall be determined by City Staff. Item 8(1) shall be modified to include if
the City Council at the time of the new road determines that it is feasible to
connect, the applicant shall connect at that time. All voted in favor and the
motion carried.
PUBLIC HEARING: VACATION OF LOT LINE UTILITY EASEMENT ALONG A PORTION OF LOT 1,
BLOCK 1, PLEASANT HILLS.
Gary Warren: The public hearing is to consider the vacation of the lot line,
utility easement along Lot 1 of Pleasant Hill Addition which is near the City's
water tower. The vacation is requested as a part of and as related to the
subdivision of the City's property just to the immediate north of the property.
In which case the property owner who was acquiring this parcel as requested that
since the lot line be eliminated, that there's no reason to have the utility
easement through the middle of the property as it would turn out in the
subdivision. There are no utilities currently located in there. The City would
receive a replacement easement along the new north boundary line of the property
such that the perimeter easements are continuous as required. From a City
perspective, we have no utilities there. We see no reason why the vacation
request should not be entertained. Also, the approval of the vacation would be
conditioned on the approval of the subdivision.
Councilman Workman: I'd move approval.
Councilman Johnson: Well let's see if anybody from the public, I can see same
of the neighbors here.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there anyone else who wishes to address this?
Councilman Johnson moved, Councilman Workman seconded to close the public
hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was
closed.
Councilman Johnson: The only thing I'd like to know is what's the progress
being made on the trail and getting the trail from, what is it Crestview or 65th
over to the junior high school. There's one of those fall between the crack
projects that needs much higher attention.
Gary Warren: Don, you're closer to that with Lori. The trail issue on the east
side. The Wolf property, etc.
Don Ashworth: I have a memorandum in my in basket. I'll have that in the next ,
Adtminstrative Section.. Basically it's saying that we're continuing to work with
Wolf and with Shivley'in developing an easement across those properties.
Councilman Johnson: I hope we learn a lesson from that one.
19 I
1
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
IIDon Ashworth: I hope we did too.
Councilman Johnson: That's before. Bill and I are painfully aware of this one
1 and I get painfully aware from it every Sunday since Kelly's goes to the same
church I do and he asks me about it every Sunday.
Mayor Chmiel: It's nice to hear you go to church every Sunday Jay.
Councilman Boyt: Way to get that in.
I Councilman Johnson: Sometimes 3 times on Sunday. I go to 2 services every
Sunday.
Councilman Boyt: It keeps getting better.
I Resolution #89-141: Councilman Johnson moved, Cbuncilman Workman seconded to
approve vacating the drainage and utility easement for a portion (192') of the
north property line of Lot 1, Block 1, Pleasant Hill as shown on the map
attached to the staff report dated December 12, 1989 and conditioned on the
II City's approval and recording of the Pleasant Hill 2nd Addition subdivision
scheduled for review by the City Council in January, 1990. All voted in favor
and the motion carried.
I
AWARD OF BIDS: FIRE DEPARTMENT FITNESS EQUIPMENT. ,,,
1 Councilman Johnson: I move approval.
Mayor Chriel: Is there a second?
IICouncilman Workman: Second.
' Councilman Boyt: I have a question.
Mayor Chmiel: Question. Discussion.
' Councilman Boyt: Normally, and I think over the last 3 years I've pretty
generally taken anything the fire department's requested and felt it was a
< bargain. I understand that this money is budgeted but I am amazed when I look
IIat the cost of a bicycle that goes nowhere.
Councilman Johnson: Yeah, but it's in a basement. You can't go anyplace.
IICouncilman Boyt: And a treadmill.
Mayor Chmiel: That doesn't go anywhere either.
IICouncilman Boyt: They've got a Schwin Aerodyne and my understanding of this is
that, and we've probably got somebody from the Fire Department here that maybe
I can talk about this but from the standpoint of an exercise bike and what an
exercise bike does, my understanding is that that Aerodyne is sort of the top of
the line in terms of it's ability to withstand a lot of use and so I asked
myself, and I think those things sell for about $800.00. So I ask myself, what
20
City Council Meeting - December 18; 1989
is it that rakes this one worth $2,700.00? It seers to me like you could buy
several more exercise bikes for the same amount of money and have a quality
piece of machinery there as well.
Mayor Chmiel: This one I think probably checks out your pulse, pressure, and 1
everything else as you're going along, as many of then do.
Councilman Boyt: Well you know in reading the description on it, I gathered '
that it has all sorts of bells and whistles on it. I don't want to get into the
business of telling the Fire Department how they should do their exercise. I'm
just absolutely amazed that they'd put $4,800.00 in one treadmill when I think
you can get a very substantial one for less than half of that.
Mayor Chmiel: True. I don't know what the maintenance and upkeep are on them
but maybe that's a part of it.
Councilman Boyt: I don't know, they have a study committee that does this. I
guess I'm a little disappointed if we don't have anybody from the Fire
Department here. That they just autocratically assure that we're not going to
ask any questions about this.
Councilman Johnson: Jim was here a second ago.
Don Ashworth: I'm surprised. I had seen Jim as well. I think if, I had talked
with Dale on the item. I'm not quite sure, normally they do have someone here.
. I can tell you that they did look at a number of different manufacrers. In
- fact I was invited over to the department when they had brought in"various of
the manufacturers. They had also brought in Dr. Welsh and he had helped the
committee look at sane of the different pieces of equipment. I can't answer
your question. I don't know how this piece compares to the one that they looked
at. One of the companies is a Chanhassen company, right in the business park.
Why this piece came up over the others, I'm not sure.
Councilman Johnson: I like the pulse monitoring and stuff. When you're
exercising alone, it's important to have, be able to monitor your pulse easily
and that kind of stuff. When you're in an athletic club and you've got all the
professionals around, or other people around, it's less important.
Mayor Chniel: Most bikes have about a year warranty. This one has a 3 year as
well. It's probably another additional portion to the cost.
Councilman Boyt: Well I can assure you that none of us could wear out that '
Schwin Aerodyne. That's an industrial grade bike and it's, I'm guessing but I
think it's right around $800.00.
Don Ashworth: The Fire Department is meeting this evening. Maybe that's one of
the reasons, maybe there's somebody going to be over after their business
meeting but if you want to table this item, I can go out and I could quick call
and make sure that they're here let's say within a half hour, hour.
Mayor Chrael: Is that your desire?
Councilman Boyt: I'd like to talk to them.
11
21
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
Councilman Workman: I've had sane discussions with them. I talked to both
Jim McMahon and Chief Gregory about a lot of this because I know they were
sensitive to this item caning up. I mean not sensitive in that they thought
'
it'd be a big problem but that it was a lot of money and that they were trying
to be frugal about it. There's not a lot of room down in that lower roam. You
couldn't put 6 of those bikes in and do much else so there's not a whole lot of
roan. I think they were going for the quality and not the quantity with a lot
of different machines. I have talked to them. I know that they were sensitive
about it and they were shocked themselves about how much all this stuff costs.
1 Councilman Johnson: They're driving to Iowa to pick it up to save 10%.
Councilman Workman: Again, I think it is budgeted and it's something that we
1 planned for. I don't think they're being, I don't think they were trying to be
excessive is what I'm saying, in my discussions with them.
I Mayor Chmiel: What you're saying is the difference between a Yugoslavian car as
opposed to a General Motors car?
Councilman Boyt: Why don't we ask them to coin over sometime and when they show
' up amend the agenda and talk about it. Would that be fair?
Mayor Chmiel: Fine. We'11 table item 5 and bring it back up at the end of the
meeting.
II YOUTH DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION CONTRIBUTION.
Mayor Chmiel: This is going to also be tabled.
IICouncilman Boyt: I'd like to vote it down.
Don Ashworth: I wonder if Margie Karjalahti or one of the others were sent
' notice on this.
Councilman Johnson: If they were Margie would be here.
IIDon Ashworth: I would have guessed that she would as well.
Mayor Chmiel: I would say that we should table rather than vote it down until
IIwe get some more information on this.
Councilman Johnson: I'd rather table it too because I want to see if, this
I youth development commission is a good thing for the County. There seems to be
some problems on how they're financing it. I think it's good to bring it up to
them but it's something that I think is extremely necessary here in the County.
II As you all know, I'm involved in the youth sports here and the coordination of
youth sports between groups is terrible. This could act as part of that and if
they could help the youth sports, it can help all other aspects of our youth
community. But being split between two school districts has really messed us
over on this one. l
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, that's right.
1
22
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989 1
Don Ashworth: Is there anything more staff should be doing on this as far as, I
tried to get input from Minnetonka School District but I haven't gotten much
from them.
Councilman Hoyt: I liked your memo. I think your memo really hits at the key
issues here. If it makes sense to table this, why don't we table it and go on.
Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to table action on the Youth
Development Commission Contribution for more information. A11 voted in favor
and the motion carried.
ZCVING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REGARDING OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING TO PROVIDE '
DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS, INCREASED PARKING REQUIREMENTS IF WARRANTED BY SITE PLAN
REVIEW, AND TO REQUEST ENCLOSED PARKING FOR TWO VEHICLES FOR MULTIPLE FAMILY
DWELLINGS, FIRST READING. '
Paul Krauss: At the last meeting the City Council first reviewed the proposed
off-street parking and loading ordinance. The draft ordinance is a
comprehensive approach designed to deal with all aspects of site plan parking
and loading issues. At the last meeting there was extensive discussion of the
proposed parking standard for multi-family dwellings. At the present time 2
parking stalls are required, 1 of which must be enclosed. As currently drafted,
the new ordinance would require the following. For efficiency and 1 bedroom
apartments, we would continue to require 2 stalls, 1 of which must be enclosed.
For 2 bedroom or larger units we would require 2 stalls, 1 1/2 of which on a
gross basis moist be enclosed. Let's say if you had a 100 unit building, all 2
bedroom apartments, you'd have to have 150 enclosed parking stalls. There's
also a visitor parking requirement proposed of 1/4 stall per unit. That would
be done in exterior parking. The City Council continued the matter to give an
opportunity for additional feedback. Accordingly staff sent notices to the
owners of multi-family residential property in this city and notified the of
tonight's meeting. Staff is continuing to recommend that the staff ordinance be
approved as proposed. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thanks Paul. Is there anyone who wishes to address this proposed
zoning ordinance amendment? I would like to have you just state your name and
your address and I'd like to sort of limit this to about 10 minutes each.
Don Patton: Can I do less than that? 1
Mayor Chmiel: I'll take it.
Don Patton: My name is Don Patton. I appeared before you before with the Lake '
Susan Hills Partnership which is on 17 south of the city. We do not have any
multiple family currently under development but we'd certainly anticipate
something will be happening as the development maturity in the City is coming
around. I guess the reason that I'm appearing before you is to oppose
philosophically what's happening. As a part of development, and I've developed
almost 15,000 units throughout most of the cities of the metropolitan area over
the last 20 years. The thing that's happening and good developers, bad
developers, whatever, but we've just continued to have a creeping regulation, a
cook book of development. The thing that's done with the planning departments I
23 1
11 City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
saying this is what has to happen to the lots, as fax as sizes go. With the
parks people wanting more and more. With engineering requiring more and more
' and the Fire Department and the DNR and the Corps of Engineers, etc. etc. We've
continued to drive up cost and I as being in something that you can't legislate
called the market. You can't legislate the market and there's a lot of people
in the Twin Cities that are not low income. They're medium income getting into
' the older, transitioning out of high technology that are having job problems.
You also have a lot of people that are in the early retirement situation from
companies. I think that we can go so far and at same point we have to stop with
' legislating what the market is because you're not going to legislate what the
market is. One of the most desirable sections, if I can call it that, that
everyone says I'd love to have it in my community could never be built in the
' Twin Cities anymore. Anywhere because it's legislated out. The lot size
doesn't fit. The green space doesn't fit. Nothing fits. The County Club of
Edina, it couldn't be built anymore but every city would love to have it in
their community. It doesn't happen because city councils...allow it. The thing
that it's done, it's continued to block creativity. As a developer, I can't
cone in with much creative because there's so many rules that you have to abide
by so we're just going to have the same bland stuff that we've always had. I
don't think that's good for any of us. I think you need two, in same market and
again I emphasize the word market which you can't legislate with anything. Maybe
you need 2. Maybe you need 3 but I think the developer in choosing the market
that he's going to care before you with a project needs to make that decision
and not the planning department or the City Council or the Planning Commission.
Thank you.
K
Rick Murray: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. I'm Rick Murray. I happen to
' live in this community as well as do a little developing here. I got a copy of
the ordinance the other day and went through it. I guess what I'd like to speak
' to, I won't take anywhere near the 10 minutes but the fact that Chanhassen in
this market that Don just mentioned, that Chanhassen restriction wise is
stepping right up to the top of requirements for multi-family housing. We're
already there and there are a lot of communities that require 2 attached single
' family dwellings or 2 attached garages for single family dwellings. I think
that after going through both of the drafts, the ordinances and what the
Planning Commission came out with, it's fairer however it's right at the top of
what you folks are going to compete for. Whether you like it or not or whether
we like it or not as developers. We only have a certain amount of dollars and
everybody's competing for that. Communities are competing for the best
=developers to care forward with their dollars in their communities. When you
I set standards that are beyond what the norm is, you're discouraging the best
developers because they're going to go where the market is. If you address
those markets and you say, these dollars are going to go to serve the middle
income market and middle income is surprisingly low. It's amazing. Middle
income now in the Twin Cities, median income is somewhere around $25,000.00 to
$28,000.00. I don't know what this year's figure is but amazingly low. Back in
college I can remember trying to rent apartments while I was going to school.
Even after school. $20.00 made a big difference and that's about $20.00-$25.00
is about the cost of that extra garage. If you made both stalls were going to
be enclosed. That makes a difference. I got the situation right now in
Excelsior. We own 12 doubles over there. One of the buildings has a double
garage. That building is $25.00 more than the other buildings if you're going
to rent them. That building's vacancy is twice that of the other units.
Anyway, in competing for development dollars, as a community must do, it affects
24
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989 1
renters. It affects townhouse owners. The qualifying, if I did my arithmetic I
right, the qualifying difference between a single car enclosed or 1 1/2 enclosed
versus that other half space that I think the original ordinance had in it,
canes to about $2,500.00 a year. $2,500.00 to same of us isn't a lot of money
but I can renenter when it was an awful lot of money. I didn't came from a
background where, my neighbors generally liked me wherever I lived and I think
that might still be the case, most of then. Anyway, we weren't a detriment to
the community and there's a lot of people like that that axe out there that need
a place to live. Who does the higher cost affect? It doesn't affect people who
can make a choice of where they want to live but it affects the younger and it 11 affects the older. People who really don't have the advantage of raking that
kind of choice. I would suggest that Chanhassen needs a broad maarket. We're a
developing community here. We have the advantage of setting rules and
ordinances and a picture that would attract people. Developers, quality
development, development dollars and people who would want to live here. We've
done a tremendous job downtown but I think, I don't think we want to segregate
our markets to say we don't want this class or this category of people here. I
think you want to keep your markets open to everyone and rake a spot for them.
Not that Chanhassen can be hate for everybody. I'm not suggesting that but I'm
suggesting that the opportunity should be there. That it could be. This
ordinance snacks of architectural censorship. I agree with Don. In the last 12
years that I've been developing, we have lost a lot of the creativity that at
one time we could exercise ourselves in that now are, it's pretty structured.
You're in this zone. This is exactly what you do. There's a lot of merit to
doing that. I've seen a lot of reasons for doing it in communities where I've
gone in to look for property. I think that regulation is good but thin it's
got to be metered with discretion. An ordinance that sets out this is how it 11 should be, or this is exactly what it can be and only that, removes a lot of the
discretion and that's what this body is for. I know that you don't like that
because the approval process, if it's cut and dry it's real easy. I know I've
said before that I like rules being set out verbatim but if you're going to
verbatim, if you're going to take and segregate your markets so there's no
flexibility between markets like this intends to do or I think this starts to
do, you're really condensing the amount of people or the market that we can
develop for. Then if you go beyond that and you say okay we're going to address
markets. Feasibility of projects, our company happens to be involved both in
the developrment section of the marketplace and the financing section of the
marketplace. If there is, the worse projects I've seen are projects that a
developer thought were going to work out okay and ended up not. You might get
people who are trying to compete with other communities that have lesser
standards. I'm not talking about lesser quality now. I'm talking about lesser '
standards. Our State Building Code and the City ordinances and building codes,
those standards all remain the same if they're reasonably applied by officials.
State officials and City officials. So I'm not addressing quality. Just
addressing the ordinance standards. If we're competing with other communities
that have lesser ordinance standards and the same quality, the developments that
are in those other communities and if you go through your list there, I think
the staff's pretty well laid them out for the western suburbs and the southern
suburbs. You're directly competing with the sites that are available in Eden
Prairie. You're directly carpeting with sites available in Plymouth. Sites
available in Minnetonka. We're the most restrictive here, or we would be the
most restrictive here. If someone had a site in Chanhassen to develop and they
weren't being competitive by that $20.00 or by that $1,200.00 or $2,500.00 fo ra
townhouse, people are going to go to the, they're going to go to the lesser I
25 1
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
IIexpensive site. Not lesser quality but lesser expensive site and they're going
to spend their money there. The worse thing for a community is when a lender
I cones in and fills the units up because he's not going to have anywhere near the
leasing criteria or the sales criteria that that original landowner had. Those
are the worse projects I've seen. Now you might pass an ordinance like this
that sets those standards or very structured standards. Very limited standards
I but I would suggest that you're still going to compete with the sites that are
available. Eden Prairie, Minnetonka, Plymouth, Maple Grove. If you go around
the other way, you're really not going to compete with Edina. You know the
II average sale price of a townhouse in Edina? It's $275,000.00 last year. We
can't fool ourselves. We're not going to compete in that market here yet. Don
mentioned something about maturity of markets. We've got to get there. I don't
II think that we're quite there yet. I'd suggest that you consider, there are sane
very fine changes in here. I don't think the attached garages are one but
Paul's pointed out several that the old ordinances skipped or were overlooked. I
think that same of those bear merit. I don't think that the number of enclosed
IIparking spaces bears merit.
Councilman Johnson: Rick, are you primarily going for the enclosed parking
II spaces? The defining of how big a parking space is, 1/4 for a visitor's parking
spot, you don't have any problems with a lot of those? It's primarily the 1 1/2
enclosed?
Rick Mlrray: Yes.
Councilman Johnson: Thank you. •K 1 1
IAl Klingelhutz: Al Klingelhutz, Chanhassen residence. I'm here as a landowner
in Chanhassen. Possibly getting sane of this type of zoning on my land sometime
I in the future when TH 212 and TH 101 intersect my farm. I guess my biggest
concern is, have you ever thought of affordable housing? Affordable housing to
the people that work in Chanhassen. The young people that haven't got a
$40,000.00 a year job at this time that have to start somewhere down in the
I $20,000.00 to $22,000.00 or even $15,000.00 to $18,000.00. Are we going to zone
ourselves out of this kind of a place for our children and sane of the people
that work in same of our industrial plants which we're really accumulating quite
I rapidly in Chanhassen. Most of those people that work in quite a few of these
places are down in the $6.00-$6.50 an hour range and they can't afford to even
buy a $70,000.00 house much less add another $10,000.00 onto a unit of a quad
II `unit or an apartment unit that is being sold out in individual sized units per
family. I guess I'd ask you to really take that into consideration when you're
asking for 2 enclosed units. Off street parking I can understand that but if
the street is wide enough in a residential area and these same streets are in an
I apartment area and you allow the street parking in a residential area, what's so
wrong with allowing some of that for guests and visitors in an apartment area
because these people are actually paying the same assessment of front footage as
I the people in the single family residential area. I've seen several apartments
in Chanhassen that have been in existence a long time and I don't think there's
been really many problems. I know of about 5 of them that have no enclosed
parking and they seem to be doing quite well. They're normally at 95% capacity.
IIWe've got a lot of our older residents living in them, and as the city gets older l
and the people in it get older, we're going to have a lot more of that coring up
and these people are going to want a place to live in Chanhassen. Thank you.
I
II26
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989 1
Mayor Chnmiel: Is there anyone else? If hearing none, any discussion. 1
Councilman Johnson: I would think it's pretty plain from what I said the last
time that I'm against the 1 1/2 parking spots. I like most of the rest of it. '
There's other parts of, on-street parking you can only do it overnight certain
parts of the year. It's not something you can do year round here which as usual
as it canes into winter we need to remind everybody of before the snowplows get '
out there but this weekend before last I went to a housing conference sponsored
by the Lutheran Church here in the Twin Cities on this and this type of
ordinance is one of the things that they're fighting. In order to maintain life
cycle housing and housing for everybody, it is this type of ordinance that makes
it to where people cannot afford the housing. We need the housing in this town
to fit the employees in this town, our kids as they grow up and want to move
out. Right now if our kids want to do it, there's a couple apartments available
but if they're full, then they've got to go to some other town. They can't
afford to live in Chanhassen. I'm going to vote against this because I think 1
enclosed parking spot seems to be the standard of all the other suburbs. I
think we should be setting minimum standards, not maximum standards. We go to 2
or 1 1/2, I don't think you'll ever see anybody go to 2.6 or anything bigger
than what our standards are. I'd hate to feel that we are being more exclusive
than Edina, given all the jokes that people make about Edina being exclusive.
I'd hate for us to start becoming the brunt of those jokes. We have people in
this community who are on minimum income and we have a lot of jobs in this
corcmunity. Mr. Carlson from United Mailing, Instant Webb, Victory Envelope, was
in here arguing for affordable housing one time. Very few of his employees live
here. They come in to work but they can't afford to live here. Items your
project he was arguing for.
Don Patton: More than the young people, it's people who are retiring on reduced
incomes. It's the spectrum of the age, not just the young and the people that
are starting. 1
Councilman Johnson: I agree with you. men I said the life cycle and I talked
about youth, knowing everybody here has kids but Don, both Don's here are
getting older quickly.
Mayor Chtmiel: That's maturity.
•
Councilman Johnson: Oh maturity. Maturing quickly. And they may be on fixed
incomes pretty soon. But true, the elderly in our society is more and more
becoming pushed out of housing. It's becoming a problem. If you do go, when I
was campaigning 3 years ago, going through the apartments out here. The
apartments without the garages, it was very high percentage of elderly, retired
people in those apartments. ,
Councilman Boyt: Which ones don't have garages?
Councilman Johnson: The ones on than View over here. All they have is parking
lots. There's about 4 buildings over there. 5? Our ex-mayor used to live over
in one of those. Still does. I haven't followed where he's gone in the last 2
years. I think it's pry important for this city not to, I think the R-12 is a
district where people are going to be moving into start or ending up when they
get onto the fixed income and they can no longer afford our constantly rising
taxes and everything in this area, or in the case of this year hopefully
27
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
Ideclining taxes slightly. But yeah, no such thing as massive declining. I
still, I'm going to argue against it but I'll let you guys argue for it now.
' Councilman Boyt: Do you want to hear the other side? I'll give it a go. I
don't know if this will prevail. I've argued every time Jerome Carlson has come
in here and said give me housing for somebody who's making $13,000.00 a year,
that unfortunately that housing doesn't exist.
•
Councilman Johnson: Not at $13,000.00.
Councilman Boyt: Show me a house that somebody can buy on $13,000.00 a year and
that's what $6.50 an hour works out to. The other thing I think that the
Council I hope keeps in mind is that residents are not demanding, asking for,
hinting at the desire to have this kind of housing. Now I'm not saying that we
shouldn't have it but there are better ways to get it than allowing people to
build to a reduced standard. I think we'd find that when we've made lots
' smaller, it hasn't resulted in lower house prices. It's resulted in more
problems for us. I think that what we want to do on the Council is give people
the highest standard that we can. I think that in Minnesota, and all you have
' to do is go out tonight and try to start your car, we have a situation in which
during part of the year having a garage may pass beyond the desirable into the
necessary. We've set for single family homes in Chanhassen 2 car garages are
the minimum. I think we ought to say the same thing for multiple family. I
Ithink that if we don't, we're in essence not offering that option to people.
We're forcing them to take 1 car. If they've got 2 car garages and they don't
want to use it, maybe they can use it for storage. Maybe they can rentVt out
' to a friend but I suspect that if we went around and checked how many of these
apartment dwellers have 2 cars, we'd find that a very large percentage of them
have 2 cars. I'd like to see them have the ability to put those into parking.
II I think that when we talk about, and I read the Planning Commission Minutes in
which they talked about the average income in Chanhassen, those figures are so
far from reality that I would consider them to misleading, and maybe
intentionally misleading. The Planning Commission, Mr. Johnson gave a figure of
II $29,000.00 as the median income in Chanhassen. In 1984 it was $39,686.00
according to the Met Council.
ICouncilman Johnson: The median was $39,000.00?
Councilman Boyt: The median was $39,686.00. Now if you want to compare that
I with surrounding communities, it was $43,000.00 in Eden Prairie. It was
$47,000.00 in Edina. Now let's suppose that over the last 10 years that that's
gone up $10,000.00. The last figure that I heard but the Met Council didn't
have it officially, was that the median income in Chanhassen was $50,000.00.
II I'm saying that one of the things that the City Council does is it determines
the flavor of a community. I think that when people live in apartments in
Chanhassen, that we ought to do everything we can to be sure that that apartment
gives them as high a standard of living as possible. Now we can choose to let
them build to the lowest possible standard but I'll bet you that that money goes
to the developer. That money goes to a quick sale for people who are hard
II pressed to find a home. I agree. But I don't see Chanhassen residents saying
we want to be that kind of-community. We want to be Noah's Ark to the western
suburbs. I think people are saying protect my property values. Keep my taxes
as low as you can and relatively low priced housing does not keep their taxes
low. We subsidize those people in terms of taxes. So I think there's a couple
1 28
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989 1
of reasons why we should do this. N tuber one of which it gives people something
they need, which is they need a place to put their car, or their cars which I
think is frequently the case. I think we should go for the 2 car covered garage
standard for multiple family homes in Chanhassen. Whether that carries the day
or not, there's I think a less controversial issue as well and that is that we
talked a few months ago about daycare parking requirements. Out of the whole
list of requirements in there for parking, daycare was overlooked so I think we
ought to amend the parking requirements to include something for daycare
facilities.
Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor. Councilman Boyt spoke to me about that earlier this
evening. I do have a proposed standard for daycare parking that was based on
sate survey work that I had done of a number of daycare facilities. It works
out to a requirement for 1 stall for each 6 children of licensed capacity. With
your average daycare center which has about 110 children, you're looking at
about usually 19-20 stalls. The problem with daycare centers is that they have
a rush. Everybody comes at 7:30 in the morning or at 5:30 in the evening and
you need to have enough capacity so that people aren't parking out in the
streets when they have to pick up and drop off their kids. In my experience,
that standard seems to work pretty well. '
Councilman Boyt: So I would like to see this rather lengthy amendment modified
to include parking standard for daycare.
Mayor Chmiel: I'm not sure whether I want to go into that yet. Looking at
daycares that I've seen and watched and observed, I don't find that5o real
problem of having 1 stall per each 6 children. I've observed one on...sat back
and watched that on a constant basis and this was when we were discussing it
sometime ago.
Councilman Boyt: I remember well. ,
Mayor Chmiel: That flow was not there. Not there. I watched another and that
flow wasn't there. It seemed like they were more staggered than what you're
saying. It wasn't congested.
Councilman Boyt: Well I think that we've gone through here and I couldn't think
of anything else that we haven't put a standard in here. Bowling alleys,
churches, service stations. We should work out a standard for daycare centers,
whatever that's going to be and put it in here. 1
Councilman Johnson.: Send that back to Planning Cc fission.
Councilman Boyt: Well if we're going to amend something this lengthy, we should '
get that taken care of somewhere between now and the final reading I would
think. The other point, you know I watched something right outside my back
door. When than Vista was approved shortly before Saddlebrook was approved
Rick, I was concerned about the price of homes there. My bet is that you felt
pressure from them because as I understood it, you were planning an upscale
development from, what than Vista was going to be in Saddlebrook but I don't
think you've been able to do that like you planned to do because of all the
competitive pressure from than Vista.
Rick Mirray: It's not only than Vista...Joe Miller homes. 1
29 1
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
Mayor Chmiel: Rick, would you like to care up to the microphone because we
can't pick this up for the Minutes.
' Rick Murray: I guess without naming a lot of names but there's been a lot of
competitive pressure in Chanhassen and it has been for lower priced lots. We
' were getting near, for the size of lot that we were offering, we were getting
near top dollar for those lots from builders. Chan Vista was tough competition
and so was Lake Susan.
Councilman Boyt: And I suspect that what happens is people build to our lowest
standard. I mean not all the people but we've got to face it, there is going to
be economic pressure on our lowest standard wherever we set it. In this regard,
when I think about multiple dwelling apartment buildings, we have quite a few
buildings that have 1 car garages or no car garages. I think it's time that we
started building them with 2 car garages and move the standard up.
Rick Murray: Do you need the toughest standard in the Midwest to move it up?
Councilman Boyt: Maybe.
Rick Murray: Find me a community that has 2 covered garages in the Midwest.
Councilman Boyt: Well Rick I know from the survey that Paul did that this would
be the toughest standard.
II 4
Rick Murray: Not only in the Cities now. Let's expand it. C find one. I
don't know of one Bill.
' Councilman Johnson: Engineering wise, could you build one easily?
Rick Murray: Well you'd have to spread things out. That's what I mean when I
said censorship of, architectural censorship. You're really going to be limited
when you start putting all of those.
Councilman Johnson: You can't build a 3 story apartment.
Rick Murray: If 2 stories are parking.
Councilman Johnson: Dig a deep hole.
Rick Murray: You know you are definitely creating the market. With that
standard you're saying that this is the price.
' Councilman Johnson: I think it's your hill R-12.
IRick Murray: I only own a little piece of it.
Councilman Johnson: You sold most of yours.
IIMayor Chmiel: Any other discussion? Tom?
Councilman Workman: Well Rick, you sold a little piece of your southern part of
Saddlebrook there over to Dean? I think what we're all kind of forgetting about
1 30
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989 ,
is maybe why all this all came up. I think a lot of why this all care up was
because I don't think the City Council or the Planning Cbrmission or any, Park
and Rec Commission, anybody felt comfortable about what was going to be built up
on top of a very prominent hill in Chanhassen and so people started running
around trying to figure out a way maybe that it wouldn't occur. I'm not sure
Dean how many people you were trying to get to have in there but you were trying
to get about a half an acre of park in there with several hundred people in
there which anywhere in the midwest would be laughable I think. So it is a two
sided, we have a lot of developers in here tonight and there's a developer's
standpoint and we're coming up on at least my one year anniversary on the
Council. I still consider myself fairly new to the job but I do know one thing
and that's be careful when a developer's caning in. I was telling somebody on
the phone today that one word that I've heard quite a bit over this past year
was free. It's free. We can build this. We can do it. It's free. You know
nothing's for free but we have Frontier Hanes you know. Even with all of the
guards that you put on, if I could be blunt, people are getting it. I won't be
blunt. I live in a townhouse. I've said that everytime this doggone issue's
cane up. I live in a townhouse. I thank Cod that I've got a 2 car garage and
$25.00 is a big deal to me. It is to my neighbors. I live in a quad. The
other 3 people in the quad are retired. If they don't have 2 cars, they've got
it packed with firewood or something else. On the other hand, the twinhates
right near by also have 2 car garages. They've got boats and trailers and
pick-up trucks and I cannot get down the street. I can't get down the street.
I don't mean to keep anybody, as I repeat this, I don't mean to keep anybody
from sharing the beauty of our community. As I mentioned before, I've got same
questions about apartment buildings but when it comes to townhouses r and single
family homes, you've got a lot more stuff than you've got when you' re living in
an apartment. When you move out of an apartment, you throw the shoes out that
you haven't worn since the last move. Or whatever. You keep moving it because
you're moving. I just think that a lot of the discussion of philosophy about
atter,pting to keep people out of the market, $70,000.00 hare is a pretty
r inexpensive home I think these days.
Councilman Boyt: Unfortunately. '
Councilman Workman: Yeah. I think we're talking about going to $50,000.00 and
less hrn,es. Then it became a matter of a prominent area in our city. We've got
Readi-Mix in one end and we're going to have a parking lot on the other. It
sort of became that thing so everybody got real nervous about that and I think
that's where a lot of this came from. Maybe it needs some fine tuning so that
we don't become the hard guys. I'm by no means living down by Herb or anything.
You know I'm living in a townhouse. I mean I'm maybe a part of the group that
you're talking about here but I don't intend to stay in it either but to go
lower and to see lower, much lower than that starts to get into an area where I
think sane of the ideas that Bill has had start to make a little bit of sense.
To start saying we're trying to divy up the categories of people or pick on
these people or the homeless and the downtrodden and we kind of get shoved down
this hole. I don't feel comfortable being pushed in that direction. I don't
think it's fair. Again, when a developer canes in and says he wants to ram
several hundred people into an area and provide a jungle gym on the quarter to
half an acre piece oE,parkland, I don't think anybody thinks that's fair and
that's where this whole thing has taken off I think because we felt that maybe
we were being taken advantage of which wouldn't have been the first time.
31 1
ICity Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
IIMayor Chmiel: Ursula?
Councilwoman Dimler: I have emotions both ways here and then I have sane
II thoughts so I'll concentrate on my thoughts. I appreciate all the comments that
were made about keeping the environment competitive. I do believe that we
should do that. I also believe that maybe we are setting the highest standard
here within the State but I guess my main concern is that, you know and I've
heard a lot of comments about affordable housing and I do agree that Chanhassen
should have affordable housing. I don't want to keep low income people out but
II I guess my question is, what's low income? Would it be under 30? Is that kind
of what everybody thinks is low income?
Mayor Chmiel: Probably so. $30,000.00 I think.
IICouncilman Boyt: If you go with Jerome Carlson's $6.50 an hour, that comes out
to $13,000.00 a year.
ICouncilman Johnson: Almost everybody in that group's got at least 2 incomes in
their household. A lot of them have 2 jobs.
1 Councilwoman Dimler: Okay but my point is that I think that we are already
precluding the very low income by our tax base. They just simply can't afford
the taxes here in Chanhassen and therefore we're not even going to be targeting
' them even if you do build it $10,000.00 cheaper by not putting in the 2 garages.
Those people can't live here because of the tax base. And I do wonder sometimes
if the difference between 60 and 70, the low income people, if they can't afford
I 70, I wonder if they can afford 60. So although I agree with all your comments,
when I'm looking at the figures here I just, I don't see that the really low
income could afford to live here anyway and then I would go with building the
higher standard because I think it's more a safety issue than a profit issue
I here.
Dean Johnson: A lot of what they've been talking about is because of me and
also stuff that I guess I've given, I guess I'd like to go over it a little bit.
Same of the comments here I guess hinge on this. This is the overlay or the
transparency I showed you. This is a 1989 survey. This was done this year.
II This was done by the Minnesota Labor and Economic Development and this comes
from a letter that they put out on your community. These are the types of jobs
you have in your community and are getting in your community because of
`Rosemount and the Press and other things. Minimum wage $3.75 is $7,800.00.
II Shipping clerk, $8.10, $16,000.00. These are the low end and the high end that
was done on that list that was made up on your community. $25,000.00, when you
get to the high end here, your accountants and tool and die makers. Okay?
' They've determined that $29,000.00 is the difference between high income and all
the other incomes. Moderate, median and low income. At $25,000.00, those
people cannot afford a $70,000.00 loan. At $60,000.00, instead of $23,000.00-
$25,000.00, those people just qualify so you should realize that low income or
average income isn't $70,000.00. And what you're saying can't afford the
$70,000.00 and I admit that. The project that I'm talking to you isn't going to
take everybody on this list.
Councilwoman Dimler: Very few.
i32
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989 1
Dean Johnson: It's going to pick up about 3 or 4 groups basically. What do you
want to do? Do you want to cut that machinist out of there? Is it fair to cut
that machinist out of there who's single and the only inane he has is what he
makes at that plant in Rosemount. 1
Councilwoman Dialer: Well on the other hand, housing should not take up more
than what is it, 35% of your income? So we don't want to stretch these people
either you know.
Dean Johnson: But that's what qualifying is for. That's what mortgage bankers
are for and that's why FBA, sets top ends and low ends of debt and qualifying
ratios so within those they take into those things.
Councilwoman Dialer: But they just barely make it. '
Dean Johnson: Not all of them. Sane of them have gift letters. May have came
out of a divorce with $5,000.00 so they can put it down so they can qualify for
those types of things. All of that stuff enters into this. The other thing I
wanted to show is something that Bill said. I don't know what you're average
income is in Chanhassen. The $39,000.00 you know I'm sure you know...
Councilman Boyt: Well you quoted it to the Planning Commission. ,
_ Dean Johnson: No. I quoted $22,385.00 and that was put out by the Carver, or
excuse me. $21,112.00 and that was the median wage in Carver County is what I
had.
Councilman Boyt: When? I
Dean Johnson: That was from that same thing.
Councilman Boyt: No, if your statistic is within 7 or 8 years of today, I'd be I
amazed. The Metro Council doesn't quote a number anything like that.
Councilman Johnson: Carver County?
Councilman Boyt: Carver County is surprisingly not a lot different than
Chanhassen.
Dean Johnson: This cares out from the Minnesota Jobs and Training and
Employment and Wages. 1
Councilman Boyt: And what year?
Dean Johnson: I don't have the year written in this report. The other thing I
is, I guess in my project, because I know a lot of this hinged on my project,
was when we were talking about the park. If the issue is, the reason that you
didn't want my project and all these subsequent things that happened and now
you're looking at making strict zoning ordinances so nobody else can go on it.
When I first came with it, staff you know, because of your park director and
stuff like this, recommended that I give cash and put in this playground
equipment. I never offered to have it for a ground or I never tried to put park
equipment you know in one corner of the project because that's what I wanted to
do. The staff from the park staff, the park commission, recommended cash and
33
1
11 .City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
IIthis park equipment so we concurred with it. I have 3 staff reports that say
this. Then they changed their mind and went to land and so now we've given
land. We did not try to cane out and say we're trying to get away with
II anything. We were going to be paying fees and putting in the park equipment.
And then it changed to land so now we are trying to give land so at least that
should be clarified. That's all I have to say.
IICouncilwoman Dianler: I have one more comment. I brought out last time under I
think it was Section 20-1123. It's on page 5 about the lighting. I wonder if
II anything was looked into there. We were going to look into the number of lumins
or foot candles.
Mayor Oriel: Foot candles.
ICouncilwoman Dimler: Page 5. Under lighting, it's Section 20-1123. Paul, was
anything looked into there? I had requested that we specify a certain amount of
1 lu ination.
Paul Krauss: Councilwoman Dialer, no. I really haven't looked at that. Now
this ordinance is structured to minimize impacts, off site impacts from lighted
I parking lots. It doesn't get at I think the issue that you have about the
safety of those parking lots. Possibly if this ordinance passes tonight in the
first draft, I can talk to Jim Chaffee and see if there's a minimum standard for
lighting that's an accepted standard. I'm not aware of one if there is.
Councilwoman Dialer: Okay. I would like that researched because the cc ,ents
I that I've had that the parking lots that are already existing are not wall
enough lit.
Paul Krauss: We also do circulate plans as we get then, to the various
1 departments in the city and it's been my experience in the past in reviews such
as that that you get public safety input. If you have underground parking lots,
that they want theta well lighted. That they want TV surveillance and that kind
of thing.
Councilwaman Dialer: You're not aware then or we have another ordinance that
covers lighting in parking lots?
Paul Krauss: I don't think we do. This is where you probably should put it.
IICouncilwoman Dialer: Would you check into it?
Paul Krauss: Sure.
ICouncilman Johnson: Ursula, trying to get more lighting into a parking lot and
then we look at the new shopping center where we're trying to bring the lights
down lower. We're at odds with each other there.
ICouncilwoman Dimler: I know but that's why I thought it'd be good here. This
is just multi-family residences.
IIPaul Krauss: No, this would apply to commercial.
34
r
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989 1
Councilman Johnson: It's all commercial, industrial and multi-family parking ,
lots. This is all parking. This isn't just multi-family residence.
Councilman Boyt: You don't have to go higher with the light in order to provide '
more lighting.
Mayor a iel: You can get a direction of light flow depending upon which way '
you want it to go.
Councilman Johnson: But more and more and more for more and more and more cost. 11 Then you're driving the cost of businesses...
Councilwoman Dirtier: My concern is that we have safety in the parking lots.
Councilman Boyt: There is.
Councilwoman Dirtier: Especially for the elderly. You know they're dimming 11 anyway so they're having a hard time seeing at night.
Mayor Ci'iel: Rather than go into reiteration as to basically what's said, I
too am leaning towards the 2 car garages. I think that it's time that we
probably take a stand within the community. I feel basically that 2 car garages
are needed not only for the availability of having 2 cars. If you have 1 car,
• you're still going to utilize that for the other storage because normally in
those kinds of buildings you don't have capacity or storage. Things that I
think about are the boats, same trailers and things of that nature hat are
parked out there as well and they're there. So I guess without going into much
further ado, I guess I would lean towards the 2 car garages contained within
that R-12 family dwelling. Any other futher discussion?
Councilman Workman: What is, maybe Dean you can answer it for me. I know you
talked about this last tine, what's the difference in the cost on a home that
you said between the 1 car and the 2 car?
Councilman Boyt: He said $10,000.00. That's what he said. '
Dean Johnson: In townhomes. The reason for that is to stretch the face of it
out enough so that you can get the 2 cars in. You end up having to increase the
living area at the same time. Understand that the garage stall itself does not
cost $10,000.00. The fact that you have to have enough face to the house in
order to do it, especially when you go with the 35% impervious surface that you
have on it makes it, for any type of design, almost mandatory to be somewhat
tucked into the house. You have to increase the width of the house and
consequently you get to increase size and the second stall garage and that's
where the $10,000.00 comes from.
Councilman Workman: So we're talking about the difference between 50 and 60?
Dean Johnson: You have to realize that you know that the low end units that I
was talking about, your single car ones, keeping square footage down were going
to sell in the mid-50;)s so what you're talking about is the mid-50's to
mid-60's. $10,000.00 is increasing cost to these people by 1/6. That's what
you're doing to them. Making 1/6 of a payment which could be as much as $150.00
more than they're paying. I
35
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
Herb Bloomberg: It's not that important but obviously I've been observing your
comments in regards to storage and double garages and all that sort of thing. I
know that over here on the Villas up on TH 101, we insisted, we wouldn't sell
that property unless they used double garages but the main thing that I think of
is that everybody needs storage. And if you realize that the present technology
' is all built with trusses. We used to have an attic. We don't have any attics
anymore. We've got space. There's a great place to store popcorn but
absolutely you can't put anything up there. I think that this to me is the
biggest factor is that there is no other storage. I've done many haves,
expanded because they had an attic and you could go up and build extra rooms.
Today you can't. I mean we've got these great structures and the technology is
all filled with nothing but trusses. But the difference, you've got to build
' your walls anyhow and if you really analyze that material, like a garage floor
and a couple of trusses and some roof, that section doesn't start to commence to
get to be $10,000.00. In fact I don't think it gets close to $5,000.00 to make
the difference between a single. I think any engineering study would prove that
out. But we all need storage. Of course I'm interested in historic
preservation. Most things are found in attics that people have saved and
nowadays, you've got a generation now, there's no place to save anything but we
have to live with that. But the one way we can gain a little storage space is
by having at least a double garage.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Any other further discussion?
Councilman Boyt: Were we going to then hold the daycare for a future d '?
' Mayor Chmiel: I'd like to have that yes.
Councilman Boyt: Well I would move approval amending the multi-car parking to 2
' spaces.
Councilman Workman: Where's the apartment requirement?
Paul Krauss: B(6) .
Councilman Boyt: I think one area for discussion is do we want to have a
different standard for efficiency, 1 bedroom units than we do for 2 bedroom and
larger units. I guess my off hand estimation would be that probably maybe an
efficiency but a 1 bedroom unit can very easily generate 2 cars.
Councilman Johnson: There could be same people with no cars.
Councilman Boyt: Not in Chanhassen.
Councilman Johnson: Why not?
' Councilman Boyt: Well the only reason I can think of for having no car is you
don't have a driver's license.
Councilman Johnson: That's possible too. My brother-in-law's about to lose his
for quite a long, long time.
Councilwoman Dimler: Don't tell us why.
36
11
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989 1
Councilman Johnson: Because of what we talked about earlier. Alcohol, His
third DWI.
Councilman Workman: What's his name?
Councilman Johnson: He doesn't live in this town. '
Mayor andel: Don't say it.
Councilman Johnson: I won't say it but it's the sad truth. According to my
mother-in-law, it's going to be like 10 years is the mandatory thing in Nebraska
or something for losing his license. My mother-in-law is very misinformed a
lot. ,
Mayor Chr►iel: I hope she doesn't live too close either.
Councilman Johnson: You don't distribute in Omaha do you? 1
Councilman Boyt: Would it be amendable to the Council to have Section B amended
to such that effeciency units would have 2 stalls 1 of which would be campletely 1
enclosed. That 1 bedroom units and larger would have 2 stalls which 2 units
must be enclosed in the garage.
Councilwoman Dimler: We're separating item 1 into two different ones? '
Mayor Chriel: What page are you on?
Councilman Boyt: On page 6, Multi-family. Item 6(b) . Saying efficiencies,
just strike 1 bedroom units out of that number 1 clause and move it down to
number 2. And number 2, change the 1 1/2 to a 2. Where it says 1 1/2 must be
completely enclosed. Change that to a 2. I would move passage of this.
Councilwoman Dimler: Just a minute here. Are you saying that 1 bedroom and 2
bedroom and larger units must have 2 stalls then?
Councilman Boyt: Right. So I would move approval of the first reading.
Brad Johnson: Could I say something before you go too much further? Just a
convent.
Councilman Boyt: Let's get a second. ,
Mayor Qndel: Okay, we have emotion on the floor. Do we have a second?
Councilman workman: I'll second it for discussion.
Brad Johnson: I'd like to ask a procedural question. When you have your first
reading, what happens on your second reading? Can you rescind your vote or
anything like that? I was not able to be here and I would say this is one of
the more crucial votes that you're going to be taking and I don't own any
multiple land and I'm not involved. I've got one that we're building but I
think you really should think out this whole ordinance. What I see it as is far
more stringent than is necessary to accomplish whatever the goal is and it
37
i
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
doesn't deal with just tons of issues. I can say you've got a St. Hubert's
sitting over here planning on building an elderly housing project and you're not
going to have a garage in an elderly housing project. Build a 28 unit and we've
got 8 parking spots. You just assume they will not have cars and there's all
11 different kinds, types of housing. Not to say if you had over here a 3 story
apartment building like we're building over here or have been built all over the
community. Maybe you can build an apartment for 45 for rent. For $45,000.00 to
$50,000.00 cost, maybe $55,000.00, you've just made it impossible to build the
standard 3 story apartment building in Chanhassen. That just doesn't make any
sense to me at all. It's just impossible. You can't build it and be
competitive in cost because you have to provide one parking lot. I think Dean
said it 2 meetings ago. You provide 1 parking spot underneath the building. To
provide 2 you have to then put all kinds of garages around it. It just doesn't
make any sense and I think you guys should look at this. I think you're
' reacting to an overall multiple question when you may be having to deal with
coverage. All kinds of things that, neighborhood associations. There are all
different ways of taking care of what you're trying to accomplish and I think
you should all look into it. Have Paul look into it. I told the Mayor the
other day, I've been driving around trying to look at, there are good projects
and there are bad projects that are multiple. If you go over to Hazeltine,
11 they're building a very nice one there. Each one with 1 car garage. I think
you guys should just look at all of those and rethink what you're trying to
acca+tplish because I don't think, we're going to care back to this in the
future. There's a guy sitting right there, units do you have to develop
' multiple? It's going to sit there forever. It's just life because you're just
beyond what Chaska's is. You're beyond what Victoria, maybe not Victoria.
Waconia. You're way beyond Minnetonka and Eden Prairie and they've got t lot of
' land left that's multiple. We've got land to develop. You should have a
percentage of it in housing other than single family. I think these are just
decisions you're going to have to look at and I think that's all I've got to
say. This ordinance to me makes no sense whatsoever from a technical point of
view. You're accomplishing maybe what you're trying to accomplish but you're
really limiting all future development within this community. I think you'll be
back at the table about 10 more times, I would think you'll be back a number of
II times. You encouraged him because I was here. You encouraged him to put
multiple in for low income and now you just made probably impossible for him to
build any and that would be my concern so, there's another reading. I think you
all should just take a look at other community ordinances. Take a look at other
projects and see what they've done because there are good ones and bad ones. I
agree. And we're just commenting, there's a number of apartment buildings over
here that have no garages at all and the parking lots aren't full. If you go
II over and look. I mean it's just different. I think that's my concern. I'm not
pro or con on what's going on over there but I think you should look at that
ordinance heavily because it is, I build a lot of apartment buildings. This is
ridiculous from a point of view of strictly an ordinance.
Mayor Chmiel: Thanks Brad.
Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, if I can address a couple things that Brad brought up.
On page 7 pertaining to senior citizen housing, there's the third paragraph
down. It says that the City may apply a decreased parking requirement for
II senior housing projects or other residences which by their nature should
generate a decreased parking demand so you have the flexibility to work with
seniors. I don't think that that's an issue per se. Theoretically I suppose
1
38
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
you could also make a determination if federal funding for low income housing
cares back and the HUD guidelines insist that you have 1 car and no car parking,
you can make a determination to waive that requirement for some higher purpose.
If those projects exist so I think you can deal with that. As to the issue of 2
cars per unit versus the 1 1/2 that had been proposed. I guess I'd have to give
you my own judgment that I think the 2 per unit is by everything I've seen on
the excessive side. I think there's a real physical limitation in terms of
being able to accommodate it in the types of buildings that are being built. In
the architectural plans that I've seen, I don't believe that you can. What you
would have to do and I've seen a few buildings that this is done, you basically
have a footprint for the building and the underground parking garage has to go '
out under lawn area beyond the footprint of the building. That's not impossible
to do. Not many people do it. It's fairly expensive and it has same design
limitations but it could be done. I'd like to recarnend that you look again at 11 the proposal that was developed by the Planning Camimission. I think that
represents the upper end of the spectrum in terms of the expectations placed on
multi-family housing in the Twin Cities and I think would accomplish your goal.
Mayor Chmiel: I think what I'd like to see is if anyone else has additional
information before it goes to it's next reading, give that information to us.
Enlighten us. Give us more specifics as to some of your concerns and then we
can go from there. We had a motion on the floor. Any additional discussion?
Councilwoman Dimler: He had an amendment to that. '
Councilman Boyt: I just gave the motion with that in it so it's really not.
Councilman Johnson:- You're approving the whole thing with that. ,
Councilwoman Dimler: I think we should separate it.
Mayor Oriel: If it's indicated. 1
Councilman Johnson: Is there something else you want to amend?
Mayor Chmiel: Multiple family is what you made.
Councilwoman Dimler: I'm not sure that a 1 bedroom needs... ,
Mayor Chmiel: Well the efficiency is left out with the 1 bedroom.
Councilwoman Dimler: No. That's not what you meant was it? Efficiency has 2
stalls?
Mayor Chmiel: 1. 1
Councilman Boyt: Cane covered and one not covered. The effeciency does.
Councilwoman Dimler: And you wanted to move 1 bedroom and 2 bedroom or larger 1
units to 2 stalls with 1 1/2 completely enclosed? And I'd like to have Paul
address that. Why did you put 1 bedroom?
Paul Krauss: You have a lot of single people these days. You have couples too
but you've got a lot of single people these days buy 1 bedroom condominiums.
39
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
I
For example, if you're going to invest in a place to own, an owner occupied
situation, for the extra square footage and a lot of people I know that have
done this, make the decision if they're going to buy it, they're going to own it
for a period of time. They want the extra square footage. They buy a 1 bedroom
rather than an efficiency. They still only have 1 car. Granted you could have
a situation where there's a couple living together or two unrelated people
living together, whatever where it happens but when you average the whole thing
out, you're not looking at the need, probably in my estimation for 2 enclosed
parking stalls for every 1 bedroom apartment.
Councilman Boyt: If I might respond to that. You've indicated in here
somewhere that you're only requiring then, to include one of those garages in the
lease or sale of the property. That's part of it so if you don't have a need
for 2 cars, maybe you only have the 1 garage but it's sitting there available.
' As Mr. Bloomberg pointed out, there's a tremendous need for storage in these
buildings and none of those covered garages are going to go empty. I think that
there is, I'm interested in the architectural problems that we're posing. I'd
like to see how that gets worked out. Maybe we end up going to stand alone
garages as we have now in our apartment buildings. Maybe 1 bedroom apartments
fits where they are right now with efficiencies. I'm open to that but the way I
proposed it, I moved them down to go in there with the higher standard.
Councilwoman Dimler: I was wondering what Paul's reaction, why he wrote it up
at the top there?
Councilman Workman: Maybe where we're running into...is in this multi-family.
Multi-family is anything from a twin have to a 300 unit apartment buildkng. Is
that right?
Roger Knutson: Yes.
Councilman Workman: I think when we start to mix those twins and quads, etc. I
don't think we've got enough definition there. I've said it now both times
we've talked about this that the apartment building doesn't make as much sense
' as the townhouse idea because as far as getting parking under and around and
where it's going to be doesn't quite make sense to me yet. So while I'd be
willing to go along with passage of the first reading, I do want to see same
' I guess, I don't see the word apartment building in here. Because I think that
is a completely different category of housing from twins and quads.
Councilman Boyt: But see down in here we talk about 20 dwellings. You really
don't get into the complicated garage structures until you get over 20 together.
20 is your typical apartment building.
11 Brad Johnson: That's 40 parking spaces.
Councilman Johnson: Enclosed.
Brad Johnson: That's a lot.
Councilman Workman: I don't think we're going to be restricted to, as
Chanhassen grows and Al Klingelhutz down by TH 212, etc. I don't think people
are going to continue to build this simply 20 unit apartment buildings because
they're usually a lot bigger than that. I guess just in my mind I see some
1
40
I
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
I
problems with that. Because I think apartment complexes are a completely
• different thing than what Dean wants to build and townhouses so I think when
we're kind of lumping the together, it doesn't...
Councilwoman Diarler: Do you want to create a separate category then for
apartment houses? Can we do that?
Councilman Johnson: Put twins in. Put quads in. I mean you know, your R-4's,
your R-8's, your R-12's. We've got different zoning districts and we're
applying one standard to all three. I personally think that the one standard,
it's good to have one standard. It should be one car.
Councilman Boyt: The issues are almost the same. I think the design issues and
our desire to flex to that changes as a building gets larger but the issues of
either the storage or the parking requirements, the standards that we set,
I think are the same whether we're talking about a quad home or whether we're
talking about a 100 unit apartment building. The design issues are different
but the issues of storage and protection of property. The ability to store your
car out of the winter are the same.
Councilman Johhnson: One of the twins behind me has a single car garage. Of
course they've got 4 people living there and each of them have a car and some of
the have more than 1 car. So a 2 car garage would help but we're still going
to have cars in the street.
Don Patton: I guess I would like to ask the Council to table this and expand 1
it. As long as you have multiple zoning, I think you should really look at the
parking requirements. I realize you're trying to simplify this into a couple
things but I really think that multiple family is completely different. T+oem, I '
really support what you're saying and I don't think it's, especially with the
R-12 that we'll be looking at in the future. I don't see that as we had it
approved in our PUD here, it isn't going to work that way. I
Councilman Johnson: You've got 4, 8 and 12 in your PUD.
Don Patton: Exactly and it's not going to work that way. '
Councilman Johnson: What do you think about 2 cars enclosed in 4 and 8?
Don Patton: Jay, I'd really hate to comment on that at this point but one of ,
the things again, a quad, a townhouse, I can understand a little bit of that but
the thing I disagree with Councilman Boyt, I just hate to see everything
legislated. You're going to get a lot of 2 cars with efficiencies or whatever
but I just don't think, I think that should be for us to came forward to you as
a Council and justify that to you rather than setting up some type of rule for
it. As much as I respect Mr. Bloomberg, there's another industry set up for
storage which you have in the city of Chanhassen for people that need that.
Mayor Chmiel: The only trouble is that they don't go there. They're all on the
street and that's what I've been seeing. Not only here but in other communities
that I've reviewed also and that's my major objection.
Don Patton: With apartments?
41 1
pity Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
I
Mayor Chmiel: With apartments and multiple dwellings, yes.
Councilman Johnson: Storage of cars.
Mayor Cmiel: Yeah. Cars outside on the streets.
Councilman Johnson: They do it on houses too. They do it on single family
houses with double car garages. There's one across the street from me, they
have 1 car in the garage and 1 on the street.
Councilman Boyt: Not now.
Councilman Johnson: Yeah now.
Councilman Boyt: Well it's illegal.
Mayor Chmiel: Alright. We have a motion on the floor. We also have a second.
1 Councilman Johnson: I think we need to have the motion restated. It's been so
long we don't know what the motion is anymore.
I Councilman Boyt: Okay. Well this is for the first reading. The motion is as
stated in the written document with the change to item 6(b) (1) moving 1 bedroom
unit down to number 2 in that category and changing item (2) so that it reads 2
stalls must be completely enclosed in a garage. As we all understand that the
first reading so it's open to change.
Councilman Workman: Now many readings are we going to have on it, two? *
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. We can always change it the next time.
Councilman Boyt: I could have added a lot more restrictions but I decided not
to.
Councilman Johnson: No, I mean being the most restrictive in the Midwest is not
too bad.
Councilwoman Dimler: Should we vote on this amendment separately from the whole
Iordinance?
Councilman Boyt: This is the ordinance. There is no other.
ICouncilman Johnson: Is there any other amendments to vote on?
Councilwoman Dimler: I want to vote the whole thing through but I don't want
I that amendment.
Mayor Chmiel: The amanc tent of what...
ICouncilwoman Dirtier: Of moving the 1 bedroom down to 2 enclosed stalls.
Councilman Johnson: Than it fails.
42
I
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
I
Councilman Boyt: Yeah right. You just put it back together. It'd be just a 11 quick. If you want to vote, if you don't like it the way it is there, then vote
against it and then bring up a new motion. It'd be just as quick.
Mayor C *ael: Okay, we have a motion on the floor. And a second still stands. 1
Councilman Workman: Do you have another motion in mind?
Councilwoman Dimler: That's what I'm trying to figure out. 1
Councilman Boyt: It's the first reading. You can certainly change it the next
time around.
Councilman Johnson: Your changing the motion will be easy. It's just you don't
move 1 bedroom. 1
Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah right. Just leave it as it is.
Councilman Boyt moved, Councilman Workman seconded to approve the first reading
PP n9
of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code for Division 2,
Parking and Loading as written by staff with the following amendment to Section
6, Dwelling:
b. Multi-Family:
1) Efficiency - Two (2) stalls one (1) of which moist be campletely enclosed
in a garage.
2) One (1) Bedro and Larger Units - Two (2) stalls of which two (2). must 11 om
be completely enclosed in a garage. This requirement is to be assessed
on a gross basis for the entire project. I
All voted in favor except Councilman Johnson who opposed and the motion carried
with a vote of 4 to 1.
AWARD OF BIDS: FIRE DEPARTMENT FITNESS EQUIPMENT - CONTINUED. 1
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, let's just move back with the Fire Department fitness
equipment. John, are you ready to answer same questions? Just state your name
and address and there are same questions.
John Wolf: My name is John Hblf. I'm a 4 year member of the fire department 11 and I was more or less volunteered by the fire department to help that put
together same exercise equipment recarvendations to the City Council.
Mayor Chmiel: Good. Thank you. Bill, you had same questions. 1
Councilman Boyt: Right I did. It's my understanding that you have this amount
of money budgeted but I was wondering why is an exercise bicycle and a treadmill
so expensive when your Schwinn Aerodyne is a third that. I think treadmills
43 1
11
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
1
that are standard motorized treadmills can be, very good ones can be had for
half that. So.
John Wolf: We currently have a Schwinn Aerodyne in our exercise room right now
and it is a valued piece of equipment. The aerobicycle that we're proposing
brings same additional benefits and it more or less, as we see it, enhances the
safety of using the equipment along with it has the capability or at least based
on the experience we've seen at health clubs, it's a more interesting type of
machinery to use. If we go back to the reason why we proposed exercise
facilities to being with really was two fold. One was for the attraction and
retention of membership. The other was to enhance the physical capabilities of
1 the fire department. The Aerobicycle Four that we're proposing has
preprogrammed workouts. It's a computer assisted device. Your progress is
monitored against YMCA standards so you're able to more or less keep track of
your improvement or lack thereof. There is a pulse monitoring device which we
do have same overweight, sane inexperienced exercisers and we have same people
that are on the opposite end of the spectrum but there is a concern that people
may overexert. Hopefully and we've tried to encourage or at least using
' equipment that has pulse monitoring devices so that was another reason why we
selected this piece of equipment. The Schwinn Aerodyne is an air driven
flywheel machine. For people that are relatively new in exercising, it's kind
of a strange phenomena to have air blowing all over you while you're exercising.
It's also an upper body and a lower body device which for same people they want
to just isolate the lower body. With the Schwinn Aerodyne, that's difficult to
do because those upper arms are back and forth. I guess those are the prismary
' reasons why we're looking at this piece of equipment. It is an expensivg piece
of equipment but we hope to have this piece of equipment 10 years from now. It
is a long term investment in that regard. You can purchase cheaper exercise
bicycles but if you go to Northwest or to Flagship, you'll notice the equipment
that's being used is the Treadmill. It's the Stairmaster and it's the
Aerobicycles. There are sign-up lists in health clubs whereas they have a lot
of this other equipment around but it really sits there. We're trying to outfit
II the roam with equipment that people will use and they'll want to use that will
be popular. So that's the objective is to try to encourage maybe marginal
exercisers if you will, to use the equipment and to compete against the health
11 club environment for those.
Councilman Hoyt: Certainly the heart monitor is a good idea. You can get the
I best available chest heart monitor for $200.00. You could outfit several of
your people. You could, I guess as I look at this, I just thought about it. If
you're talking about 34 to 40 officers, certainly you can't put then all in the
room at the same time but you really have a very small amount of exercise
1 equi vient there and you have a great deal of money and 3 pieces of equipment. I
guess in a sense I'm second guessing you. I basically feel it's your decision.
I just am cautious that it's a great deal of money for 3 pieces of equipment
I where you could get industrial grade equipment for half or less. I appreciate
your coming over.
IICouncilman Workman: Were stairs looked into?
John Wolf: We have a staizy,machine that we purchased from a local vendor,
Fitness Master and it's not one of the computer assisted machines. We have 3
1 pieces of equipment in there now and they're not getting the use we'd like them
to get and quite frankly we think the reason is is because they're not the
' 44
1
- 10j1787
car. ter assisted machinery. The other reason '
Pu so we think the roar; itself doesn't
get a lot of use is because currently there are no weights or upper body
exercise devices in the room now. We think that once we balance the room with
the weight machines, the computer assisted devices and the current equipment
plus the racquetball court, that we will get more use out of the roan.
Mayor Chriel: May John. Thank you.
John Wolf: Thanks for your consideration. '
Mayor Chniel: Do we have a motion?
Councilman Johnson: We already have one standing. I
Councilman Boyt: Well I'll move approval of the Fire Department's Fitness
Equipment. '
Councilman Johnson: It's already been moved and Tam seconded it.
Councilman Boyt: Okay. ,
Councilman Johnson moved, Councilman Workman seconded to award the bid for the ,
exercise equipment for the Chanhassen Fire Department to The Fitness Store in
the anount of $11,821.50. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT MODIFYING ZONING RESTRICTIONS AND LOCATIONS FOR
CONVENIENCE STORES, GAS STATIONS AND AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE STATIONS, FIRST READING.
Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. Last September you reviewed a
draft ordinance regulating convenience stores and other uses with gas pumps.
Staff got feedback from the Council that the ordinance should be revised to
provide separation standards both to separate individual CUP's having gas pumps
frah one another and also well basically to prevent clustering at major
interchanges and also to provide a setback standard from residential properties
given the high impact that these types of uses create. We reviewed past
discussions on the ordinance and believe that a somewhat different approach may
be appropriate at this point. We therefore separated out all uses with gas
pumps and classified therm as conditional in those districts where we propose
that they be allowed. Convenience stores without gas pumps are proposed to be
treated as any other lower impact or retail use might have been and is permitted
where appropriate. There's a table on page 3 that illustrates where uses are
permitted or conditionally permitted. Lander CUP guidelines, a minimum
separation of 250 feet is proposed between gas pumps of uses which are applying
for CUP's. This is in an effort to discourage clustering. We think it's an
effective number to reduce the possibility or eliminate the possibility that
you'd have 4 gas pumps located at an intersection. You may have one kitty
corner fran another or down the street from another but you wouldn't have 4 at
the same intersection. We're also proposing that a setback of 100 feet from
residential properties be required. Basically that will allow a greater than
► normal setback where'hopefully we can through the site plan review process get a
high level of screening to be offered. The ordinance would also correct what we
view to be an amission in that it would allow auto servicing in the highway 11
45
I
11
business district. In reviewing the ordinance we felt it odd that a business
district dedicated to highway uses, i.e. auto related uses, prohibits servicing.
I've talked to a number of people who were looking at the possibility of
autonalls or a Goodyear or Firestone type of operation and if it's to be
allowed, that's probably a district where one can consider that to happen.
We've proposed correcting that with the change in the ordinance. The Planning
Commission discussed the ordinance in November but was unable to rake a
recommendation. This item was scheduled for City Council review at the last
meeting but wasn't heard due to the late hour. At that point Councilman Johnson
noted that the current and proposed definitions for a typical gas station
prohibit any kind of significant auto servicing. Consequently the normal, the
formerly normal type of gas station is actually prohibited in Chanhassen. Minor
servicing was allowed, changing wiper blades but nothing more than that. On
the basis of Councilman Johnson's inquiry and my expectation that this may have
been an oversight, I proposed a revised definition for rotor fuel stations now
calling it motor fuel and service station and tinkered with it so that it would
allow auto services without restriction.
Mayor Gael: Thanks Paul. Any discussion?
Councilman Johnson: You can have a service station without gas pumps like a
Goodyear. inhere would a Goodyear fit?
' Paul Krauss: Well we think it would fit in the Business Highway district if we
amend it.
Councilman Johnson: I mean as far as definition wise. Do we have a definition
that would...
Paul Krauss: No we don't. We do have auto service listed as a conditional use
in several districts but not in the business highway district.
Councilman Johnson: Yeah but we deleted the definition of auto service.
Paul Krauss: We deleted the definition of was it auto service station?
Councilman Johnson: Yes.
Paul Krauss: I use the launching point for this, the ordinance that
II Mark Koegler developed last summer which talked about motor fuel stations
instead of auto service station.
1 Councilman Johnson: The only place we see motor fuel station it should say
rotor fuel and service station?
Paul Krauss: Right.
Councilman Johnson: While you changed the definition you didn't change it back
in the additions?
IIPaul Krauss: If I didn't, that was an oversight. I changed the definition on
page 1 of the ordinance. !' '
46
I
,City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
I
Councilman Johnson: Right but on page 3 it's not. Under 20-714, Conditional
Uses it just says motor fuel station. The next page it just says motor fuel
station.
Paul Krauss: Ch yes, that's an oversight. All those should be corrected to
motor fuel and service.
Mayor Chmiel: Just one question Paul. In dispensing gas within residential
parcels, you're proposing a minimum separation of 100 feet. Is 100 feet really
enough?
Paul Krauss: Well if you have a gas station or a convenience store that's say
at the end of commercial center and adjacent to a residential parcel. Outside
the immediate area for gas pumps, you may have 50-60 feet of blacktop to allow
for circulation and trash storage and everything else. If you accept that as
kind of an average, then you're looking at about 40 foot of green space. That
allows you to do quite a bit. This was my attempt to address that issue.
hbether or not it goes far enough is the question I think but you have to keep
in mind that these things are reviewed not only with a conditional use permit
but also in conjunction with site plan approval where you get to approve the
landscaping and screening as well.
Councilman Boyt: There is Mr. Mayor, I think if we took this particular part of
that ordinance to TH 41 and TH 7, that they would be in arms against us. If we
said that a service station could be 100 feet away from their house.
Councilman Johnson: Two miles is too close.
Councilman Boyt: So I agree with you that 100 feet is not far enough. And that
doesn't mean that the individual service station has to build right on the
border of a residential neighborhood or has to have 40 feet of greenspace. It
simple means they can't build on that border. They've got to be sanewhere in
the zone. They can't build right on the edge next to a residential development.
Councilman Johnson: Is the 100 feet from where? 1
Paul Krauss: From the gas pump itself.
Councilman Johnson: To the nearest resident. Do you know what we have from the
pumps over here at Brooke's because...
Paul Krauss: I'm sure it's doesn't Hake it. The residential's right behind the
fence.
Mayor Chmiel: That's part of my concern. That's mach too close there.
Councilman Johnson: But the vents there are on the back of the building.
That's where the odor problem canes from. Not as much, when they're filling the
tanker and they do a lot of their tanker filling at night. It's easier for
tankers to drive around at night only with the drunk drivers.
Councilman Workman: Your brother?
47
1
1
Councilman Johnson: Brother-in-law. Just my brother-in-law. I think the
distance from the tank storage vents have to be taken into account because
sometimes those vents can be a long ways away from the building or the pumps.
In the case of a station I'm working on up north on a leaking underground tank
situation, his vents are actually at the back of the convenience store again
across from the alley but it's probably 75 feet from the tank. Fra'i the pumps
where his vents end up because of where his tanks are. So again that's the
worse case is as close as he could get to putting therm next to residences. And
the Brooke's is even worse. It's right there and a slight southern breeze with
an inversion condition and the neighbors back there get a real good whiff of
fuel.
Councilman Boyt: What about the possibility of saying, what's the typical lot
depth in the zones we're talking about? It's 125 feet?
Paul Krauss: It's 125 feet minimum. Realistically they're typically somewhat
more.
Councilman Boyt: On a residential we move it to 125 feet. Is that true in the
commercial areas we're talking about? Business highway and so on. Is that the
minimum? Off hand I don't rergather the minimum.
' Paul Krauss: If it's in proximity to any kind of single family that's been
developed in the last 10 years or so, yeah, that's the standard.
Councilman Boyt: ...lot depth in the commercial area but it seems tore like
there should be one lot between the lot that whatever we're calling these
things, motor fuel station sits on and any residential development. Would that
be reasonable?
' Mayor Chmiel: I don't know if you want to put another lot but I think a greater
distance than 100 feet is what I'm, depending on what those lot depths are.
ICouncilman Boyt: Well yeah, I don't know whether 250 feet's reasonable or what
but it would seem to me as maybe a street width and a lot depth would be, we're
at least saying here's same kind of cushion. Minimum lot depth is 150 feet.
Still?
Roger Knutson: That's what it says.
I 'Councilman Boyt: That's not residential right? That's commercial.
IRoger Knutson: That's business highway. 150 feet.
Councilman Boyt: Well my point is, rather than just pick an arbitrary number of
100, 200, whatever, it would be nice to have something to reference it against.
II If we're saying a lot, it's got to be one lot in from a residential zone and
maybe that's 150 feet. Maybe we take a lot and a street and say okay, if
there's 60 feet width for a street?
IIPaul Krauss: For local residential street.
•Y I
Councilman Boyt: So it's 210 feet. I'd say somewhere inbetween there is a
distance that makes same sense.
1 48
I
city wunc7.1 reetlng LeCem►Der its, .M1
I/
Paul Krauss: Yeah. I think that that has same potential.
Councilman Boyt: Well we're into a first reading situation again right?
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. ,
Councilman Boyt: Aren't these fun?
Mayor Chmiel: Exactly. That's where we're at. '
Councilman Boyt: I cut you off. I believe you were making same cements.
Mayor Chmiel: No. That was one of the major concerns that I have with this is
that I was thinking about Brooke's as we have now with John living directly in
back there. Sane of the people are saying that they get the odors of the
gasoline and that's one of the concerns I had. Second concern I have is a
safety aspect. In the event that there is something would happen. That's a
major concern there so that's why with 100 feet, I just wasn't too comfortable
with that.
Councilman Hoyt: I'd like to suggest another change under Motor Fuel Stations.
Other appropriates. This might be a good time to add. ,
Councilwoman Dirtier: Bill, what page are you on?
Councilman Boyt: Section 3, page 2 I guess. I asked the Recyclin4 Committee to II
look at this issue. I know Jo Ann looked at it and proposed something to the
Council about a year and a half ago. I think that people who service motor oil,
sell and service motor oil should have same means of collecting it for recycling II
by the public.
Mayor Ch'iel: Isn't that a mandate? I
Councilman Boyt: Well the State mandate is that they post a sign that says
where it can be collected.
Mayor Chmiel: Any specific station that sells it is required to take it in
also.
Councilman Boyt: No. Just post it. And so what we did was we, TH 41 and TH 7
as part of their conditional use permit, required them to do that.
Councilman Johnson: And Amoco also. r
Councilman Boyt: And Amoco, Jo Ann worked with Amoco and as part of the deal
there they agreed to do it. We didn't really have much leverage but they agreed
to do it. This would be a chance to say to motor fuel stations, when you plan
to build, plan to put in that extra tank to collect recycleable motor oil.
They're there 24 hours a day and that's what we need is somebody who's there to
monitor it. So I'd Yike to see us include that as another condition.
Councilwoman Dialler: So that'd be condition 9?
49
I
Mayor Chriel: Before we add that as a full condition, would u '
yo just review
ew
that as to the State requirement.
Councilman Johnson: No, he's absolutely right.
Mayor Chmiel: Is he?
Councilman Johnson: Yes.
Mayor Chmiel: I thought that they were mandated to take oil. If they sell it,
they have to take it.
Councilman Johnson: That was originally. That was the original legislation.
That got in the next session, that went down. It didn't last.
Mayor Chmiel: Check that out would you please.
Councilman Boyt: Just to show you the problem Don, the previous Council even
' went so far as to say we will pay you $500.00 a year to be open to collecting it
and they refused.
Councilman Workman: I think the nearest place is Chaska.
' Mayor Chmiel: No, I'm not objecting to what you're saying.
Councilman Boyt: And I agree that we should check it out.
Councilman Johnson: If you catch the Sinclair on a good day, he'll take it.
Amoco has taken it in the past.
Mayor Chmiel: Amoco's taken it from us. We've taken ours there. My kids have.
Councilman Workman: They haven't taken it from me.
Mayor Chrdel: My kids took it there T .
Councilman Workman: Down at Carver County Auto Body in Chaska is the nearest
place they'll take it as far as I know.
I Councilman Johnson: TH 7 and TH 41's got one. I've gone into Amoco before I
was on Council. Brought it in. It depends on which kid's working there.
' Councilman Boyt: They turned me down any number of times.
Mayor C triel: If you buy your oil there, they take your oil.
' Councilman Boyt: That's probably the secret.
Councilman Workman: This thing is so dog gone weighty and bulky that I don't
I even know where it's going. If the developers that were in here earlier have
one point that I support is that we're as heck getting into the business of kind
of trying to fine tune an awful lot of things in this city that I'm not sure we
should have so much control over. There's a lot of good arguments for why we
' want to control this. My real only concern was how far a gas pump set up is
50
I
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
I
from a residential because I know that is a constant problem or going to be a
constant problem. Other than that, this trying to separate stations, etc., I'm '
not sure how much of a problem we're going to have with that in the future.
Maybe we've peaked. As far as convenience stores, we're getting a grocery store
in, maybe we won't have that problem anymore. I don't know. I don't know if I
feel comfortable trying to plug all these holes and I'm kind of losing the
focus, this seers so like it's got so many different focuses that it's not
focused. Does that make sense?
Mayor Chmiel: Say that again.
Councilwoman !Ashler: We're trying to cover too march. I
Councilman Workman: Yeah, I think we're trying to cover too, I don't know if
it's the Planning Commission can't decide and we can't decide and staff can't
decide.
Councilman Johnson: I think it's comprehensive.
Mayor Chmiel: I think you have to take a position Tam to look at something of
these types that they're proposing and not having one on every corner.
Councilman Workman: I guess you know, and that's what I'm trying... '
Mayor Orden Termed as gasoline alley and I guess that's what I look at it
from. To re that's a visual blight. You need those kinds of services for the
motorists camping through the community but if they need gas, there's always that
availability getting gas somewhere. They may not have the right cledit card but
you have to be sort of selective in where those kinds of stations are going to
go.
Councilman Workman: And maybe this isn't a good argument. There's an awful lot II
of insurance agents out there. Nonetheless I got into the business. I think I
can do a better job. I think I can offer better service. I can blah, blab,
blah, blab. Likewise a businessman, maybe somebody can do a better job with a
Dinner Theatre. I don't know, are we going to put a dinner theatre on every
corner? But for us to tell a person, a property owner on a very busy
intersection that this in fact would be, something's telling a permit that this
is a very good intersection to sell gasoline because there's an awful lot of
traffic going by. You can make a lot of money doing this. Maybe all four
corners are being told that and there's that competition thing so I'm interested
in doing something. I'm interested in passing the first reading. I'm just
letting everybody know that the second reading I'm going to have maybe sate more
refined ideas on this.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, you're only limiting 5 different specific ones from not '
being permitted within those categories as we have listed. The others are
permitted uses and conditional uses and all those are being permitted in there
with just specific conditions as to what they have to meet. '
Councilman Boyt: I think one of the things to keep in mind, it is pretty
comprehensive. There's a lot of ground that's covered in this thing so maybe it
does seem to lack focus. What I entered it trying to avoid was probably what we
can't avoid very easily and that is the feeling that there's too many
51 11
City Council Meeting - December 18; 1989
' convenience stores with gas pumps in this town right now. 250 feet I see as
being the absolute minimum. I guess I can kind of live with it because as Paul
said, it keeps tha'i off every corner.
Councilman Workman: Let me just ask you this quick. Are any of those
' convenience stores going broke?
' Councilman Boyt: Well what's going to happen is, I hope not. What will happen
is unlike the insurance business where you can enter and leave and pretty much
not leave something that everyone else has to live with. In the convenience
store gas pump, once you build that building, it's there. Try to find an
' alternate use for those things and it's a challenge so you see empty gas
stations sitting around from the big crunch 10 years ago. People can't enter
the Dinner Theatre because of the large fixed cost.
Councilman Workman: Right. I was using those in basically a larger
philosophical in that maybe my investment in getting into the insurance business
isn't as great as somebody that's going to be building a convenience store which
is a big investment but they've got to think that through and I'm not going to
baby than through it, you know what I mean. That's all I'm saying. That's not
my job to tell this guy, hey watch out you're going to fail because businesses
' fail every day. And it's also not my job to say for the convenience store
that's already there, hey I'm going to protect you because I don't want you to
fail either. I'm going to start getting into this juggling act. That's what
I'm nervous about and I understand completely where Council wants to go with
trying to...out a little bit but it's like pornography. When does pronography
start? It depends on what decade you were born in maybe but so there'siall
sorts of different definitions about where that competition should, where our
role in competition should begin and end and that's where I always get a little
nervous. I'm nervous talking about garages. Telling people how to build
houses.
Councilman Johnson: I don't think we're trying to protect anybody or tell theta,
protect them from failure or guarantee then, success by protecting then from
' competition. I think what we're trying to say is that the look we want for our
town, such as what is being said with the garages, the look we want for our town
is not the look of four convenience gas service stations at the corner of Great
Plains and TH 5. We don't want to see, I don't know how wide that right-of-way
II is. Whether 250 feet crosses the right-of-way there or not from Holiday to the
other side of TH 5 but is that what we want as our vision for our commercial
< development in town. One of our main entrances to town to be a Holiday, a Super
II America, Super Q and an Amoco and I guess we've got room for one more gas
station yet to be tossed in there.
I Councilman Workman: I'm just saying don't let our vision get in the way of a
property owner making sane money. That's all I'm saying so I know what you
mean.
I Councilman Johnson: Now is there other things that can go in there that would
be commercially viable also? We put those uses in there and then there's no
room for a Burger King or a Bonanza or Mills Fleet Farm or whatever.
IIMayor Qr.►iel: Any other discussion?
52
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
Councilman Johnson: So I agree with you. ,
Councilwoman Ditrler: Yes. I've been uncomfortable with this all along and I
guess mainly because of the problems with limiting free trade and restricting
competition is my main concern. Also I think this puts the City in the business
of, or into a position of granting on a first cane basis and I'm not real sure
that we want to be in that position. Again I think we're coverning too much.
Trying to be too restrictive. I believe sane of this is necessary but I think
as fax as the convenience store aspect is concerned, I no longer see that as an
issue. I kind of feel like we're closing the barn door after the cows are out.
I think that that was the issue last year as they were springing up but I don't
see that happening and I don't think that will happen.
Councilman Johnson: The issue's about to start again because Amoco didn't do
anything within their year. They're about to lose their...
Councilwaran Dimler: We11, like you know with the grocery store caning. I
don't know if too many more convenience stores will want to care in here. I
Paul Krauss: As far as Amoco goes, they're working with us on building permit.
The thing that's hanging then up right now is the need to clean up existing
conta:m►ination on the site.
Councilman Johnson: They thought they'd have that thing whipped out by spring.
Gary Warren: They're looking to bid it so they can start this sprijig.
•
Councilman Johnson: They have applied for the building permit? I
Gary Warren: They've applied for the building permit. They are currently
reworking our site plan to coordinate with the TH 5 and the Great Plains Blvd.
expansion and they're looking to get us, we've been provided a temporary plan
for the clean-up effort out there. We had a big meeting 2 weeks ago with MnDot
and others to coordinate that because we do need an easement from them to do our
ultimate Great Plains Blvd..
Councilman Johnson: Now that we've ventured off the subject slightly, do they
need any kind of extension? I mean they haven't moved any dirt. 1
Mayor Chnael: Let's try to stick to what our subject is.
Councilwoman Dialer: Yeah, I guess my final convent was what the gentleman said
before here. Although we did legislate the market there, I'm real uncomfortable
with doing it in all cases.
Councilman Johnson: We have eliminated apartments in this city on the last one.
Councilwoman Dimler: No, no, no. We left an opening there to separate that
out.
Councilman Johnson: ,~tit's a first reading.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah.
53
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
I
Councilman Boyt: Well I would move approval of the first reading, adding to
I Section 3, point 9 that motor fuel stations provide for the collection and
recycling of oil.
ICouncilman Johnson: You can just rewrite 6.
Councilman Boyt: Well, whichever.
IIMayor C imiel: Section 4?
Councilman Boyt: Sure. The intent would be any place that sells motor oil
I which sane of these may then decide that it's not worth selling motor oil but
certainly the service stations are going to.
I Mayor Clir►iel: Okay...that 100 feet and so on. More than 100 feet. Okay. Is
there a second?
Councilman Workman: I'll second it.
Councilman Boyt moved, Councilman Workman seconded to approve the first reading
I of the Zoning Ordinance An►endhent modifying zoning restrictions and locations
for convenience stores, gas stations and automotive service stations with an
amendment to Section 20-282, condition 6 to include that all motor fuel stations
I provide for the collection and recycling of used motor oil. All voted in favor
except Councilwoman Dimler who opposed and the motion carried with a vote of 4
to 1.
I Paul Krauss: Two points of clarification if I could briefly. Did that
condition also apply to convenience stores that sold oil?
Councilman Boyt: Yep. Anything that sells oil.
Paul Krauss: Okay, and was the setback increased or it has not been at this
time?
Councilman Boyt: Not yet. I think we asked to consider 150 to 210.
Mayor Chmiel: Yes.
Councilman Boyt: But we didn't change it yet.
IICouncilman Johnson: And the typo's corrected right?
Mayor C ►iel: Right.
ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REGARDING REVISIONS TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO ALLOW
IFOR THE REVIEW AND GRANTING OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS FOR USES THAT ARE
TEMPORARY IN NATURE IN ALL DISTRICTS, FIRST READING.
Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, Irm► prepared to go ahead with that. Would you like for
' me to skip this one tonight in favor of going to what we have left on the
agenda? This isn't pressing.
54
I
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
Mayor Ch[niel: I don't think that is a pressing situation. Maybe we could just
table that.
Councilwoman Dimler: I'd like to make a comment on it. Just real short. i
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, say it.
Councilwoman Dimler: I was just wondering if we're somewhere including seasonal
sales of Minnesota grown products?
Paul Krauss: No we're not. There was another ordinance that was drafted last
summer that I think we lost in the pile someplace pertaining to sales of farm
products.
Councilwoman Dialer: Okay, should we mention this in that one?
Paul Krauss: I don't know. '
Councilwoman Dialer: I would like to have it covered somewhere. Whether it's
in this ordinance or in another one. '
Paul Krauss: I suppose we could, sure.
Councilman Boyt: It might be better to have some sort of permit process for
that rather than going through the getting some sort of interim cor4itional use.
That's kind of involved. +►
Paul Krauss: The problem with this is if sarsebody wanted to sell their corn
crop or whatever off the back of their pick-up truck.
Councilwoman Dimler: That's what they did last war. '
Paul Krauss: But through this ordinance it would take then 2 1/2 months or so
to get it approved. '
Councilman Boyt: We need a permit that...
Councilwaran Dialer: Okay, so what do we have covering. '
Paul Krauss: If you go through the Planning Commission, City Council you're
probably looking at 2 to 2 1/2 months.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, fine. I understand that and the season's over with
but what do we have covering that because we had, that cane up last season. Do
we have anything covering that?
Roger Knutson: We drafted an ordinance. '
Paul Krauss: We can resurrect that and bring it back.
• w
Councilman Johnson: `Didn't that get passed? '
Paul Krauss: Kb. It's never been reviewed.
55
i
II , City Council Meeting - Decerrber 18, 1989
Councilman Boyt: I have a couple other, excuse me but I think these are fairly
i
important if we're going to bring it back. One, I think we ought to strike
mobile hones as an interim use. I think we're kidding somebody. At least I
would be, if they thought I'd vote to put mobile homes in Chanhassen.
Councilman Johnson: Construction trailers?
Mayor Orden Well no. For instance, if someone were wanting to build their
own home and utilize a mobile home for that interim. I've seen that happen.
IICouncilman Boyt: I think there's some sort of construction situations where
people put one on site for their construction crews. Well, okay. If you guys
want it but...
Mayor Qrael: I can see where that might be. Just for that specific use.
I Councilman Boyt: That's something to consider before bringing it back is how do
we take care of that use without...
I Councilwoman Dimler: Well on any of these, we have the final say when they come
in and apply don't we?
Mayor Chmiel: Yep.
Councilman Boyt: The other thing is, I think we should, staff should review all
conditional uses currently and take out of, use that list as a starter Test to
I cane up with interim because we don't have enough on here. This is hardly worth
doing. Churches are the only thing that show up but I think if they went back
and referenced other things that we said are conditional uses, they'd find a
whole list that they could put in here. Not that all conditional uses should be
interim but it'd be a good starting point. That's all I have.
IIMayor Chmiel moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to table action on Zoning
Ordinance Amendment regarding revisions to the zoning ordinance to allow for the
review and granting of conditional use permits for uses that are temporary in
II nature in all districts, first reading. All voted in favor and the motion
carried.
IIWETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A BOARDWALK ALONG THE EDGE OF
A CLASS A WETLAND, 7280 KURVERS POINT, WOODDALE BUILDERS.
II Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. The applicant's requesting
approval for a wetland alteration permit to build a boardwalk out to an elevated
area located adjacent to Lotus Lake and to add some fill to an area located
' above the high water of Lotus Lake, basically to firm it up. It's rather soft
and squishy at this time. To firm it up so that it becomes useful lawn area.
The boardwalk will be located 5 feet at the closest point outside the protected
wetland area and neither at nor a retaining wall that's already been built for
the house, encroach into the wetland. We support the idea of using a boardwalk
in this area rather than the use of woodchips or gravel because it will run atop
a dyke that is used to create an impoundment area for storm water and the
56
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
boardwalk results in fewer problems with this material running off and plugging
up the outlet. As I noted earlier too, the area being filled adjacent to the
lake is located above the ordinary high water mark. It's high ground. It's not
anything the DNR regulates at all right now and the area is just being filled to
make it more useable. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposal and
rea:mended it's approval pending several additional conditions. The developer
has since clarified how fill will be moved onto this site without damaging the
wetland. The idea is to do it during the winter months and one of the things
we've also looked at pending, well based on the Planning Commission's
recommendation, is that a $5,000.00 bond be established to insure that the site
is properly restored. A revised accurate survey has been provided. There was
some question about the original survey at the Planning Commission meeting.
With that staff recommends approval of the wetland alteration permit subject to
appropriate conditions.
Mayor Ctmiel: Paul, I just have one question. Regarding that $5,000.00 letter
of credit or cash performance bond. Is this a requirement of all people
proposing to do this specifically? ,
Paul Krauss: No, Mr. Mayor it has not been. We've been using it with, well as
evidenced earlier tonight, with more regularity. As these requirements are
placed on properties we find we need a mechanism to enforce it and having
somebody's money in the bank or sane sort of a financial commitment is the best
way I know to do that.
Councilman Johnson: This is one where this seems very appropriate. This is one
where they can mess up big time. Actually $5,000.00 is cheap. Thep could mess
up and fill wetlands and do, get pass the ordinary high water mark and really
have same substantial cost of restoration. Without any kind of backing, it's
tough to go back in there and correct it. I'm wondering if this is boggy area,
is this a wetland that they're filling? Has anybody surveyed the fill area to
find out what type of vegetation is within that area? I
Paul Krauss: Yes. We were out there and we had Fish and Wildlife folks go out
there as well. The area they want to fill is not a wetland. It basically looks
like lawn right now. It's just a little squishy.
Councilman Boyt: In the dry season.
Mayor Chmiel: And that's understandable too.
Councilman Johnson: It's squishy because it's wet or it's squishy because of
the type of soil.
Paul Krauss: It's virtually, I didn't dig a hole to see the type of soil but
it's virtually at, it's above the OHW. It's not significantly above it.
Councilman Boyt: Why don't you have Type III erosion control along the lake?
Paul Krauss: If we don't, that would be an oversight. That should be that
along the lake front.,
Councilman Boyt: Maybe I can start this out with a couple of comments if it's
alright. When we•have wetland alteration permits, we in the past have given
57 '
11 City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
IIalteration permits for boardwalks so I don't have any problem with that. I
think we've set a precedent. Well, this Council may not have but previous
Councils have, which isn't binding on this group but we've done that. What I
II think this Council has done, as well as previous Councils, is say that any
wetland alteration permit has to be an Improvement to that area. An actual
Improvement in one way or another to the functioning of that area. We've got
this need to go through and get a permit because we consider these areas to be
so fragile and here we've got somebody who's filling in right up to the
lakeshore. Personally I think we ought to allow them to put the boardwalk out
II there so they can get to the water but that should be the end of it. They
bought the property as is. The City certainly didn't promise then a beach and
we've had this desire to protect not only the wetlands but in this case Lotus
Lake, but setback areas from that so they can do their job to filter runoff. To
I do all those sorts of things and if this fill is going to be approved, it's got
to be demonstrated that it actually improves the ability of the land to do it's
filtration job.
IMayor Qi'iel: Yeah, but isn't that fill going to be placed above the high water
mark anyway so what effect would that have on it?
1 Councilman Boyt: Well because that high water mark is merely a standard from
which we back off 75 feet and say you can't develop there without an alteration
permit and we have shown historically that alteration permits are granted for
I 5mprovaents. I remember the guy who came in here in the last 6 months who
wanted to do a little bit of fill in his backyard next to a wetland. Not a
lake, just wetland and we said show us how that's improving the abilitypf that
piece of property to filter and what not before it gets to the wetland and we'll
approve it.
Councilwoman Dimler: Can you address that right now?
IPaul Krauss: Yeah. I think our wetland ordinance is a little unusual in that
it's not only work in the wetland that requires a wetland alteration permit.
' It's work within 200 feet of it. This boardwalk is not in the wetland. The
fill is not in the wetland nor is it in the lake. Nothing is being altered in
either the lake or the wetland. There's a larger philosophical issue about our
I ordinance and Jo Ann and I are going to be putting together a position paper on
the wetlands ordinance for you hopefully this winter yet, and that's one of the
things we'd like to address in that one of the things about the Ersbo Addition
has a wetland alteration permit. The homes are nowhere near the wetland.
I They're impounding the upstream water and maintaining quality. There's an issue
with the ordinance but in this particular case there is no impact directly or
indirectly, well possibly indirectly but there is no direct impact on the
Iwetland of the shore.
Councilman Johnson: I'll have to disagree with that. When you're right on top
II of the shore, right on the edge of the wetland, right on the edge of the lake
and you're going to put dirt in there and you're going to put grass in there,
you're going to put fertilizer in there to rake that grass grow, tell re you're
not going to have an increased run-off. You're not going to have increased
Inutrient loading into Lotus Lake. Do they need a Watershed permit to do this?
Paul Krauss: The area that we recommended that they not be allowed to manicure
is the area between the wetland and the retaining wall. It's not that high
58
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989 1
ground that they want to maintain. ,
Councilman Johnson: If we're going to fill this area, I'm going to want to put
sane restrictions...in fact the entire state needs some restrictions on use of
fertilizers along the edges of lakes and whatever. But I think this is, we've
got the ability to do this. No fertilizer can be utilized in this fill area.
We can very easily say that because they need a permit to do it. '
Councilman Boyt: How are you going to monitor that?
Councilman Johnson: How are we going to monitor it? 1
Mayor andel: That's almost impossible to do Jay.
Councilwoman Dimler: You have run-off from other lawns as well.
Councilman Johnson: Not in this location. The only thing would be from that
knoll.
Councilwoman Dinler: But what you're generally talking about, that would be
very, very difficult to regulate. 1
Councilman Johnson: Yeah, well in this area we could monitor it. It'd be a
little expensive because we'll have to do sane testing of the soil before and
after. I didn't get a chance to get out and see this one but I'm not happy on
the fill area. I think the boardwalk's a good idea but I'm not tevibly sure of
the necessity of the fill area. I
Councilman Boyt: There is, if you take Ladd Cbnrad's comments out of the
Planning Commission. Ladd lives on the lake. I think he sort of lives and dies
wetland ordinance from time to time. Certainly Sue does. He says in his first
comment, I'm real surprised. Then he goes on to explain why but in his second
ca+ment he says in 10 years I've never seen anybody go right up to the edge of
the lake. I think what we've got here is a change in staff approach to our
wetlands ordinance from when it was written and as a councilimerber, I'm not
ready for that change.
Councilman Johnson: That 200 foot protects that wetland. That's why we're not,
when you start getting up and to say okay, here's this blade of wetland grass.
This is the edge of the wetland. You can now do anything you want as long as
you don't disturb that blade of grass. You're not protecting that wetland '
because that blade of grass is then going to move further down because that one
dies and pretty soon you don't have a wetland. You're shrinking it. I have a
real hard time filling right next to, doesn't DNR control any filling adjacent '
to lakes?
Paul Krauss: No, it's only when it goes below the ordinary high water.
Mayor andel: That's what it says in the Minutes too.
Councilwoman Dimler: "'So you're saying DNR would have no problem with that being
done?
59
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
11
Councilman Bout: That's also why we have the toughest wetland ordinance in the
state.
Councilman Johnson: DNR shows ours to a lot of other cities and says use ours.
' We're trying to preserve our wetlands. That's what people move here for.
Mayor Chmdel: Okay, any additional discussions?
Councilwoman Dimler: I guess I'm concerned again with the rights of the
property owner here. As long as the DNR doesn't oppose it, I don't see why I
should.
' Councilman Johnson: We have tougher ordinances than the DNR. The DNR is P retty
laxidasical. Well, I shouldn't say laxidasical but they're a big picture people
' okay and they're restricted by the legislature and you know what they've been
able to do. We've been able to get in here and produce a model ordinance that I
think...
' Councilwoman Dimler: I don't know though. They came out for that little pond
there in awry Farms. I thought they were quite concerned about that. I think
they are concerned about...
' Councilman Johnson: They are. When there's the rules to do it with. Sometimes
they've said geez, it's Chanhassen rules that we can use to force something to
happen here. We can't do it on our own.
Don Ashworth: I'm concerned with the one comment in regards to staff looking at
this differently. I'm not aware of that case. As this application deals with
the wetland, I'd like to go through that with Paul but as it deals with adjacent
to the lake, I mean you can go around to any of our lakes and we have
continuously disturbed up to the lake area. Whether it's fill in the back yard
of different homeowners or the actual construction of new homes or the boat
access or the park on the north side. I think there's a 100 examples. It's
because of that that we put in the fencing requirements to keep run-off from
' going into the lake so we toughened our ordinances to insure that wouldn't
happen. I didn't see anything on this application that would lead me to believe
that we're not doing that in this particular one nor are we not trying to
' protect the wetland, right?
Paul Krauss: I believe that's the case. In fact there is a retention pond on
this property that's designed to intercept water flowing out through the project
and hopefully clean it up a little bit.
Councilman Johnson: Also, on Type III versus the other type, Type I, Type II,
whatever, depending upon the slopes here, I don't see there's much of a slope in
this area. I'm not sure if we want the haybales. What that ends up doing is
giving you a larger area of no growth. If you can have just the fence stripped
in there, you will have less disturbed area than the haybales. If you don't
have a steep slope, you're not going to need the Type III. It's going to be
overkill. It's more expensive and it nay actually be environmentally worse than
having just the silt fence.,, Refer that over to Gary to see if he agrees with
IIthat opinion.
Mayor Qriiel: Is the Wooddale Builders here?
' 60
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989 1
Don Begin: Yes. '
Mayor Ci iel: Is there something you'd like to say? Would you like to come up
to the mic please. Just state your name and your address. ,
Don Begin: My name is Don Begin and I'm a serviceman for Wooddale Builders.
Tom, the superintendent couldn't make it down here tonight so I care down to sit
in. I think you're discussing it adequately. I've been in building all my life
and now have stepped away from the supervisory and into the service area and
I've seen a lot of building, a lot of run-off and everything. I think this has
been looked at real carefully and I don't think that the customer is requesting
this and I don't think he's going to do anything to damage the lake in any way,
shape or form. We're going to bring that fill in there on frozen ground. I
believe there's only going to be about a foot of fill put in there and then
sodded immediately when sod is available in the spring. Whatever way we can
keep the run-off from, if there is going to be any which I don't think there's
going to be any run-off. Whatever way Council decides to hold it, we'll
maintain it.
Mayor ( v iel: Okay, thank you.
Councilman Boyt: I'd like to take issue with Mr. Ashworth. I think that if you
look around the lake at development, a good bit of that took place before the
wetland alteration permit was put into place. That since then if we go back to
a year and a half ago, staff was at that point trying to pursue with the DNR the
correction of an alteration to the lakeshore where the owner did ajdhole lot
less than is being proposed here. Went out and pulled some cattails out and we
felt that was enough of a violation to get the DNR out there and talk about
car-plete restoration. I think it's a big change when staff comes in now and
says let's put a foot of fill right up next to the lakeshore when in the last
year and a half we were onto people because they were pulling cattails out. '
Don Ashworth: I guess I don't see where those two are one in the same. The
other portion, I don't know if you've had a chance to walk this area but it's,
you've got mature oaks there that are, I don't know how big they are. 36 inch
diameter.
Councilman Boyt: Not where they're filling? Don't tell me they're where '
they're filling because that will kill them.
Don Ashworth: No. I don't know of any fill that's proposed to go around those
trees. My point there is in walking that, it's a lot different situation than
the cattail issue that you're describing and I totally agree. I can't rererber
the incident but if someone was out there with cattails, filling in there, staff
would be the first one to say let's get that corrected. '
Councilman Johnson: As I understand, this is basically yard right now? Open
grassy area? '
Paul Krauss: Well there is open grassy area as you walk down to the lake and
you cane out through•:here. The wetland is up closer to the house. It kind of
meanders out that way. There is high ground out here and the City retention
pond is right there. The area that's being filled, this is the old survey so
it's somewhat inaccurate but the area that's being filled is something like
61
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
II that. It's about 30 feet wide so it's well away from the wetland proper. It's
close to the lake.
Councilman Boyt: The lake is...
Councilman Johnson: A wetland also.
IICouncilman Boyt: Class A.
Mayor Chmael: Okay. Any additional discussion?
IICouncilman Johnson: Is there a way we can get a little more distance from the
ordinary, instead of getting right to it we, because you get sane wave action
going in there and it will be, you'll be having wave action hitting your silt
fence if we have a heavy spring. The ordinary high water nark, you have a heavy
spring, it's going to be above the ordinary high water mark. So maybe filling
no closer than 5 or 10 feet of the ordinary high water mark. So you taper it,
instead of tapering 30 feet, we'll taper in 20 or 25 feet. Give us that little
extra for protection.
ICouncilwoman Dimler: Would that be acceptable?
Don Begin: I think what the owner was really looking for here is, like you
I said, it's a sponging area and what he's looking for is to walk out onto the
boardwalk and have a sod area. An area where they can sit out by the edge of
the lake. I would almost agree that he's not going to sod right up to tie lake.
II He's not going to sod way out there and leave that sod wash into the lake. It's
just non-sensical. Common sense is going to tell you he's going to hold back so
when you say 5 or 10 feet, I think that's probably what he's going to do anyway.
I Councilman Boyt: I think if you allow him to fill in this spongy area, then
where does it stop?
II Mayor Chmiel: Bill, if you look at the review that they did have in the
Planning Commission meeting. They took all those things I think into
consideration and they basically approved it with no dissenting votes. They do
have the 7 conditions contained within there. One Jay was talking about, that
IIwould make condition 8.
Councilman Boyt: You know it amazes me that they took all this concern to say
I you couldn't sod between the retaining wall and the wetland but you get out to
the lake and they say go ahead. So maybe they shouldn't sod there either.
Let's let prairie grass or whatever is going to grow up along the lake do that
II so that it serves it's natural function. I don't think we should be filling it.
I think it's a mistake.
Councilman Johnson: Actually it's probably just going to settle in.
1 Mayor Chmiel: I think it would too.
Councilman Johnson: I thiq,k in a couple years the sod's going to be wet. It's
going to fill in your...
Councilman Boyt: Well if it is, the dirt's only gone in one spot.
62
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989 1
Councilman Johnson: It's going straight down.
Mayor Chrael: Oompacts. '
Councilman Johnson: Not only compacts but will migrate into that, it's probably
a peaty soil that's there from the tree areas that has created this soil. The
clay will create a clay cap for a while and than that soil's slowly going to
migrate into the peat. It will be gone in a patter of a couple years. I'm
trying to think of what the purpose naturally, if we're coming out of a forested II
area your run-off's a little higher acidic from huRanic acids. Hitting this
area and a) sorbing prior to going directly into the lake. The sod's not going
to probably let it absorb a little too. I
Councilman Workman: Jay, your 8th amendment would be to not sod within 5 feet
of the ordinary high water park? Is that what you said?
Councilwoman Dimler: Or 10 feet.
Councilman Johnson: Well, I was going to start at 10. I would start
negotiating at the fireplace you know. So my condition 8 would be no filling
. within 10 feet of the ordinary high water park and I'll prove approval with those
8 conditions. 1 thru 7 as recartramded by staff and 8.
Councilman Workman: Is that fill area 40 feet wide?
Councilman Johnson: About 30 feet wide. '
Councilman W rkman: That's a friendly ao romise. I'd second that.
Councilman Johnson moved Oounci
, loran Wbrlaman seconded to approve Wetland
Alteration Permit #89-10 as shown on the site plan dated October 20, 1989 with
the following conditions:
1. ESrosion control shall be installed between-:the proposed grading and the
Class A wetland and between the ordinary high water park and the altered or
filled area prior to any improvements made on the site. Also, soil in the
fill area must be stabilized after it is placed.
2. The applicant should be made aware if the city or utility company needs to
use the utility and drainage easement. The city or utility company shall
not be responsible for any damages to the boardwalk or restoration costs.
3. The area between the boardwalk and the wetland shall be maintained in it's
natural state.
4. The area between the retaining walls and the wetland shall be maintained in '
it's natural state with no sod.
•
5. The boardwalk no*nth of the Class A wetland up to the ordinary high water '
mark of Lotus Lake shall be of permanent construction.
63
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
I
6. A $5,000.00 performance bond vast be posted with the city to guarantee that
any overland haulage to the fill area is restored to its present condition,
that any damage to the retention pond is repaired and that all distrubed
areas are seeded or sodded as soon as possible with erosion controls being
maintained throughout.
7. A grading permit shall be submitted and approved by staff prior to any work
' beginning on the site.
8. There shall be no filling within 10 feet of the ordinary high water mark.
All voted in favor except Councilman Hoyt who opposed and the motion carried
with a vote of 4 to 1. I
' REVISED ARCHITECTURAL DETAIL, COUNTRY SUITES HOTEL.
I Paul Krauss: Mr. Mawr, members of the City Council. Last Thursday, we've been
reviewing building permit plans for the Country Hospitality Suites and last
Thursday received same information that there were going to be architectural
changes proposed to the building. There's two reasons for the changes. One was
apparently the franchise corporation took exception to the roof line that had
been proposed. That it didn't match up with their corporate image I guess and
that can be explained by the developer in a minute. The other was that there
' was a basic underlying thrust of trying to save money on constructing the
building. There are a lot of changes to the building that were being proposed
same of which no longer are being proposed. Some of which are basically
II acceptable but they were significant enough that when taken in total, I was
unwilling to sign a building permit because I didn't think it was the building
you had approved. The changes included modifications to the roof line.
Deletion of cedar shake shingles for asphalt shingles. The elimination of one
I canopy, the small canopy on the west side of the building and a significant
downsizing of the main entrance canopy. The building is 12 feet shorter than it
used to be. I believe that's probably all the changes that we looked at. Now
with regard to the roof line changes, I think there's been some modification
since it was first proposed to us last Thursday that took into account
suggestions that we made to improve the sight line. Basically the original roof
II system that had been proposed was a massive slab pitched roof that had nothing
to break it up or not very much to break it up. As you can see from the
- drawings that they're providing tonight, that there's additional detailing being
proposed. The developer's here tonight to address the package that they want
you to look at in total. I guess I also had a philosophical issue with this
that I should lay on the table and it's that there's been same occasions in the
past where the buildings that have been approved were changed during the
' building permit process or after that and I was uncamfortable being a party to
that. It's my belief that when you tell me that you've approved a building,
that you have an expectation that that building is actually going to be built.
Therefore, and given the time constraints that this developer has, therefore I
II wanted to bring it back before you tonight and let you make the decision and
direct us which way to go on it. In the future, given your direction, my
preference is when these conditions crop up is to just say well, if it's a
I significant deviation from`the approved site plan, you've got to go back through
the Planning Commission, City Council and go through it again because that is
not the project that we approved. I coordinated this review with Todd Gerhardt
' 64
I
City Council Meeting - December 18; 1989
I
and he indicated that the HRA would probably have similar concerns as well. The
City has a significant stake in this project and he's scheduled a comparable
review for their meeting on Thursday.
Councilman Workman: Is there a page that shows the changes? '
Paul Krauss: Well the rear 3 pages, and I'll let Mir. Hemminger explain that but
the rear 3 pages of the original in that packet will became what they're II proposing now. By the way, I apologize for the late date of getting this to you
but events occurred rather fast and we just got these ourselves to look at
today.
Dave Hem►inger: Good evening Mr. Mayor. Councilmerbers. My name is David
Hem►inger. I represent D.W. Hutt Consultants Inc.. Construction margement for
the firm and Mr. Bloczberg and a partnership for the Country Hospitality Suites II Hotel. As Paul mentioned to you, last week I approached him with a request or a
consideration of what changes could be made to the building to conform with the
Country Hospitality Suites signature requirements and by signature requirements
I mean building identification. In the hospitality industry, they like to be
able to have their buildings identified by certain trademarks. One of the
trademarks is of course the country look porch at the front of the building.
Also the roof pitch as he had mentioned. They were strictly opposed to the flat II
roof so our alternative was to. approach you with going to a 6:12 pitch roof and
trying to get a pitch that would conducive to the other buildings in your city.
In doing that I guess I didn't convey well enough to Paul what our intentions
was. I understood that he thought we were looking at a pretty well flat roof
with no detail. Basically I was trying to get information from hires to what
type of detail you'd be looking for and then take it back to the architect to
find out if that's in fact what we could do and fortunately I think we were able
to do that quite well and keep the original facade that you had agreed upon...
This illustration here showed the flat roof with a mansured and if you look at
the vertical elevations of the building you can see that these roof lines right
here are still predominant in the gabled roof. They extend a little bit higher
though because we're going up about 20 feet further with the roof pitch. So the
accents are still there. In trying to meet the Suite's requirement though for
the pitch roof we ran into another problem and that was with the cedar shakes.
The Code requires that they be fire treated and to fire treat using that type of
a shake on that passive of a roof gets to be a pretty substantial cost factor.
We were considering in the other application to use a non-treated shake but have
it painted over or treated by fire chemical process. That however is no longer
acceptable in the State Codes. So what we wanted to propose instead is using a
Timberline shingle which gives you the same appearance as cedar shakes. The
type I'm referring to is what you're seeing put on the Riveria right now. Not
what is on the shopping center and not what is on the apartment project behind
the shopping center. And this shake is a Class A rated shake and it's built up 11 in layers and we're talking in the excess of 250 pounds. In fact it's more like
300 pounds. I'm pretty sure it's 300 pounds. This will give you the same
effect as the wood shake. If you drive past the Riveria and you look at the
snow or at the light, it gives you the same cast from the distance and it has
the same effect as a wood shake but it's half the cost of a wood shake. If you
• look, getting back to the roof again, if you look at the second page underneath
the site plan you cant see in a view looking down upon the roof. I'm pointing
this out to you again to show you that this view is the accents and shows how
the shadowed effect of the roof is going to take place so that you'll have that
65 '
1
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
same appearance when you look onto the building. That there are jogs and
offsets in the roof and it's not just a single plane roof that we're
contemplating. The issue on the canopy, what happened there is kind of two
fold. NUmber one, it took away from the country porch appearance and number
two, it became a massive structure because of it's span. The canopy that was
proposed or wound up in the final drawings was one that spanned 48 feet and was
11 32 feet wide. It had to carry a lot of structural load and the eye beams became
very massive in it and so what we want to propose is a lesser type of canopy. I
should back myself up here a minute. The reason this canopy got to be so big is
that it's my understanding it went from a 24 foot driveway to a 30 foot driveway
11 to allow buses to turn in there and unload. That's why it went to a lot bigger
than the recommendations of BRW the engineer. However, no cost factors were
applied to this or engineering at that time. It's our intention that we want to
' see a canopy and I think we can do this by if you look at the elevation on the
next page behind the roof. The top elevation to the left shows you the entrance
into the motel. Our intention is to take that center portion and try to bring
that out. However, at this particular time and because of our financial
restraints and so forth, we haven't been able to do the engineering or the cost
value on that. It's oux intention however to do something in that area and what
I'm asking for is your blessing in letting us go ahead with a permit and work on
that. I think Mr. Bloomberg would even support me in the fact that he's pretty
adamant that he wants that canopy and he usually gets his way I think. So we're
not throwing that entirely. We want to look at sale different alternatives and
' we want to try and satisfy the franchiser by giving a still a porch type
appearance and maybe we can just bring that little canopy of that doorway, bring
it on out and serve the same purpose but look at some different engineering,
structural engineering on it so we can accomplish that. The situation, we have
shortened the lobby by 12 feet but there was some discussion also that we wanted
to move the building 12 feet to the east. Now we have abandoned that idea
because again our time restraints and we don't want to go through the process
unnecessarily of having to go before zoning again and so forth if we should move
that building. So that has been abandoned. One of the concerns was that there
was a watermain located along our west foundation wall and Gary was going to do
same research on that. I don't know if he's done that yet for me but he was
going to look at that.
Gary Warren: I haven't finished. We've been looking at whether we can get by
without them but I haven't concluded yet.
Dave Hemminger: So that's an area that we have to address somehow but our
intention is not to move the building.
Councilman Workman: Why do you want to move it back 12 feet?
Dave Hemminger: Well we were going to move it at first to take it off that
watermain so we could construct without having to concern ourselves with the
main.
1 Clayton Johnson: The watermain is going to be abandoned but right not it's
underlying the footing.
II TFY
Gary Warren: Be abandoned' and replaced.
Councilman Johnson: As part of the construction?
66
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
Dave Hem►inger: Be routed around. '
Gary Werren: As part of the proposed city public Improvement project there.
We're looking to see if we have enough looping capacity right now to allow it to
be abandoned since we wouldn't be entertaining construction of the new main
until the weather breaks in the spring.
Councilman Johnson: Will they start construction this winter yet? '
Dave Hem►inger: Would we start? '
Councilman Johnson: Yeah.
Dave Hem►inger: Yes. We already have. In fact our lender has required that we
start as of last week and so that's part of our restraints here.
Councilman Boyt: I have a question if I might. Mr. Bloomberg, don't you have
cedar shakes on your building now?
Dave Hem1inger: He wants to know if you have cedar shakes on your building now.
Your existing building. Yes he does.
Councilman Boyt: Well how is this going to match if you take Timberline and
match it up against cedar? ,
Herb Bloomberg: You can't tell now with the shortening of the building, it has
it's advantage. It's going to have almost a 40 foot distance between the
rebuilt area that's being...and the hotel. My feeling is that is going to be a
roof line which may be more flat up to a railing on it so the hotel architecture
will stand separate from the one going to it. That is the rebuilt one. Our
plan was to run the shakes around there and continue like what is on the Animal
Fair building, a mansur roof and if we have to use the fire rated shingles
that's fine with me but to the, I think when we get to the hotel then it will be
the asphalt. I think you'll understand the dilemma a that we've gotten into on
this, a few of these changes. One thing, I wasn't that close to the architect
when they started but they were approved and very muct involved with the Country
Suites Hotel and I'm as surprised myself that they didn't design in the first
place with this gabled structure because I saw these and I was even at the grand
opening of the one in Burnsville which was one of the first ones here. But our
position today is that we have the permanent financing. We have the interim
financing but the problem is that we have to furnish a term construction
statement that it can be built for the financing. So what we're asking for is
the permit to go ahead on this basis, which is with the asphalt shingles and as
far as the carport's concerned, I'm in hopes that we can somehow squeeze that
out and get that like a carport. The appearance will be essentially what is on
the original plan and I think the roof will be a little higher but I think that
with the 3 story building, and as you look at that one now, it will be another
third higher perhaps in the roof system which I think will be desireable rather
than this projection. This presentation...the an who is actually doing the
construction management and we've gotten the bids in and this can be done now in
this budget but we do"have I think a good group of partners and I think I can
sell then on doing same other things for the hotel to change the interior to the
67 '
11
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
I/ benefit of what we're trying to do in this community. I think that's more or
less the story.
Councilman Boyt: Thank you. I guess that explains why you're caning in here
because you can't build the initial building for the amount of money you have
financed.
Dave Hemminger: That's correct.
Councilman Boyt: Because what I see you doing is I see you taking a lot of
11 cost, maybe not proportionate to the total cost but a significant dollar amount
out of the building cost wise. I'm not sure, one of the things that always
troubles me is when the City Council and the HRA are both voting on the same
11 issue. I'm not comfortable with that. The HRA has considerable money in this
thing and when they put money into it, I really like to see us cane out with a
product that's everything we hoped it would be so I'm a little relunctant to see
the building shrink in size. That's unfortunate that we have to give up the
cedar shakes. We've given them up other places in town. I guess I can live
with that part of it easier than I can live with the building being 12 feet
smaller which means considerable less square footage.
Clayton Johnson: Bill, if I could comment. The 12 feet is only in the pool
area. It's not in the main building. It's in the pool area that the building
is being shorten 12 feet. The issue of shakes goes back to on the old plan,
when we had a :tonsured roof, cedar shakes were an insignificant item but now
when we go to the full gable roof and with the new requirements that areivin
place for fire retardancy, the cedar shakes are just not a practical solution.
That's the way it is. Up until just recently we could have put on the cedar
shakes and fire proofed them with a spray on material. That's no longer
permitted under the Code so we have to go to a Class A shingle and Timberline
would appear to be the best solution. One other comment. In regard to the
canopy. It's like Pinnochio's nose. It keeps growing. We started out with a
very modest canopy. The canopy on the Dinner Theatre is about 20 feet long.
When the decision was made to tear down the gabled roof building, BRW came in
and helped us redesign all new parking and the stacking in that area. When they
did that, the driveway grew to 30 feet because obviously it would be nice to
I accmodate buses in an orderly manner. When the road grew to 30 feet, now the
canopy grew to 44 feet in length. 44 x 36 so I mean it was just one of those
issues that the architect didn't really go back and address after the changes
were made by BRW. So Herb's hope is to maintain the canopy. Core out to the
II sidewalk. Project it out over the road. Maintain the same look from the street
but get away from that 48 foot by 36 foot mass. It's really huge.
Councilman Workman: So you're saying you're going to keep the canopy on there?
Clayton Johnson: Yes. It's just not going out all the over the road and
anchoring on the island. Instead of being 48 feet.
IIDave Hemminger: It won't be 48 feet.
IIClayton Johnson: It won'trbe 48 feet long.
Councilman Workman: It will be how long? 1
i
68
i
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
Clayton Johnson: Well I don't know. What is it to the streeet it's what Dave?
Councilman Workman: When you say to the street, you're talking about the north
side?
Clayton Johnson: No, you go out to the sidewalk and then canolever out to the
street. 8 feet?
Dave Henninger: 8 feet. 8 feet to the sidewalk and then probably another 6
feet or so, it'd be 14 feet.
Councilman Workman: What's 14 feet going to cover?
Clayton Johnson: It will permit a cay to go underneath.
Dave Henminger: A car and a vehicle to pull up along the end of it so they can
get out on one side and go through at the same time.
Councilman Johnson: When you say to the street, you're not talking West 78th?
Clayton Johnson: We're not talking West 78th Street. See there's that big turn
around in there that's 30 feet wide and the original canopy went out to the
sidewalk, across the 30 foot street and beyond. That's why it ended up so huge.
Dave Henninger: But as Herb has mentioned, we are going to try in the hopes to '
make that a longer one yet. To try and get back to that 48 if possible but we
have to look at the valued engineering and the structural capabilit ' of it.
Mayor Qrmiel: The days that it rains, if it were to be up to 14 feet, you'd
probably get 1 or maybe 2 cars in there at the max.
Councilman Workman: One with the doors open. I
Mayor QTmiel: Right and I've know that I've gone into different motel/hotels
and it's nice and convenient plus I think it adds a lot of aesthetics to it.
Makes it look a little more complimentary just as I see the shake shingles
because the present Dinner Theatre is all shake shingles and by continuing with
those I think would blend in mach better than going to the proposed shingles
that you're talking about as well.
Councilman Johnson: The flat roof too. Isn't the Dinner Theatre so it's just
the sides that are shake shingle.
Cbuncilman Hoyt: It's got a big sloped roof on it.
Mayor Qiriel: When we approved this, I liked the appearance of it. I think it
had quality. A look that was complimentary. I don't know if these changes now
are going to do the same thing for it. I know there are some other shingles I
believe that are out on the market that are very close to the shake shingles.
Dave Henminger: What are you referring to?
Mayor Qariel: In an asphalt kind of shingle and I'm not sure whether those.
69
•
i
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
Dave Her+i inger: This is it.
Mayor Chmiel: No, there's some others that I've seen that are other than that.
Dave Henninger: There's a heavier grade.
Mayor Chmiel: There's a different grade and it has a little different effect to
it. It has a ripple in it just as a shake shingle has.
Dave Heriringer: Have you seen the roof that's going on the Riveria?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes. I don't like that one either. My own opinion.
Dave Herminger: When you see this and the size that it is, you won't know the
difference standing on the ground and looking at it whether it's going to be a
cedar shake or an asphalt shake.
Mayor Chmiel: I question that. I can distinguish the difference believe nee.
Aesthetically in just looking at it, you can tell the difference. There's no
question in my mind.
11 Dave Hemminger: You'll tell it in a certain way but quality wise it's going to
give you the same impression. That's what you're looking for is, what kind of
ambience it gives to you when you're looking at it. Does it give you the
impression of the country look, the western look and I think that's what it does
for you. And it gives you the best fire rating you can possibly get. ,
4
11 Mayor Chmiel: Right. I realize that.
Dave Haiinger: And I think that's a big consideration that should be
' considered when you're considering it.
Herb Bloomberg: I was just going to comment. I was watching them laying the
shingles today on the Riveria, finishing up and there was a light snow and you
I could see every row of shingles. Actually these are 3 thicknesses if you look
in places and the minimum of 2 so it is that effect. Obviously this is a
sample, I don't think gives you the flavor of it at all. This shows how thick
II it is. It gets to be about a half inch thick there... All the way through the
town there isn't a single new shake roof. However in the rebuilding, what
they're going to be demolishing, that will be shake and it will be mansured
' which will be very dominant because it's a very high, and then from there down,
it mist be over 1,000 feet of shake buildings from that building around to the
mu
hotel. Down beyond the theatre will be all shake and I think it's the flavor of
the town...going to be okay. ...remodeling of the American Legion when they
1 moved in where the Riveria is now. We gave them the shakes for their front
entrance. I started the shake business but the closest we've gotten now is the
Timberline roof.
Mayor Chmiel: Any other discussion?
Councilman Hoyt: What di&the HRA decide?
Councilwoman Dirtier: They're going to review it Thursday.
I
70
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989 1
Councilman Boyt: So what we have control over is the building permit. Is that
the thought?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes. ,
Councilman Boyt: Well what does the HRA have control over here?
Don Ashworth: The only thing the HRA is doing is has an incentive regarding the
special assessments or parking lot improvements. They are not in any way
financing the structure or the land write down or anything else.
Councilman Johnson: But they're going to be the special assessment reduction
program that goes through the HRA?
Don Ashworth: Yes.
Councilman Boyt: So I guess the question then is would we have approved this if
it was caning to us as it is being presented today. Tonight.
Councilman Johnson: I think I would.
Councilman Boyt: I think a canopy's a nice touch. I agree with the Mayor. It
will attract save people just because it's a convenience.
Councilman Johnson: I've been to too many hotels without the canopies in the
rain. It seams like it only rains at the hotels without canopies.,.
Councilman Workman: I guess quickly and for expedience sake, it looks like 1
there's 4 deals here. One, shakes. Two, the building's going to be 12 foot
shorter. Three, shorter or no canopies.
Dave Harminger: Shorter canopy or an extended canopy.
Mayor Chmiel: 14 feet or. ,
Dave Herminger: Or better.
Councilman Workman: And a higher roof line. I like the higher roof line. I
don't mind the shakes. 12 feet shorter, I've got to know more about where that
sewer line and that, I don't understand that. Then I think the canopy, I don't
mind the country look but a screen door in the front end you know kind of thing.
Dave Herm►inger: It's not a screen door.
Councilman Workman: It sure looks that way on the picture over here. I guess '
the apartment building went up in town and gee I heard, I'm also on the HRA and
I heard the rest of the HRA kind of rambling, geez did we approve that. Geez,
was that that close to the road for the medical arts building and holy cow and
it was looking kind of bare faced because they had gone through same of the same
processes. Stripping it down kind of thing. I'm not so sure that there's lots
of people that are really happy and I don't want that to happen to this. This
is going to be a class act and when you call your roan suites, that means it's a
fancy place, otherwise it'd be just roars.
1
71
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
Dave He minger: Don't let that mislead you though. It has a country there to
it and you have to remerher that. The idea of the country suites hospitality
franchise.
' Councilman Johnson: You mean they've got an outhouse?
' Dave Henninger: No. It has the country look and the 12 feet that we're
affecting does not affect the units themselves and the suites concept is a
bedroom and a parlour concept. That's the concept there. It's not, it going to
upgrade it from a budget but it doesn't make it a high class.
Councilman Workman: I understand. I just don't have a very good clarification
yet on why it has to be 12 feet and maybe Gary can give me that explanation.
' It's just a general idea of kind of now we're stripping it all back and then
worrying later about yeah, we approved it and yeah, it doesn't quite came up to
where we thought is was supposed to.
Dave Herminger: But your 12 foot concern is a small part. I go back to what
Herb was saying earlier in your 2 garage affair. It's a small section of just
roof and open space.
Councilman Johnson: It's the lobby and the swimming pool.
Dave Henninger: That's right. It's wide open area so you're not taking a lot
of...
Clayton Johnson: There's a lot of history to this. I really don't like the
connotation that it's all done for cost. It's done trying to work with the
franchisee and part. The whole issue of the pool gets back to an issue of
supervision. If you're not going to have full time supervision in the pool area,
then they want to keep the pool area small. Smaller. In this type of facility
you're not going to have full time supervision in the pool area.
' Councilman Boyt: There's not full time supervision in a pool area in any pool
in town in a hotel.
' Clayton Johnson: There is in a large Holidot,e or a facility like that but there
won't be here so they want to reduce the amount of extra space around the pool.
It's trying to satisfy both the franchise and owner. I think we're very tuned
into the concerns that have been voiced in the past about what happened to the
11 apartment project. That's why we're caring back to inform you at every step of
the way as to what the changes are so you're in a position of being informed
rather than surprised.
Councilman Johnson: You suggested to Paul to bring this back to us?
Clayton Johnson: It was Paul's decision whether to bring it back. All we can
do is keep him posted.
Councilman Dinner: Can‘we send it back to Planning? Do they need to see it? I
Paul Krauss: That's an option. I think you have to determine if the changes
are significant enough to warrant that. I think in the future if we continue,
say Market Square canes in and it doesn't look like Market Square, it would be
1 72
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
my inclination to send it back to the Planning Commission. But in this case it
eight not warrant that.
Councilman Boyt: They're trying to get this built. I would think personally, I
can give you the shingles. I want the rest of it. I'm not sure about a 48 foot
long canopy but I am pretty sure that I don't want it 14 feet long. That won't
go so somewhere inbetween there. Higher roof. I agree with what Tan just went
through. I'm saying of the four, I guess given the way we've shingled the rest
of town, that I can live with the Timberline shingles but I don't see the rest
of it. I think that was the deal you came in with. I think that's what you
should have financed it to do. I'm surprised you didn't finance it to do that.
Councilman Johnson: I don't even think the 12 feet doesn't bother me that much.
It also provides a bigger separation between the existing buildings and the
hotel then. The hardware store building. It's currently a hardware store. It
provides a larger separation. I think that's an improvement to changing to
shake.
Herb Bloomberg: ...as I say it's almost 40 feet now and that's enough of a
separation so we can set off the difference in the architecture which I still
think is going to be complimentary but it certainly won't look like...abrupted
change...really quite handsome transition there.
Councilman Johnson: The water pipe issue is on the other side of the hotel from 11 the 12 feet issue. What the issue is is whether we can get along without that
water pipe while you're constructing and before we have the new water pipe. Is
that what I'm getting and engineering is looking at that issue? '
Dave He minger: That's correct. ,
Councilman Johnson: What happens if it canes up that we don't have looping
capacity and we have to have that water pipe functional during your
construction? Does all heck break loose?
Herb Bloomberg: An engineering study there would prove that that can be 1
handled. Obviously the soil test will be taken so we know that...leave the pipe
in there and just bury it underneath...
Councilman Johnson: Abandon it and place it in the future? ,
Gary Warren: The development contract states that if it is left in place, that
basically Country Suites, Bloomberg, whatever assumes the responsibility if in '
the future it collapses after it's been abandoned but it would abandoned in
place full of sand and grout or whatever so that it would stabilize.
Councilman Johnson: What if there's building settlement that breaks the pipe,
erodes the foundation and their building falls in? Is that the City's problem
or is that Bloomberg's problem? ,
Dave Ha+minger: That becomes a partnership problem.
Gary Warren: Partnership. Not the City's. I
Councilman Johnson: Better be.
I
73
i
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
I
IIHerb Bloomberg: It's our problem, because...
Dave Hem►inger: We would have soil borings done by an outside facility and if
II the soils warrant that it has to be dug up, then we dig it up and recampact it.
If their findings indicate that we can bridge it, then we fill it as Gary has
mentioned.
1 Councilman Johnson: Are we going to be looping it before they move in so
there's no problem with that?
IIMayor Ch oriel: No.
Gary Warren: No.
IICouncilman Johnson: So it's going to be, when they build it's going to be a
functioning watermain underneath their building?
IIGary Warren: At this point in time it would be a functioning watermain. What
we're looking at and should be hopefully resolving it I would hope this week, is
I do we have enough looping capacity with the improvements that we've done in the
downtown improvements in Phase 2 of the downtown such that it's not as integral
a main as it was before. One of the impacts to that decision is that the Market
Square plat and subdivision which as you know also has sane modifications to the
II watermain which provides an alternate loop to this connection here so we're
looking at how those 2 might end up happening at the sale time in which case
we'd be having same problems. But ultimately the new main would be consttucted
in the spring which would give us back this connection.
Councilman Boyt: How long is the canopy to begin with?
IIMayor C hmiel: 40 same feet.
Councilman Boyt: Well it's 48 now. at was it when we first started? Before
II it kept getting...
Clayton Johnson: We started with a 20 foot street so I don't know what that is.
Probably 10 feet shorter.
Dave Ha inger: When we first started it was
real short.
1 Councilman Boyt: Well, 30 something right?
Clayton Johnson: I can't tell you Bill. All I know is the street grew.
IICouncilman Boyt: Well I'll make a motion to see if we can get this moving
along. I would move that we approve the building permit allowing them to change
IIto shingles. The canopy be it's original length or the closest reasonable thing
to that which isn't the 40 feet, it's 30 something.
Clayton Johnson: Well Bill, if it's 30 feet, you're going to have to go all the
IIway over the street. ,-
Councilwoman Dimler: It won't go halfway over the street.
r
74
I
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
I
Councilman Johnson: Well 30 feet starts fron► the building or 30 feet starting 1
from the street?
Clayton Johnson: 30 feet starting from the building. You're going to end up in
the middle of the road.
Dave Hemet finger: It has to be 48 feet. I
Councilwoman Dimler: You have to go all the way across the road.
Councilman Boyt: Well if you go out to the island, the first island, is that
what we've been talking about here tonight is that 48 feet?
Dave He manger: Yes. 1
Councilman Boyt: It looks like 38 in your diagram.
Councilman Johnson: It's another 10 foot to the building. The sidewalk's 8.
Dave } vinger: Does he have an old site plan?
Councilman Boyt: Well I'd be open to an erten:bent on the canopy but my basic
motion would be that, I have no idea. It looks to me like it's got to be 48 feet
but if somebody feels differently, suggest it. I would move approval allowing
the heavy duty Timberline shingle in place of the cedar shakes. Everything
else, the high roof line. The 48, whatever length canopy should bethe original
length of the building.
Councilman Johnson: How about the 12 feet?
Councilman Boyt: My motion would be keep the 12 feet, the high roof, the 48
foot canopy and allow there to change the shingles.
Mayor Chrael: Is there a second?
Councilman Workman: Second.
Councilman Johnson: I'm not sure why you're so pepped up on the 12 feet. To me
in a building that's 300 foot long and this is their entrance, whether their
lobby is 12 foot bigger or not. It seems to be a really minor manner if they
can be more economically viable and their franchisee wants it that way, I think
we should be able to live with that rather than going to the detail of what we
originally approved because what we originally approved wasn't a whole lot more
detailed.
Councilman Boyt: We're talking about value of the building I think. Square
footage translates into value. If they want to came back and say we can spend
that money better doing this with it, I'm interested.
Councilman Johnson: Well if they don't build the building at all, then we don't
have any value. I
Councilman Boyt: That's true. That's an option.
?5 '
11
IICity Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
Co uncilman J ohnson: And that's an option if their financing and their
franchisee says go take a jump.
IICouncilman Boyt: Well I would suggest to maybe what they want to do is go back
to the HRA and see how much money they can get. That's what the people in the
IIapartment building kept doing.
Clayton Johnson: We don't have any assistance other than the straight special
assessment.
Councilman Boyt: Well, suggest an amerfr ent to that.
II Councilman Johnson: Leave the 12 foot. Let then decide what's economically
viable.
Mayor Chmiel: Explain to me one more time with that 12 feet. It's the main
entrance. It's the pool area and the main entrance coming in. What else is in
there and that's it?
IIDave Hemanger: That's it.
Mayor Chmiel: What in dollars does that cut back?
1 Dave Henninger: Roughly translated.
Mayor Chmiel: How much per square foot?
Dave Hemmi er: Less than $25.00 a square foot.
ng qua
IICouncilman Johnson: A single story area. And that's what, 7 feet by 12 feet?
Councilman Workman: Which end is the 12 feet going to cone off of?
IIDave Henninger: The east end. It separates it back from the existing building.
It'd be this end.
1 Councilman Workman: So as this top cover sheet sits, it should have been 12
feet longer. You're showing it shorter.
IIDave Henninger: Yes.
Councilman Workman: So it should be out to here.
Dave Henninger: That 11 foot 6 is an error. It should be 16. It's 11'6". It
should read 16'8". The architect made...
1 Councilman Workman: So it's about 924 square feet?
Dave Hemanger: Well 25 x76.
II vY II
Councilman Johnson: So about $25,000.00. Does an insurance man's calculator do
square feet? He could be doing house insurance.
1
76
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
Councilman Boyt: I can't believe that $25,000.00 is killing this project. I
Clayton Johnson: It isn't. It was the design consideration. it wasn't an
economic consideration. Like Herb points out, the only difference is going to
happen now, you're going to lose 12 feet off the building. You're going to gain
12 foot in the connecting link. When the connecting link is built, which is an
aisle connection, enclosed, heated, it's going to be 12 feet long. You're going
to force us to go all the way back through Country Hospitality again and revise
the plan.
Councilman Johnson: Country Hospitality, are they local? I
Dave He minger: It's a Radisson corporation.
Councilman Johnson: That's what I thought. 1
Councilman Boyt: Well I agree that, I sure don't want to be in the position of
designing your building for you but that's apparently what we're in here. If
the Council seers to think that we can get rid of the 12 feet and it's not an
economic issue, then put the shakes back on and take your 12 feet off.
Councilman Johnson: For fire safety, which is better the shakes or the '
Timberline?
Councilman Boyt: Well it's sitting next to the Dinner Theatre. Don't talk to
me about fire safety.
Councilman Johnson: It's 40 feet away. I
Clayton Johnson: The Dinner Theatre is all sprinklered.
Councilman Boyt: Right but I Haan we've already got cedar shakes. I
Clayton Johnson: On a mansured roof Bill. The whole theatre is a mansured
roof. It's got a flat built up roof top. That was the original design. We do
not have a building in town that has a roof this massive that's got cedar
shakes. I don't know where it is. It would be huge.
Councilman Johnson: That's like say because your right foot hurts, you ought to
drop a hammer on the left so they both hurt.
Mayor Chmiel: The only one you'd have would probably be St. Hubert's. Old 1
St. Hubert's.
Cbuncilman Johnson: So there's a motion on the floor. I
Mayor Chmiel: There is a motion.
Cbuncilwaran Dimler: Did you amend it? t
Councilman Johnson: Well they didn't accept my amendment. I would move an
amendment.
.y
Mayor Q iel: Make a friendly amendment.
77
i
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
Councilman Johnson: I tried a friendly amen3nent.
Councilman Workman: What was your amendment?
Councilman Boyt: He tried to shorten it up 12 feet.
Councilman Johnson: Yeah, I was going to put the 12 feet back. There were 4
things you were asking for.
Dave Hemminger: Actually there's only 3 things. The fourth one is something I
approached Gary on. It's 3 things. One is the roof. The second is the shakes
and the third was the canopy.
Councilman Johnson: We want a canopy. You want a canopy. We're in agreement.
We just don't know far you can canolever the canopy out. Whether it goes all
the way out the 48 feet or not...
Herb Bloomberg: Somehow the canopy's going to be built. We have to work with
my partners and I think I have enough... on it. However, to get the permit now,
we have to keep within the budget. Otherwise we can't get a disbursement for
the building permit. So we're locked in unfortunately but I'm satisfied that
it's going to make a good project and I think everybody's going to be happy with
it in the end. Unfortunately we've kind of run out of time to where we're on
the job and we're ready to excavate.
*4
Dave Hemminger: I'd like to add one thing here since everybody is relating to
the budget. When the budget was established for this project I was not even
involved in it. I cane in with a budget that was already established. That's
' terrible to be honest with you but like we tried to say before, a lot of these
things were written by the Radisson Corporation to the architects and it was
suggested that it doesn't go in here. That it does not conform to their
prototype, etc., etc. and there are certain amenities that they are demanding
and don't want to sign off on and we're trying to make everybody happy and get
the project going.
1 Councilman Johnson: Do you happen to have a letter from then tonight to show
us, you know say here's Radisson's letter saying...
II : Clayton Johnson: Yeah, I have a letter here. We've exceeded all of their
criteria on about 27 out of 30 in terms of specs on the hotel but the one is the
gabled roof.
Councilman Workman: We had a special meeting Mr. Johnson, we had a special
meeting of the HRA to kind of help out, because I think it does kind of cane
down to a budget thing here. We had a special meeting to discuss or to take
I care of a collateral situation. In other words move back everything and move it
around and maybe you could sense I was a little nervous that night about it.
Asking a lot of questions. Now we're kind of scaling things back a little bit
and it sounds to me a little bit like it's a budget thing. I still haven't been
given a real clear idea of-mhy Hospitality Suites thinks that that 12 feet is a
consideration in the overall design of a 300 some foot hotel. I don't know
where the city gains by having a longer corridor connecting this thing versus
more hotel. I'd rather have more hotel but it all does kind of, if the
78
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
HRA hadn't helped out with that collateral deal, no hotel. If we don't shorten
it by 12 feet and do these shakes, no hotel. We hear no hotel. It is kind of a
budget thing. That's where I'm starting to get even more nervous because what
are we going to do next? Next we're going to have no pool. I
Dave Hemminger: The thing about lobbies though and pools is they're
non-productive areas. They do not bring the revenue in. Pools are used
normally and you can check any industry standard on this, are used by children.
Small children. Adults don't use then. So it's a very costly, expensive daily
operational expense.
Councilman Wbrkcran: But we knew that when this first came in.
Dave Hemminger: Okay, but the Radisson and the management people were probably
not involved in it. I don't know. At that time, in the preliminary stages and
design of this, they probably were not involved in it because I see their plan
review was in July of 1989. I believe that was probably presented before that
to you. 1
Councilman Workman: Which end is the pool in?
Dave Hemminger: It's in the east end. r
Councilman Workman: By the nein entrance? '
Dave Hemminger: East of the main entrance. It's between the exis tirlg building
and a new building where that walkway is. The walkway leads into the lobby
portion and the pool is adjacent to that area. I
Councilman Johnson: So the southeast corner of the nein building.
Dave Hemminger: The pool is right down here. Then the lobby's up here. Then '
you've got prep kitchens. You've got registration desk. You've got exercise
roans.
Councilman Workman: I think maybe you know where I'm caning from. It just
seers rather natural and a lot of it, it's not just this deal. You get a deal
and then it starts to trim up and that's what I get worried about. '
Councilman Boyt: Well we have a motion, I think and I don't think it's been
amended.
Mayor Qvdel: We have a motion on the floor
with a friendly motion.
Councilman Boyt: A friendly amendment that hasn't been taken so far. So that ,
we have the full length building, the full length canopy and the higher roof
line. I think the option to that is if it passes, and they don't like it, go
back to the Planning Commission. '
Councilman Johnson: They want the higher roof line so that's one that we're...
• Councilman Boyt: That's one where there's no problem. So the only two it cares
•
down to is the canopy and the full sized hotel.
79
City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
Councilman Johnson: Let me try nay friendly amendment...an unfriendly amendment.
Okay, I move we allow them to knock off the 12 foot and that they have a canopy
that's, I'm not sure of the length though. We want a canopy.
1 Mayor Ch*ael: I think build a canopy to a portion that will be a little more
excessive than that 14 feet. It might be 15 but I think Herb wants a little
more than that.
Councilman Workman: 14's in the street then.
Councilman Johnson: That's canolevered so there's no post at the end of it. He
can't go too much further.
Councilman Workman: I know what that word means now. Mansured roofs, I'm going
to find out what those are.
Councilman Johnson: So that's my motion is that we have it extend at least 14
feet. A canopy extending at least 14 feet.
Paul Krauss: Is that measured from the building or from the curb? Are we
talking about the canolevered here, what do you want to cover?
Dave H winger: It's 8 feet to the sidewalk and then another 6 feet out over
the driveway.
Councilman Johnson: It's 10 feet to the sidewalk, 8 feet across the sidewalk,
you're at 18 feet before you even get to where the car is so let's say a minimum
of one car width with the doors open across the parking lot and it's not a Hugo.
Paul Krauss: So a canolever of at least 10 feet beyond the curb line.
' Clayton Johnson: That was the intention of the redesign.
Councilman Johnson: Yeah. That would be the motion then.
Mayor Qriel: Bill, do you accept that?
Councilman Boyt: He needs a second. That's completely counter to what I was
trying to do.
Councilman Johnson: Yes, I know.
Councilman Boyt: Well mine has a second. We can vote on that.
Councilman Boyt moved, Councilman Workman seconded to approve the revised
II architectural details for Hospitality Suites Hotel to keep the 12 feet in the
building, approve the high roof, keep the 48 foot canopy and allow changing to
Timberline shingles. Councilman Boyt, Councilman Workman and Councilwoman
Dimaer voted in favor. Qoyncilman Johnson and Mayor Chmie voted in opposition
and the motion carried with a vote of 3 to 2.
Dave Hemminger: So you just approved what?
80
City Council Meeting - December 18; 1989
Mayor Q iel: We approved basically the asphalt shingle, the high roof and the
remaining of the 12 foot.
Councilwoman Dinler: And the canopy has to be 48. 1
Clayton Johnson: And if we can't do that, we go back to Planning, right?
Mayor Chmiel: Right. ,
Councilman Johnson: Or you convince one of these 3 to ask for reconsideration
at the next Council meeting. I
COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS: ,
Mayor Chr►iel: We're going to hit these Council Presentations real quick. I'd
like to just make you aware of the fact that the State of Minnesota has taken a
positive step for our children by passing what is called the drug free school
and park zone act. This law provides tougher penalties for those who sell and
use drugs in and around schools or parks. Mn other words, what it will do now,
the tougher penalty will mean anyone holding or possessing a narcotic drug,
cocaine, crack, opium or heroine, up to 20 years in prison and up to $250,000.00 II
fine.
Councilwoman Dirtier: Possession only? 1
Mayor Chmiel: Holding or possession. Selling a narcotic drug is bp to 25 years
in prison and $500,000.00 fine. I'd glad to see that they've taken that to
alleviate some of those problems within schools.
Councilman Johnson: I'd like to see what it'd cost to get same signs put up at
our parks advertising that.
Mayor Chmiel: That's something we could look at. We'll discuss that later but
I just wanted to point that out to you and I think it's a good proposal or a law II
I should say. Okay Bill, Moon Valley quickly.
Councilman Boyt: We can cancel that one because he came in and talked about it. '
Mayor Chmiel: Police study.
Cbuncilr►an Boyt: I'd like to ask to have that reconsidered. I
Councilwoman Dirtier: You don't want a study commission?
Councilman Boyt: Well, first off I don't, what I read in the staff report
wasn't an accurate reflection of the Public Safety Commission's motion so that's
one bone I have to pick with it. The other one is, I agree with a lot of what
you and Tam said. I'd like to have this thing discussed briefly again but not
being here I don't know what right I have to ask for reconsideration.
1 •y
► Mayor Ch iel: Right. I feel that that's true and I don't know whether that's
necessary.
81 1
I
11 City Council Meeting - December 18, 1989
Councilman Johnson: It was a heck
of a battle.
IIMayor Crtiel: So I would say that I would not move on that myself.
Councilman Johnson: What are your concerns?
IIMayor Chmiel: Well he said it's not consistent with Public Safety's.
Councilwoman Dimler: Those that voted in the positive would have to ask for
reconsideration.
Councilman Boyt: Okay, I'll pursue that with Roger after the meeting.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, how about the appeal.
1 Councilman Boyt: The appeal to the Board of Adjustment and Appeals' appeal,
what I'd like to have happen. I think if the applicant wasn't able to attend,
it undoubtedly would have been tabled. As one of the two people who appealed
the appeal, I would have appreciated it, and I would certainly offer this to any
' other Council person who wasn't there, that we table it. Unfortunately I
couldn't predict that I was going to be out of town. As soon as I knew, I
called. I don't know if it would have changed the vote. I'm not interested in
attempting to get this reconsidered. I'm just asking that in the future we
offer that courtesy to each other.
Councilman Workman: Bill, I
guess I think we felt that by all indications from
the meeting that we had that you were here, that we were giving him the
indication that that's where we were heading. I mean that's the way I felt. So
not to be, not to sneak one in under the rug while you're out of town. I mean
that wasn't the impression.
Councilman Boyt: No, you didn't create the impression that you were trying to
' sneak it in. I'm just saying that if I appeal these things it's because I've
got a pretty strong feeling about it and I'd just like to have it carried over.
As you all pointed out in the Minutes, he's not going to put this thing in in
the next 2 weeks. Enough said I think.
IICouncilwoman Dimler: I thought we had a rett�
P y good discussion on that day
though. Both at the BOA and at the Council meeting. Nothing changed.
ICouncilman Boyt: The third item I had was the Public Safety resignation. I
think you were supposed to get a copy of it. I don't know if you did.
IIMayor Chmiel: No.
Councilman Boyt: I have one. Candy Takkunen has resigned.
IJim Chaffee: Bill, she's not seeking reappointment.
ICouncilman Boyt: Well she aid at the end of the meeting that she's not serving
anymore. We are going to be in need.
82
City Council Meeting - Decerber 18, 1989 1
Mayor Chmiel: Does her term expire at the end of this month? What other its
do we have expiring? I thought there were some more.
Jim Chaffee: There's 3 on the Public Safety Ctmr3ssion Mr. Mayor.
Councilman Boyt: And there's others. Park and Rec. So I'd like to see us
advertise for those in the next week. Public Safety needs those people.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay.
ADMINSTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: PLANNING CCNMISSION INTERVIEWS, PLANNING DIRECTOR.
Mayor Chmiel: We're going to have this tomorrow evening at 7:00 prior to our
budget meeting, is that correct?
Don Ashworth: It would be proposed to do that, yes. 1
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, and you'll have those two candidates there for the Planning
Commission? '
Paul Krauss: Is that your preference then?
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah.
Don Ashworth: Do you wish to add any others?
1,4
Mayor Chmiel: No, I don't.
Councilwoman Dialer moved, Councilman Workman seconded to adjourn the ireeting. '
All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 12:10
a.m..
Submitted by Don Ashworth
City Manager ,
Prepared by Nann Opheim
1
I
xv
i
83 '
II PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION
tINE4ii EL
REGULAR MEETING
c
NOVEMBER 28, 1989
1 Chairman Mady called the meeting to order at 7: 30 p.m. .
I MEMBERS PRESENT: Jan Lash, Sue Boyt, Curt Robinson, Larry Schroers, Ed
Hasek, Dawne Erhart and Jim Mady
II STAFF PRESENT: Lori Sietsema, Park and Rec Coordinator and Todd Hoffman,
Recreation Supervisor
I APPOINT ACTING CHAIR: Hasek moved, Robinson seconded to appoint Sue Boyt
as Acting Chair for the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion
carried.
I
AUTHORIZATION TO PREPARE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND EASEMENT ACQUISITION
II FOR HERMAN FIELD PARK.
Public Present:
IName Address
Betty Lang 2631 Forest Avenue
II Bob & Jodi Riesselman 6320 Forest Circle �`�
Marcia & Bob Schiferli 325 George Street, Excelsior
Randy Herman 2792 Piper Ridge Lane
Candi Storm 6360 Forest Circle
I Arthur Kimber 2820 Tanagers Lane
Judy & Darrell Hinklin 6345 Minnewashta Woods Drive
1 Sietsema: This item is placed on the agenda. Recently we reviewed a
couple of drawings for the Herman Field Park plan and sent a recommendation
I onto City Council . They approved that plan as recommended by the Park and
Recreation Commission. Now what we need to do is simply go forward with
the plans to develop that park and determining the costs of all of the
different features and preparing plans and specs and also entering into
I negotiations to acquire the easements to get access to the park. So it's
really simple and straight forward but we're not reviewing any of- the
features of the park really until we get an idea of how much they cost.
I Then we look at how much money we have to spend and what we want to do
first. There are people here in the audience for this item. The other
thing that I wanted to bring up is that there was a suggestion from one of
I the residents in the area that suggested we develop a committee of friends
of Herman Field committee and we'd like to establish that committee
tonight. I know there's a number of people that are interested and most of
them are here tonight that have called me and there may be additional too
I so. There's another sheet of paper back there. I put a couple out there
and if you're interested on being on the Friends of Herman Field Committee,
I'd like you to sign up on that and indicate maybe on the sign-up sheet
I that you're interested. Make sure that I get your address and a daytime
phone number so if we hold a meeting, I can give you a call . If it's late
notice or if I need to contact you for anything.
II
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 28, 1989 - Page 2
I
Hasek: This is just a discussion meeting tonight? It' s not a public
hearing?
II Sietsema: No, it' s not a public hearing. It' s basically authorization to
proceed with the development process. To get cost estimates and enter into
negotiations to acquire that easement.
Boyt: We can start with that and we' ll have discussion on acquiring
easements . Do we have any comments from the Commission on that?
Hasek: On acquiring easements?
Boyt: Yeah.
Hasek: I have a question. Are we trying to acquire an easement or are we
trying to acquire a piece of right-of-way?
' Sietsema: We' ll look at both options .
Hasek: I guess I ' d be in favor of making it a permanent right-of-way right
IIoff the bat. . .problems down the road so if we make it a public street.
Sietsema: I would imagine that the landowners would probable' be more in
I favor of that because that would make it more clean for the property owners
too but we 'd like to discuss that with them i.n the negotiation process.
I Boyt: Any other comments on the easement? I think we might have someone
here?
Betty Lang : I 'm Betty Lang and the only comment I have is I hope they do a
II survey and what we would like is that they don' t divide up any of our lots.
That they go to the boundary lines of the two properties and not break up
our lots down there.
IIHasek: You mean like taking a chunk out of the middle of one of the lots?
IIBetty Lang: Right. Exactly.
Sietsema: And leave one piece off all by itself.
1 Boyt: Wait a minute, this is being recorded so we do need to have you come
to the mic.
I Betty Lang : Betty Lang, 2631 Forest Avenue. The request that I have is
that in doing the survey, and I hope they do a survey and stick to it, is
that they don' t break up our lots down there. The way we understood it is
that they would come between the two property lines.
IIHasek: Or along the property line that abuts to. . .right now. You' re
talking about the survey for properties.
IIBetty Lang: For the access to Herman Field .
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 28, 1989 - Page 3
Sietsema: The City would need to do a survey to get a property description '
or land description of the property before we could enter into a
transaction. I think the City would find it most desireable to go along
the property line rather than dividing a piece of property. '
Boyt: We need a motion to approve authorization to start negotiations to
acquire the easement.
Mady: A question first. Do the Schiferli ' s have any concerns other than
what Betty brought up?
Marcia Schiferli : No, that' s our biggest concern too.
Mady: Okay, thank you. I ' ll move to request staff to pursue acquisition
of entry into the park. Enter into negotiations with the two property
owners.
Robinson: I think we really should consider that they go along the 1
property lines and not divide that by any means.
Sietsema: That' s the way the plan was shown . I
Resident: Excuse me. Where's this entrance? Is this the ode that they
talked about on Forest Trail?
Sietsema: Yes. Off of Forest Circle.
Betty Lang: No, Forest Avenue. I
Sietsema: Forest Avenue.
1
Mady moved , Hasek seconded to authorize to proceed with negotiations to
acquire an easement off of Forest Avenue for access into Herman Field Park.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Boyt: Now we can organize a committee tonight. It says that we need to
1
talk about Phase I facilities.
Sietsema: Well basically what we need to do is, with your authorization to II
go ahead, staff will proceed with getting cost estimates and rough plans
and specs together to determine what the costs and the implications of
doing the plan are and what's involved so you can have more information to
base your decision on what you want to include in Phase 1 and Phase 2. So
we' ll have something done for the entire park and then you can determine,
pick and choose what you want done in Phase 1 and Phase 2 or perhaps it can
all be done in Phase 1, I
Boyt: With the plan that we have now that we've discussed before?
Sietsema: Right. '
11
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 28, 1989 - Page 4
I
Boyt: So the committee would meet with you?
Sietsema: Well first of all , staff will go ahead and work with probably
I Mark' s firm and get all the estimates and the specs and the information
that we need and then we' ll bring it to the committee and to the Park and
Recreation Commission to review and determine what you want to do in Phase
1 and Phase 2.
Boyt : I wonder if we need to have the committee review the plan before we
take it to Mark.
IISietsema: Why?
' Mady: The plan had been previously reviewed by us with the help of the
neighborhood and it looked at the neighborhood concerns.
Boyt: I remember we had quite a discussion that evening and I wanted to
make sure that it did.
Sietsema: I believe it was. To the approval of the neighborhood . We
I didn't have any objections to it. And we amended it to take into
consideration their concerns .
Betty Lang : I just would like to, I can' t remember what was decided on the
property line as far as we are concerned. Did they decide, I know they
weren' t going to go with the fence but did they decide about any type of
trees or berms or anything that would protect our property from
1 trespassers?
Sietsema: A landscaping plan hasn' t been done to plant additional trees or
I anything. A fence was shown and a cost estimate would go along with that
as far as what that would cost and if it would be done in the first phase
or second phase but it was shown in the plan.
Hasek: Just a comment . We had talked about a little bit about a fence and
I don' t know where that came from but that certainly doesn' t preclude any
of the neighbors from putting a fence on their side of the property line
too. They still have that right if they need that protection.
Sietsema: But the issue wasn' t that we want to revise the plan anymore
I because we haven't made all the revisions and had it amended at the Council
level and that has been approved. Now we want to determine, with the help
of the residents in the area, what we want to do first and how it's going
to be done and there may be residents up there that have some interest in
II exactly what type of surfaces and what actually we put into the park and
how it' s maintained and that kind of thing . Those are the kind of things
that I think they're interested in being a part of.
' Boyt: Okay, instead of just planning and development but it' s more of a
development.
IISietsema: Planning development.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 28, 1989 - Page 5
Hasek : I was just noticing that we put together at least a ballpark idea
of what we want to do with our capital improvement plan over the next 4
years and we' ve allotted $35,000. 00 in 1990 to Herman Field . It seems to 11 me like $35,000.00 would almost dictate that we have some some of phased
development out there. It' s going to take a lot more than $35,000.00 to do
that plan isn' t it?
Sietsema: What that $35,000. 00 is is the $35,000.00 that was donated when
the park was donated. That' s in the reserve and whether we spend it next
year or in phases or whatever , that' s what we have to start out with for
development in that park.
Hasek: Still , we don' t have anything else allotted for that.
Boyt: We' ll get to our plan later . We can still add more. We' re not done I
with it yet. What do you need from us now?
Sietsema: I need authorization to proceed with plans and specs and then if I
you wanted to develop this Friends of Herman Field Committee. That would
be two different motions.
Boyt : Okay, do we have a motion to proceed with the plans?
Hasek: I move that we proceed with the development of plans. Are we into II
specifications right away too? Are they going to get to that detail or
not?
Sietsema: Probably not the detailed specs, no. '
Hasek: Plans for Herman Field considering the possibility of developing
that park in several phases. i
Mady: Second.
I
Hasek moved , Mady seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission approve
proceeding with the development of Plans for Herman Field Park considering
the possibility that the park will be developed in phases. All voted in
favor and the motion carried.
Boyt : Okay, a motion to form a committee.
Sietsema: You may want to ask people to introduce themselves to you so you I
know who' s on the committee.
Boyt : Is there anyone interested in being on the committee? Anyone that' s I
here tonight?
Mady: I think if you stood up, stated your name and address so it is part
of our Minutes. That's for us.
IIPark and Rec Commission Meeting
November 28, 1989 - Page 6
I
I Bob Riesselman: Can I submit a proposal? I 'm Bob Riesselman, 6320 Forest
Circle. Betty' s neighbor . I worked out a petition a while back and ran it
to some of the neighbors . I 'd like to just read it tonight and present it
to Lori . This is dated October and November , 1989. Whereas, Herman Field
I is a 13 acre park donated by the Herman Family to the City of Chanhassen
with the stipulation that it should be used for park purposes, and Whereas,
$35, 000. 00 was dedicated for the park in 1978 , and Whereas, the City of
I Chanhassen has designed a number of park plans for development of Herman
Field since that time, and Whereas, action to develop the site has been
delayed due to the controversy over the access, and Whereas, even with
simple interest of 8% compounded annually, $35,000. 00 in 1978 would have
I accrued to nearly $65,000. 00 today. Whereas, the concerned residents of
this area bordered by TH 7 to the north, TH 41 to the east and Lake
Minnewashta Regional Park fenced and non-accessible areas to the south and
I the west have no similar recreational amenities without crossing a busy TH
7 or TH 41, Whereas, a survey conducted by these neighborhood residents in
June of 1989 indicated a high use rate. 66% indicated both spouses would
I use a park. 57% indicated they had children who would use the park. And
Whereas , demographics show a reasonably broad distribution of ages of
neighboring residents, including a significant number of young children who
would use the park as a safe alternative to playing in the street, Now
I Therefore Be it Resolved, that we the concerned citizens of this
neighboring area of Herman Field request that the City proceed with the
construction of Modified Plan B, is what we have so far , approved at the
I August 29th Park and Recreation Commission meeting without further delay.
And, Be It Further Resolved, that we request $30,000. 00 be budgeted in the
City' s fiscal year 1990. Of course now this might be 1991 because it got
II delayed, for the development and construction of a second phase of the park
which would include a paved biking trail with maybe biking access on Forest
Avenue, a tennis court, a ballfield, picnic shelter, etc. and I took this
around to about 30-40 homes and got a number of signatures. I will present
I a couple copies tonight. One other comment, I do think obviously I 'm very
pro for the park but I 'd like every concern for the property owners who are
actually giving the property. . . I would recommend that the Langs and the
I other folks are on the Friends of the Park committee and guide as far as an
appropriate park.
Boyt: Are you interested in being on the committee?
IBob Riesselman: Yes .
I Boyt : If anyone else is interested in being on the committee, would you
come up and give us your name and address please.
I Randy Herman: My name is Randy Herman and I 'm interested in being on the
committee.
Art Kimber : My name is Art Kimber , 2820 Tanagers Lane in the Manor . We've
Ibeen trying since 1982' to get this thing underway and talked to the
Commission here several times. We've got 10 times as many kids in the
neighborhood that use the park now as we did in 1982 so we'd like to get
Ibehind any effort it takes to get it handled.
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 28, 1989 - Page 7
11
Judy Hinklin: Judy Hinklin, 6345 Minnewashta Woods Drive.
Candi Storm: I 'm Candi Storm, 6360 Forest Circle. I 'm interested on
serving on the committee as is my husband Jim who' s home ill tonight. Our
particular concern is the form and style of the walking trail that would go
around that small marsh area in the west end.
Boyt: Yes, we received the letter from your husband that talks about his II
concerns. Thank you.
Betty Lang: Betty Lang , 2631 Forest Avenue.
Boyt: Now we need a motion to establish this committee and then Lori will
be in touch with them.
Mady: Were you looking for commission involvement on this item? '
Sietsema: As a committee? Yes .
Mady: Anyone have an interest?
Erhart: I would be. '
Mady: I move to recommend that the Friends of Herman Field lie formed to
review the park plans and assist in ongoing care of the park. I
Robinson: Second .
Mady: I just want to thank everyone who came tonight . It really makes our I
job a lot easier when we get neighborhood involvement because otherwise we
can maybe visit a park a couple of times but we still don' t get the
intimate knowledge of the area and it makes it a whole lot easier designing II
an area and really doing the job well when the neighborhood' s there
initially and showing us what needs to be done instead of us trying to
figure out what needs to be done.
Hasek: Just a quick question Lori . Do they have the use of our facilities
. if they want to put together a little newsletter . . .
Sietsema: Sure. Yep.
Hasek: So maybe what they should do is pick or choose a chairman who can
work with you.
Mady moved, Robinson seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
establish that the Friends of Herman Field committee be formed to assist in
development and ongoing care of Herman Field Park consisting of Bob
Riesselman, Randy Herman, Art Kimber , Judy Hinklin, Candi and Jim Storm,
Betty Lang and Dawne Erhart. All voted in favor and the motion carried .
1
IPark and Rec Commission Meeting
November 28, 1989 - Page 8
I
' SITE PLAN REVIEW, SATHRE ADDITION.
Sietsema: This item is fairly straight forward in that it' s simply
creating two single family lots out of 3.2 acres on the north side of Lotus
I Lake. The property is zoned Residential Single Family and it lies right
next to North Lotus Lake Park. The Comprehensive Plan does not call for
additional parkland in this area or trails. It ' s the recommendation of
this office to approve the proposed subdivision requiring 100% payment of
the park and trail fees.
Mady moved , Hasek seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
I recommend approving the Sathre Addition subidivision as proposed and
requiring 100% payment of park and trail dedication fees. All voted in
favor and the motion carried.
REVISED 5-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
ISietsema: I thought the Capital Improvement Program for 1990 that you
recommended to the City Council would help as we discuss this. I found a
couple of inconsistencies with the 5 year plan that I revised than what
I this is so before everything is final approved, I hope to have all those
glitches taken off. I don' t claim any accountability. But at the last
meeting, what I had given you in your packets was simply a 5,year capital
improvement program that was prepared in 1987 I believe and it hadn' t
really been looked at or revised since that time. Some things have changed
and some things were done and budgeted for in 1987, 1988, and 1989 that
weren' t on that plan and I wanted to bring it back to you to update and to
I revise so that we have in the future when we get additional money available
to us, say it' s the Lion' s donation or whatever or at budget time, we have
something to work from. It will make it a little bit easier than creating
I a new wish list every year and some of the things that we plan on kind of
get lost, fall to the wayside. So that's really the purpose of bringing
this all back together . I didn' t want our efforts from before to be
' totally not used. So what I 've done is taken your comments that I got from
Todd ' s notes and revised what was given to you last time. Again, the last
one was really off the wall in some areas because it was done so long ago.
This also shows funds that are in the referendum funds and it also shows
funds that are in the reserve account. So that' s basically where we' re at.
If you want to review that maybe park by park again or maybe you've all
reviewed it enough and you just want to go. . .
IHoffman: If you have any concerns on a particular one.
I Hasek: Maybe what we should do is ask you if you've got some concerns as
well . As the Park Board or Commission.
Sietsema: Well , if you look at the last page, the very last page. Page
I 24, you' ll see the bottom line figures of what we' re proposing to spend in
each year. Actually we're right in line. 1990 looks like a hefty amount.
It' s actually $447,500. 00 when I compared this sheet. It looks like a lot
I but $310,000.00 of that is from the reserve fund so we' re really right in
line. It' s not atypical for us to spend $120, 000. 00. We' re spending
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
g
November 28, 1989 - Page 9
$170,000. 00 this year in our capital improvement program not including the I
reserve fund so that, it's not out of line I don't feel. 1992 is 1992 and
beyond so that' s why that one is so astronomical and that' s got some real
big items like starting development out at Bandimere Park. The Bandimere
Farm and some land acquisitions in and around Lake Ann Park. '
Hasek: Where are the two numbers that were off here? We' re off the
$200,000.00 for land acquisition in 1990. 1
Sietsema: That's actually $175,000. 00 for land acquisition and that' s
reflected in the reserve account. The other spot is on City Center Park.
That should be $71,000.00 instead of $67, 000.00.
Hasek: Now these are new revisions you've made?
Sietsema: Right. Just for 1990. And South Lotus, instead of 0 there,
that should be $26,500.00.
Lash: I kind of agree with Ed' s point earlier about Herman Field . Is '
there some way that we should, we can't do anything for 1990 but. . .
Sietsema: Well 1990, see what ' s confusing is that there' s $35, 000. 00 in
the reserve fund and we can spend that at any time so that can be spent
next year .
Lash: Yeah, except for I mean what if it costs us that much just to get
access?
Sietsema: Then at budget time next year that becomes , this doesn' t mean
that we've done our budget for the next 5 years.
Mady: All this is a a worksheet. ,
Sietsema: All this does is show. If you want to stick something in there
in 1991, another $30,000. 00, or pull a number out of the sky. '
Schroers: They were asking for additional .
Lash: They were asking for another 30 so. '
Hasek: They were actually asking for an additional 60. They were asking
for their 35 plus the interest over the last 10 years plus $30,000. 00. '
Hoyt: Yeah, we can put in what we think is reasonable for a year .
Sietsema: If you want to figure the interest that's been earned over the
years and want to put in another $30,000.00 in 1991, that' s fine. It may
cost us $100,000.00 to do that park and at that point in time, at budget
time next year , we may decide that we need to go with 3 phases and do
$30,000.00 in 1991 or $50,000.00 in 1991 or whatever. This doesn' t mean
that we're stuck to anything. It just has already established a wish list
for us so that we don't have to reinvent the wheel every year . '
1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 28, 1989 - Page 10
I
IBoycatu:se I idt on think d we hcaatn s usre e athie t yr.ationalization that interest accrued
Robinson: Is that right?
ISietsema: No, it did. It just got, but the interest is accrued in the
whole fund. There's interest accrued and it's put back into that fund
overall . It' s not accrued in each individual project.
Mady: It's just going to have to be something that comes out of our
general development fund period.
IISietsema: When you look on the revenue side of the budget, it shows
$10,000.00 from the Lion' s . $10,000. 00 of interest accrued for the whole
I overall fund that we' ve earned in the last year and it gets dumped into the
whole capital improvement 410 fund.
' Hasek: That' s true but what they' re. . .
Sietsema: But what they' re saying is they should get $30,000. 00, a bigger
hunk and there' s some. . .
IILash: There' s some logic to that.
Sietsema: That' s fine but if it' s going to cost us $100,000. 00, nothing ' s
to say that we' re going to limit it to $60,000.00 or cut something out.
Mady: And if we don' t need $30,000. 00, we' re not going to spend
I $30, 000. 00. We' re going to do whatever we need to do.
Sietsema: Right. You' ve approved the plan and now you just have to
' determine the time line that you want to get the plan accomplished. We've
got $35, 000. 00 in the fund designated for that and in 1991, if we need
more, we can allocate as much as we want to it as long as we can afford to
I do it.
Mady: Recognizing the concerns from every other neighborhood that' s been
in here over the last 2-3 years.
IHasek: I've got 2 points . One, the money was given. The interest was not
given. Actually 3 points. The second one is that money was intended to be
Ispent on the park. There wasn' t a time limit put on it. The third thing
is that, I think like Judy said, and perhaps ever more importantly, that
park just did not need to be developed at the time it was given and now the
I demand is there. I think there's always been to a certain degree of demand
there but there was a real chance that that park wasn' t going to get
developed for a long time because it was to a degree, private people didn' t
want that thing developed, at least from the other direction, and only
I until we considered access to that park from the westerly access, I think
it makes it. . . interest over the last 10 years.
Boyt: We can't put numbers in right now.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 28, 1989 - Page 11
11
Mady: The only question I have in putting numbers in is we simply don' t I
have them. Every item on this list we have an item assigned with a fairly
good idea of what it' s going to cost.
Sietsema: We can revise this in 6 months when we have the cost too. '
Mady: It' s a meaningless number though.
Erhart: It will spur development. '
Boyt: We still have the $35,000.00.
Mady: No, we don't know that.
Hasek: We know that it' s not going to be enough to afford the whole park I
but we don't know how far $35, 000.00 will go.
Mady: I don' t like throwing $20,000. 00 at a budget, or $30,000. 00 or
$50,000.00 at a budget when it's a totally meaningless number. It has no
basis of fact on it in either way.
Sietsema: To a great extent all of these are meaningless numbers because
they haven't had. . .
Mady: We know a tennis court is going to be $25,000.00 and we know that we I
don't have any other money coming in for . This part we don't know any of
those numbers.
Boyt: We could put down $25,000.00 for a tennis court for that park. We
know that that's one of the things in there and it can be taken out of the
first $35,000. 00, we've still not going to have it done. They've asked for
a tennis court. '
Sietsema: I don' t think that' s unreasonable at all .
Lash: We don't have specifically stated what we' re going to put in '
Chanhassen Hills Park for $30,000. 00. But that' s what we' re talking about
for here. Jim's saying we have to have a specific thing. . .
Sietsema: The thing is is that we know what' s going in Chanhassen Hills
Park because we've approved a plan for Chanhassen Hills Park and we know
that grading and a backstop and that kind of thing is going to cost us I
roughly $10,000.00 and totlot equipment is going to cost roughly $10,000.00
and tennis courts are going to cost $25,000. 00. So you put a number in
there to get it started so you can at least do, I mean that' s where these
numbers in this whole thing have come from. There' s no specs done and we
can rough, the only thing is is that we don't know, the reason why Herman
Field is different is that we haven' t done a meandering trail through a
park. We haven't even measured how long that trail is. We don't know what 1
it' s going to cost or how long the access road is going to have to be. If
it's going to be paved. If it' s going to be gravel . There' s a lot of
things we don' t know so it' s more difficult to put in there. We know we I
have $35,000.00 that has to be spent there. We know there's a tennis court
11 Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 28, 1989 - Page 12
II
II in the plan and we know that' s rougly $25,000. 00 so I don' t think it' s
unreasonable to say we've got $35, 000.00 to spend on Phase 1 next year and
there' s no way you' re going to get a tennis court in Phase 1 in $25, 000.00
when you only have $35,000. 00. So to put $25,000. 00 in Phase 2 in 1991, I
IIdon' t think is unreasonable.
Robinson: Even if you put some dollars in there, it doesn' t. . .
ISietsema: It doesn' t mean you have to put it there.
Robinson: No.
IIMady: Point one. There is no tennis court in the development plan at this
point in time. It' s not shown on any of the development plans that I 've
I seen on this so they may want a tennis court but we have not yet shown that
in there.
1 Sietsema: Alright, I stand corrected .
Lash: It doesn' t take a rocket scientist to see that there' s going to be
at least $35, 000. 00 worth of work there and as sad as it may seem, I see
I the logic in these people' s thought that they've been on hold all of these
years and the money' s been sitting there and so say next year we've got the
$35,000.00. We get the access . We put in the little gravel road and the
I money' s gone and then we haven' t got anything in our budget for the next 2
years to do anything else except for a little gravel access to. . .
I Sietsema: Just because it isn' t in the 5 year plan doesn' t mean next year
at budget time you can' t put it in there.
Lash : I know. I don' t understand why we' re even arguing about this . This
IIis kind of stupid. Just put it in. We did it for everything else.
Mady: The other side of the argument on this is, if you throw $50,000. 00
I at it without any background on it, they' re going to say well I want you to
spend $50,000. 00 here. My fear is, I want to see, because we've got the
detail on just about every other item here, we don' t have anything here
yet. We will have that information in about 2 months so why don' t we wait
1 for it. We adjust this thing all the time.
Boyt : So it wouldn' t matter if we put it tonight though.
IMady: We don' t have any idea what it' s going to be.
IBoyt: We know there' s going to be something.
Mady: Well , what' s the number going to be?
IIBoyt: It doesn' t matter .
Robinson: 10, 10 and 10 in 1990, 1991 and 1992.
ISietsema: What difference does it make?
II
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 28, 1989 - Page 13
Boyt : Does it matter if we do it tonight or in 2 months?
Mady: Well yeah.
Sietsema: It' s a wish list. What this is is a wish list.
Mady: What's behind the wish list? What are you going to spend $10,000.00 I
on?
Boyt : Do we have any motions? I
Lash: I motion that we amend this thing and put 10, 10 and 10.
Erhart: I' ll second it. I
Lash moved, Erhart seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
recommend to amend the 5 year Capital Improvement Program to include
$10,000.00 for each year of 1990, 1991 and 1992 for Herman Field Park. All
voted in favor except Jim Mady who opposed and the motion carried.
Hasek: Just for your own gratification there Jim, I underst4nd what . . . I
think it is a wish list. We know it's going to cost more than $35,000. 00
so put a number in there and assign something to it latex . It really
doesn' t matter so I 'm not opposed to doing it.
Boyt : Does anyone else have any concerns for a specific park? We don' t
need any more work on this tonight do we?
Robinson: In the 1990 Capital Improvement, has that been done?
Sietsema: It's not approved yet, no. It won' t be approved until probably
mid-December . I
Robinson: Was that a typo or does $170,000.00 versus $116,000.00?
Sietsema: Yes. Well what I think it did was included, I don't know. I
can' t even explain it because I wasn' t clear on what it was.
Hoffman: You punched something the wrong way. I
Sietsema: Yes.
Lash: I had a question on, what one were you just talking about? I
Boyt: On this page.
Lash: Okay. On South Lotus Lake, that' s on page 5. The numbers that are
under 1989, were those things done in 1989 or are we supposed to be. . .
II -Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 28, 1989 - Page 14
I Sietsema: No, that' s the correction that I said on the last page under
South Lotus Lake was $26, 500. 00. That was rolled over and you had amended
that so that it would just be the park plan and the tennis courts would be
in Phase 1 and the rest of it would come later .
IIBoyt : I think we decided to take the tennis courts out .
Sietsema: Or was it the other way around? I 'd have to get the Minutes out
but I definitely remembered that you had phased it. From what it was, it
was $60,000. 00 and you had scaled it back to $25,000.00 worth of
development.
Hasek: I thought we talked about the motorized BMX course.
II Schroers: Do we have to earmark funds specifically for something specific
on our wish list here? I would like to earmark whatever funds it takes to
define the boundaries of Bluff Creek Park.
Erhart : It' s there .
Schroers : Where is it?
IISietsema: I could take you out there.
IHoffman: I couldn't .
Mady: You couldn' t before.
Sietsema: I can now.
Hoffman: Get some signs there that say Chanhassen park instead of State
Ipark and put them on the border .
Sietsema: What number is Bluff Creek? The reason why you can' t really
Ifind it is because there' s no road to it. The road ends at the golf shack
or the clubhouse or whatever it is at Bluff Creek golf course and if you go
down, imagine that the road kept going down along their boundary there and
Ithen you look to the south, you'd fall into it but you can' t get to it, you
can't see it from any road because there's no access to it.
Schroers : Once you fall into it, how would you know if you were crawling
IIout onto park property or onto private property?
Sietsema: All the sides all the way up is park property. Once you're on
Itop, you' re out of the park.
Boyt: That' s page 12. Is that like a survey?
' Schroers: Not a survey. I was just thinking like the area defined. If it
was accurately done on a map or just something that says Bluff Creek Park
is bordered on the south by such and such, on the north by such and such,
east, west. Just so we can pinpoint it.
11
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 28, 1989 - Page 15
Sietsema: It' s right here. It' s defined. I
Mady: Lori , if you traveled that imaginary road further past Bluff Creek
Park, does that imaginary road legal easement for us or would that be
trespassing? '
Sietsema: We'd have to gain. . .
Mady: We do not own an easement to the park? '
Sietsema: Not that I know of, no.
Mady: I want him to know that so Larry, what difference does it make? You
can't really get there anyway.
Hasek: Isn' t there a road easement that goes to the park?
Sietsema: Not that I 'm aware of. It' s landlocked. There' s a railroad
along the south and private property along the rest of it.
Schroers: I'd just kind of hate to get arrested for trespassing trying to
get to one of our parks.
Mady: Well in this park you defintely could. 4
Boyt: Should we move this up to 1991?
Robinson: I think that's a good idea.
Boyt: Access road , $10,000.00?
Schroers: At least we' ll be taking a look at it. ,
Hasek: Yeah, I don' t think we even want an easement. I 'd like to get a
right-of-way. I can' t believe that we've got an inaccessible park in the
city.
Sietsema: Well it wasn' t meant to be a park.
Schroers : We had Council direction to have park areas accessible.
Sietsema: When we got it, it was a no man's land. It was a drainage area
that nobody wanted and it got deeded over to the City.
Hasek: Did it come out of Hesse Farm when that developed or what? '
Sietsema: I don' t know. I don' t know the history of it and there' s not a
whole lot on the files about it because it was done before I was here.
Hasek: Still . To try and acquire access to that park , isn' t unreasonable.
Sietsema: No, if you saw something you wanted to get to. '
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 28, 1989 - Page 16
II
IHasek: I bet you it' s the most beautiful part of the City.
Robinson: I agree that we should. . .in 1991.
II Schroers : There could also be a situation where the Scout groups or
someone is looking for a worthwhile project and they want to clean up the
area. . .and not have a way of getting there.
Erhart: Let' s move the $10,000.00.
Schroers: Do we have to have a motion for that?
I
Mady: No. Just do it.
IIBoyt : Any other concerns on this?
Robinson: Just a question. Is the 1988 amount in here actual?
ISietsema: Probably not. It was proposed. That was taken off the
proposed. That's why the South Lotus Lake stayed in there. So I will
change that to what was actually done.
IRobinson: I was just wondering. I was looking at Meadow Green Park on
page 3 . 4
ISietsema : When I would anticipate the Bluff Creek would be an important
thing to get to is when we have more of the alignment along Bluff Creek as
I it' s acquired through our trail development plan. Once we have the next
link that goes up through the golf course, which we were supposed to get
with the Bluff Greens development but that one kind of. . .
Mady: Slipped through our fingers?
Sietsema: No. The development never went through. They went past their
I deadline and so if they want to develop, they have to come back through the
process and we'd get it eventually.
Hasek: We still have an opportunity to make some sort of connection to
that park. . .?
Sietsema: Right. And then we may have access to it from the north side of
1 Bluff Creek Golf Course, although we may want to have another access down
by the golf course since that road' s in there anyway. But just to clarify,
the original intent of the reason that we got that piece of property was
like, it' s like the holding ponds up in Pheasant Hills. It was a
drainageway that was deeded over to the City and they said, well here. You
can pretend it' s a park. It wasn' t something we acquired and gave credit
anybody for . It just is a piece of property that was city owned.
Ito
Schroers : Lori , at the bottom at your astericks there. Does that mean if
we were to have a referendum on one of these proposals, on budget proposals
Ithat we would have to add the cost of the referendum?
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 28, 1989 - Page 17
Sietsema: No. These are approved referendum funds. The Lake Ann project 1
and the Bandimere property acquisition and there' s $100,000.00.
Schroers : Okay, so you' re saying that those costs are already occurred but •
are not shown in the totals?
Sietsema: Right, because it comes out of the referendum fund. It doesn' t
actually come out of the 410 fund. What they would do is deposit that
money into the 410 fund when the bonds are sold and it would eventually
come out of there but it would screw up our totals if we showed that it did
because it' s not in there yet.
Boyt: Any other questions?
Erhart: Yeah, just one on Bandimere. That $300, 000. 00 in the 1992+. Are II
we looking at 1992 or are we looking beyond that? Starting the development
of Bandimere' s property.
Sietsema: The development of the Bandimere property. . . I
Erhart: For the youth complex.
Mady: It will take at least 2 years before the Corps of Engineers will
even start doing the rough grading.
Erhart: Okay, and it is not purchased yet right? '
Sietsema: Right. It' s still not closed.
Erhart: Okay. I ask the same question every time. I wasn' t here last
meeting. . .
Sietsema: They thought they had clear title on it and they found 3 people 1
that need to sign off on it and one of them had some questions about what
the property was going to be used for and I talked to him today. They' re
hoping that they get those signatures and we can close on Friday but I 'm
not promising .
Erhart: Are these family members? '
Sietsema: No. They' re people that have easements. They have some
easements over the property and they have to sign off on them. ,
Hasek: That' s the reason why we don' t want easements to go to the parks,
we want right-of-ways. Right there. I
Boyt: Yep. We've had trouble with easements in other parks.
Mady: And we' ll continue to have trouble with easements.
Boyt: Any more on this?
IIPark and Rec Commission Meeting
November 28, 1989 - Page 18
I
APPROVAL OF PROPOSED PARK/OPEN SPACE FOR UPDATED LAND USE PLAN.
ISietsema: The planning department is in the process of updating the Lane
Use Plan which is part of the Comprehensive Plan. What that does is it
I shows where we' re planning to see residential , low, high, medium density,
single family, rural . It also shows where the agricultural , industrial ,
commercial, park property. Any different types of land use. This is the
old one and they' re going to be updating this and what we want to make sure
I we include in that, as they update this map, is anywhere that we, and
I know we've talked about a number of things and we made recommendations to
amend this. Now they' re going through the formal process and I wanted to
I make sure that we didn' t miss anything. I know that we had talked about
that the property, I believe it' s the Zimmerman property that's over on the
east side of Minnewashta , there was a development where they were going to
create 3 lots and one huge outlot and we had talked about that being
Ipotential community park because Mark' s study had shown that we were going
to need a community park in the western part of the City. So that was one
area that we want to identify as potential parkland . Just as the area
I around Lake St. Joe is. Whether we actually acquire it or not will
determine when it becomes available through the development process . What
this does is that they cannot develop this property without us signing off
I on it. They can sell it from seller to seller as long as it' s not
developed and we don' t have to sign off on it but if they want to develop
it, that' s when we will review it. Our Comprehensive Plan and our Land
Use Plan shows that that' s shown as potential park property and we have the
I option to purchase it or get it through the development process or whatever
means we can. Again, one of the pieces was east of Minnewashta. One of
them was west of Minnewashta. One of them was in the Pheasant Hills area
I that we continue to talk about. We 've also talked about acquiring the
property north of the Bandimere Farm as that comes in and if you recall ,
there was a piece of property south of Sever Peterson's down in the
I southern part of Chanhassen that had some ravines and some natural areas
that we wanted to preserve that we felt we could get through the
development process so I wanted to point that one out as well .
IHasek: Is that the one at the end of Bluff Creek there at the park?
Mady: It' s the one on Pioneer Trail down there.
ISietsema: Yes. South of Pioneer Trail . See this one is so old it doesn' t
even have some of the major roads on here.
IHasek: It's old but it' s the existing one.
Sietsema: It' s the existing one. It' s what we go by right now and I
I wanted to, I have the recommendations from what you had previously but I
wnated to put it all in one synopsis and then review the City and add
anything else that you might want to include. We don' t necessarily need to
Igo through the neighborhood portion of it at this point in time. When we
get their first rough draft back and we see that this is going to
residential , then we can go in and say, if this is going to be residential
and it' s going to be single family and it' s going to be sewered, then we' re
Igoing to need parkland in that area. Those standards are upheld with our
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 28, 1989 - Page 19
I
subdivision process and through our ordinances but the biggest thing that' s '
most important is to get our linear and our community parks shown on here
so people know up front if where they make their first application, they
know up front that there's going to be parkland required and we may require
an all or a portion of their land. ,
Hasek: Did I or did I not see a linear park plan on trails?
Boyt: There' s a trail plan. 1
Mady: So what' s going to happen here is you're going to be coming back to
us with a proposed map of the City showing what the Planning Commission
feels at this point in time the City is going to look like in the future?
Or what they want it to look like.
Sietsema: Before it goes to Planning , I want to present to them that this II
is the areas that we know are going to need a community park or we may need
a community park so they have that information. The big chunks , they have
that information up front. If they know that we need that 80 acres of the
Zimmerman property up front, then they won' t zone that residential . But
then we get it back again and look at it for neighborhood parks. We also
want to look at this from putting our nature trails and that kind of thing. II
Show those in there as well .
Mady: My concern I guess though is, this might be, we could`tell them kind I
of the areas we're thinking about. We' re basically saying we want to put
something in the western part of the City but until we find out where they
want to put their business fringe district, because we don't want to back
our park up to that. We want to find out what their thoughts are now
before we say okay, here' s what. It's going to have to be a give and take
the whole way. We should find out what their thoughts are initially before
we start to plan ours. Then give it to them and they can come back to us
again. It' s going to take 2 or 3.
Sietsema: It is going to take a couple but I was starting here because we
know big chunks of land that we can tell them right off the bat that we are
looking at for potential parkland. We may not acquire both the piece on
the west side of Minnewashta and the piece on the east side of Minnewashta
but we may want to designate both of those on the land use plan so that we I
have the option when they come up for development. I 'm just saying, let' s
show them the big areas that we know of right now. We've discussed and we
know of right now. They' ll review that. They' ll put all their little
labels on all the different pieces and then we' ll come back and make our
revisions. But it gives them an idea of what. . .
Mady: My concern was if we go first, they might be doing something. . .right I
after that and then it' s going to be harder to change it.
Sietsema: No, they' re going to know right up front that we' re looking at I
this as a large chunk and we will be making revisions also as we see their_
plan develop.
1
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 28 , 1989 - Page 20
Hasek : I guess two things. I know what they' re going through now and
' I know that they' re thinking about changing some of the things on there.
One thing they' re looking at is changing the MUSA line that goes through
the middle of Lake Minnewashta and moving that back over to TH 41 and
' taking that chunk inbetween there out of the MUSA line. That' s one of the
draft lines that I saw and then moving the MUSA line down to TH 5.
Including that within the MUSA line. Making some changes so they can
develop along TH 212. Then there' s a bunch of things that they're talking
' about , they' re real preliminary at this point. A question before I make a
statement I guess. Are we still thinking about a community sized park west
of Lake Minnewashta or is that a neighborhood park? Is that supposed to
' represent something or. . .
Hoffman: At least the property just north of Lake St . Joe.
' Schroers: Mark had indicated that at some point in time we were going to
need another large community park in western Chanhassen.
' Hasek: That' s true. I guess I 'm wondering though, do we want to put it
west of Lake Minnewashta or do we want it east of Lake Minnewashta?
' Boyt: Well we have two options.
Hasek: We have two stars in here, that' s why I don' t know if we need both.
I Sietsema: No, but I don' t think we want to make that decision right now
either .
1 Boyt: This keeps us open.
Hasek: Let' s look just one point farther . If our point is to keep our
Ioptions open, then we might as well put 5 or 10 of them on here.
Sietsema : Within reason. I mean we could put a blanket over the whole
thing and say well all of it, we may want. We can't put something over the
I south half of Chanhassen and say we' re going to want something in there but
we don' t know quite where. We know. We've looked at a few different
places. We've looked at an addition to what we' re purchasing now and we've
I looked at that natural area over by Sever's property. We know we've looked
at the Zimmerman property and we have shown.
Hasek: Is Zimmerman' s this one?
Sietsema : No. And we've expressed interest in the piece of property
that's for sale over on the west side of Minnewashta but just because right
now they said it' s worth, that they' re asking over a million dollars for
it, doesn' t mean they' re going to get it and doesn' t mean that. . .
Hasek: I thought that had been sold?
Sietsema: It could have. I don' t know. I haven' t seen any plans in for
it.
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 28, 1989 - Page 21
Hasek: My understanding, and this may be scuttlebutt maybe but I think
that' s one reason why the member of the Planning Commission left is because
he's somehow involved in the development of that property.
Sietsema: I don't know. '
Mady: A question before we go too much further . I was under the
impression that the land around Lake St. Joe, that whole area, there simply II
isn' t a large enough chunk to even consider it a community park. It might
become a large neighbohrood park but it' s simply not going to be 40-50-60
acre site and so if we identify the area as parkland but I don' t think this I
commission should be thinking in terms of a community park because it' s
simply not going to be large enough to call it a community park.
Sietsema: And we don' t need to label it community or neighborhood. All
I 'm saying is that it' s open space at this point. These are where I know
there are large chunks that we've talked about.
Mady: My concern was that he' s throwing out community park plan here and I II
think it's not, that' s not the term we want to be using there in that
particular case. Because it' s probably not going to fit into our
definition.
Sietsema: Large park. In Lake St. Joe. . .
Mady: . . .specific area we know we want to put a park in, we've already
identified . Whether it's going to be a neighborhood park or not. In the
rest of the City that's undeveloped yet, we haven' t found specific sites
yet.
• Hasek: Let' s ask the question. What are the recommended areas that you' re 1
looking at adding to the existing park. . .
Sietsema: These are the recommended that you've already made the
recommendation. 1
Hasek: And the Comp Plan hasn' t changed to reflect it yet.
Sietsema: That's what they' re doing now. They're reconfirming that this
is where your ideas are. These are still valid recommendations and this is
what I 'm going to send onto Planning as they go through the initial
process. They' ll look at that and take that into consideration as they
make their amendments and it will be sent back to us for any final
revisions. At that point in time, we can see well , you have a large area
here that's shown for residential and it' s really in a park deficient area. II
Especially if it becomes a sewered area and we' re going to want some park
in that area. Whether we can identify that now or not, it doesn' t preclude
us, it' s just an opportunity for us to check our work. To double check, to
make sure that something doesn't slip through the cracks and we didn' t get
a chance at it and we had planned to do something there.
Hasek: The level they' re at right now and probably what we' re going to get II
a shot at isn't going to be that detailed. I think they're going to be
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 28, 1989 - Page 22
looking at basically the future land use plan without open spacing on it.
Am I right or wrong? What they' re basically doing is they' re going to take
that MUSA line and move the thing down and they' re going to say, this
area' s going to be all residential. This corner' s going to be. . .between
Mark and the Planning Department and the Planning Commission and some
decision is made on what the future complexion of the City is going to look
like. I 'm wondering if it wouldn' t be better if we just simply waited and
' say we want the opportunity to take a look at your plan so we can tell you
where we would like to put park space based upon your planning decisions .
Sietsema: We could do it that way.
Hasek: That 'd make more sense. Then we' re not putting the cart before the
horse, so to speak. Doesn' t that make sense?
rBoyt : . . .he has 1, 260 acres coming up with the population of 4,032. I
don' t think that would include any multiple family dwellings at all in
those acres. That' s 3.something people per acre and we' ve seen some pretty
' packed developments come in here recently so I 'm not sure if the numbers, I
think the numbers are a little on the low side of what they' re going to be.
And when we' re looking at our need for soccer , softball and baseball
fields, I wonder how our neighboring communities are planning to meet those
needs and I don't want to tell them what to do but I 'd just like to know
because I know we' re getting a lot of men in our softball program from
' other communities that are not providing for their people. If they
continue to not provide for their people, we' re going to end up providing
for them so I 'd like to know and I think we know which communities those
are.
IMady: Either that or we ' re just going to kick them out is the way it' s
going to be. They' ll have to make a decision to live wherever they can get
the services provided.
Lash: Is this like forever into the future? Is that what you' re looking
I at?
Sietsema: No, it'd be a 10 year . To the year 2000.
I Lash: It sort of looks to me like in the south of TH 5, there' s kind of a
gapping area there that has no stars and has no park now. And I 'm sure
that maybe not in our lifetime but sometime south of TH 5 is going to be
Ideveloped and there' s going to be a ton of houses down there.
Sietsema: And that' s exactly what I 'm saying is that it would come back
I because then we would know where the MUSA line was going to be changing.
We'd know what kind of density is going to be in there and at that time we
can identify the areas that we' re going to need in addition to what we' re
already doing. I was just trying to go in. I know that they' re going into
II the planning stages and I wanted to let them know what we know so far . But
if we want to wait until they get their blobs on the map and move the MUSA
line and then bring it back to us, we can do it that way too.
I
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 28, 1989 - Page 23
Mady: They've already received or been informed of these items because
they're already shown here because didn't we make recommendations. . .to
that?
Sietsema: Right and what I was going to do is, you've made the
recommendations and I 've known that they' re going to revise the land use
plan so I haven' t sent anything because+ I was going to send one
recommendation that these are the areas that we want. In talking to Paul ,
he said well we 're going to want you to review the whole thing and outline
where, so it' s like we' re being very proactive in this whole thing and
that' s very good and I 'm glad we' re all thinking of that. It' s just
whether we want to wait until we see their MUSA line and where the zones I
are or if we want to let them know what we know so far . I don' t know that
it' s going to make that much difference to them at this point.
Boyt: Would Paul know? r
Sietsema: He doesn' t really know if they.' re going to want to know that
information.
Boyt : Well it' s available for them if they want it. It' s right here.
Mady: I don't see any problem with giving this information. I think just 1
so they fully understand that this does not even come close to reflecting
what our ideas are for the future. It just shows the things*that we've
kind of hit on so far . We know that we' re going to need until we find out
a good solid piece of information as to what's going to be developed and
what areas we simply can' t provide them with other or further information.
Sietsema: Then what I can do is prepare a memo that says in the last 6
months the Park and Recreation Commission has reviewed areas that are park
deficient. This is where we know we' re going to be looking toward
community parks or different parks and we'd like you to take that into
consideration as you start the amendment process and keep us abreast and
let us review your amended land use plan as you get down there. So I will
do that.
Hasek: Can you take that one step farther and have Mark and Paul , who by
then ought to be real familiar with those areas that are going to be
residential . . . , let them make some suggestions to us about whexe we might
want to put our spots. I mean we can look at this thing, here's a nice
piece of property but I don' t know what the land looks like. . .so I guess we
should let our planner tell us where the appropriate spots to put those
dots.
Sietsema: Makes sense. I
Mady: Do you need a motion?
Sietsema: No. r
I
I/
IIPark and Rec Commission Meeting
November 28 , 1989 - Page 24
I
CONTINUED DISCUSSION OF LAKE ANN PARK FEE.
IBoyt: Can I have a motion on number 8?
II Schroers : Yeah, I'd like to make a motion that Lake Ann Park parking fee
for the year 1990 be conducted in the same manner like it was in 1989.
' Boyt: Do we have a second?
Robinson: What? Would you repeat that?
Boyt: Do it the same way we did it last year . $2. 00. No second?
Hasek: Just out of curiousity I called the City of Bloomington. I was
I going to call some others but I didn' t have time to do it today. I
apologize for that. Bloomington charges a $3. 00 fee to get into Hyland
Beach. They have an agreement with Hennepin Parks . Their $3. 00 gets them
into the parks and the park sticker gets them into the beach. They are
Ilooking at raising the price of getting into their beach to more come in
line with the park fee. In other words, they' re going to raise theirs
probably to $5. 00 or $7 .00 to get into that beach.
ISietsema: Daily?
' Hasek: That' s a yearly pass . The daily' s going to go up though too she
said but she didn' t know to what. It' s just something that they' re kicking
around right now. All of the money' s that paid to that park, that comes
out of those stickers, goes back into the park. In 1988 they made
I $33,000. 00 on that park and they have approximately 100, 000 people use it.
They fully expect the people that use their parks will pay for the parks.
That is the bottom line premise . This is a highly used park by a lot of
' people from outside the comunity and they fully expect those people are
going to help pay for it.
Boyt: We had a lot of interest 2 weeks ago I think, on the commission of
charging for the beach rather than the park. Right?
Schroers : Ed, I just want to make one correction. You said that it was
IHyland Beach. It's Bush Lake.
Hasek: It' s Bush Lake, you' re right . It' s Bush Lake Hyland it' s call
Iisn't it? I think that' s what she called it. Bush Lake Hyland Park.
Lash : Hyland' s further down isn' t it?
ISchroers: No, Hyland is right across the street but it's actually. . .
Hasek: I think she called it Bush Lake at Hyland Complex or something like
that.
Schroers : Yeah, it' s a merger but. . .
IIHoffman: Separate.
11
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 28, 1989 - Page 25
I
Schroers: Yeah, a separate merger . 1
Mady: But they' re charging for the beach?
Hasek: They' re charging for the beach. They don' t charge for any of the
other facilities in the City. All of the money comes out of the general
fund and she said that they have never registered a single complaint for
anyone paying to use that beach ever. They have not gotten one on file.
Mady: So if they use the beach for swimming lessons or anything , they
still have to buy the park sticker? 1
Hasek: Yep.
Schroers : It' s not only the beach that they' re paying for . In Bush Lake ,
they also have a boat access. They also have picnicking. They have
volleyball and it is the total amenity, not only specifically the beach.
Hasek: That' s the point. The swimming beach gets them into the park and
the park sticker gets them into the beach so you' re not only paying for the
beach, you are paying for everything else that' s in that park. You are
paying a fee to get into that park and use all the facilities . There' s a
free picnic facility I understand across the lake but most of the people
come to this one.
Schroers : They have their own gatehouse at the entrance to Bush Lake and
you can' t get to the picnic and the volleyball , the boat access or the
beach without going through that gatehouse.
Boyt: . . .Lake Ann Larry?
Schroers: I want to operate Lake Ann for 1990 the same way that it was
operated in 1989 because there doesn't seem to be a logical or sensible
procedure for dealing with collecting the fees from the out of town people
that participate in our youth recreation programs. There's not a fair way
to deal with that.
Boyt: Jan? ,
Lash: I 'm in favor of keeping the fee although I would be in favor of
upping registration by $5.00 and giving people who register through the I
City a parking fee. At least we' re making a little bit more money off the
people that are using it. Softball and things.
Boyt: Jim? '
Mady: My favorite topic. Lake Ann. Number one, I'm opposed to charging a
fee at that park. I think the people of the city who are using parks
deserve to use all the parks. I haven' t seen anything in staff' s memos
that show that any of the other locations are doing it on more than just on
an occasional basis . It seems to be the exception rather than the rule.
However, I realize that our budget is tight and reading the Council
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 28, 1989 - Page 26
I
comments, it looks like we' re going to do this anyway. If we ' re going to
' do it, we should by golly do it across the board , 100% without any
exceptions to anybody. What we' re doing right now is the very people are
paying taxes in this City are also paying the fee to get into their own
park. The people who live in Lake Minnetonka area, Wayzata, Excelsior ,
IChaska, wherever who are using our swimming facilities, which actually
costs more probably than the whole rest of the thing, aren' t paying the fee
to get into the park. That's ludicrous to me that the people who live in
' this town are paying twice. The people who we should be charging a fee to
use our facility aren' t paying a fee. Let's make it across the board and
they pay their $2.00 at the gate and if they don' t like it, they don ' t come
in but it' s our facility. Not their facility. If they don't like it, they
I can use a program someplace else. We just do it across the board . Whether
they come up to City Hall and buy their yearly sticker or they buy it out
there, fine. Let' s cut out the bickering about this whole thing . Let' s do
I it across the board. Everybody does it and let them know when they' re
going to have a program out here, that everybody' s going to use this
facility is going to have to pay to use it.
Boyt: Curt?
Robinson: Boy, I 'm really waffled on this one this year . I 'm back and
forth. Every other year I 've said yes to cover the fee but what really got
me was Todd ' s survey of the number of other places, surrounding
communities. Not a one charged for general parking fee. Some charged for
I public beach use. I guess I 'd have to lean to exactly what Larry said and
that is contrary to what Jim said. I think I 'd prefer to keep it simple
and you can' t keep it simple I don ' t believe by being consistent and
' treating everybody fairly so I ' ll now second Larry' s motion.
Erhart: I guess the biggest problem I have with this is, it doesn' t really
matter which way we charge. The big problem is that I think this is a real
I inefficient way to collect dollars to maintain a park because I also look
at it like Jim. That we' re paying for it twice and I would like to see,
until a better way is figured out for it, I would like to see it across the
board also.
Hasek: I guess all the discussion we' ve had in the past was trying to find
I a way that people would feel comfortable about paying it basically not
knowing they were paying and paying anyway. Which is kind of Curt' s
approach I think but I understood what he said. I would like to, if we do
go ahead and charge everybody at the gate which is the simple way of doing
I it, and charging a parking fee for that park, then I think it' s important
that we get somebody at the gate that can handle grief that they' re going
to get. I think Jim is right. If somebody does not want to pay to use
' that park, they simply don' t go into the park. But everybody has a
sticker. I don't know if you can pass stickers out along with your tax
statements to the people that live in town to make it easy for them. I
I don't know if there' s a way of doing that but I think that the users of the
park, that particular park and Bandimere when that comes around and any
other major city park, that we ought to try and pay for this facility
because not everybody uses it.
i
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 28, 1989 - Page 27
I
Schroers: Any one way or the other , there are other communities that are
charging for access to their parks. Like all the parking meters around
Excelsior lake and that' s not only for the beach and it' s for the picnic
areas and everything else.
Hasek: One last question and then a comment. The other thing that I liked 1
about having not only a gate house but a fee for that is that it would
certainly discourage misuse of the park.
Schroers: If that was an open and free park, the word' s oin to get out
g g g
what a nice park it is and it will accommodate a certain amount of people
but it's not going to accommodate the whole world and we could have our
facilities overused.
Boyt: I agree with Ed and Dawne and Jim. I 'd like to see everyone pay for II
it and I 'd still like to offer reciprosity to Chaska with their paid park.
Offer them Chanhassen residential status as a neighborly thing to do. Do
we have a motion on this?
Hasek: What kind of a motion do you want? I make a motion that. . .
Sietsema: Do you want to hear from staff at all? '
Hasek: Not this time.
%
Boyt: Go ahead Todd.
Hoffman: I like your idea that we do that and as I discussed earlier , I
tried that once and for some reason or another , it fell apart. ,
Lash: Tried what?
Hoffman: Across the board. I sat down with, I had employee orientation
meetings and I said, this is the ordinance. We' re going to charge
everybody and all of them started to do that and then some of the weaker or
the more meek decided instead of taking that grief they would be a little
more lenient. There were two individuals that were very good gate
attendants and charged everybody and they called me all the time with the
hassles they were taking. '
Sietsema: And they didn't reapply.
Boyt: Let' s get the City Council to. . . ,
Hoffman: Jay and I were out there one night with this particular
individual and plenty of cars turned around. Did not want to pay. That
was on a particular night when a Little League, a Minnetonka team was
coming down. So things just did not work out. I ' ll go along with it and
enforce it. It' s unfortunate that we went and did what we did last year
and then we' re trying to turn it around just in one year . It shows that
we're uncertain on this item and I question the fact that we go through
this every year . It' s in our ordinance. It says we need to do it every
year but I question the validity of that. So that' s all my comments. I
i
IIPark and Rec Commission Meeting
November 28, 1989 - Page 28
1
really like the idea that we didn' t have a big debate tonight. We just
IIheard your comments and hopefully we' ll pass a motion.
Robinson: Does Lori have comments?
1 Sietsema: No.
' Hasek: What is the current fee structure?
Sietsema: $2.00 daily pass. $5.00 per year for a resident and $10. 00 a
year for a non-resident.
1 Schroers: Well, I 'm ready to. . .
' Boyt: Okay, go ahead .
Hasek: I think I started one didn' t I?
ISietsema: No.
Mady: No. You asked about whether you wanted to ask for a motion.
IIHasek: Go ahead Larry.
Schroers : Okay, I 'm going to restate the motion that I made earlier . I am
IIgoing to move operate Lake Ann in 1990 the same as we did in 1989.
Lash: I second that.
Boyt: There' s a second now.
ISchroers moved , Lash seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
recommend to leave the Lake Ann Park fees the same in 1990 as they were in
1989. Schroers , Lash and Robinson voted in favor . Boyt, Mady, Erhart and
IIHasek voted in opposition. The motion failed with a vote of 3 to 4.
IHasek: Okay, we' ve got $2. 00, $5. 00 and $10. 00. $2. 00 daily. That' s the
one that's giving everybody the hard time because nobody wants to pay
$10.00 for out of town. How about if we just make it across the board the
Isame for everybody no matter whether you live in town.
Lash: Is it the $10.00 one that people? I think it' s the $2. 00 one.
Sietsema: It' s the $2. 00 one.
Hasek: Nobody wants to pay the $10.00. They' re forced to pay the $2. 00
' and they don' t like that choice so how about if we make it $5. 00 and $2.00
for everybody? Is there anything wrong with that?
Lash: I think it's still the $2. 00 when they' re going to only use it once.
11
Park and Rec Commission Meeting 11
November 28, 1989 - Page 29
1
Boyt: They have a choice if they' re coming back for baseball at another
time during the year, it'd be a better deal .
Lash: What is it that you get the complaints about?
Hoffman: The complaints from the people that are coming from out of town
to use this park in an organized activity which we associate. Chan Little
League associates with South Tonka Little League. We go play on their II fields. We don' t pay to get into their parks . They come down to our park,
and they' re upset about that.
Schroers: So it' s not a dollar figure, it' s just the idea that they have
to pay here and we don' t have to pay there?
Hoffman: Correct. '
Mady: Well they're not paying to use the park. They' re paying to put
their car .
Boyt : Do you want to work on your motion?
Hasek: I just thought I would change it. I make a motion that we change '
the fee structure at Lake Ann Park to across the board for residents and
non-residents alike, $2.00 a daily fee, $5. 00 seasonal and seniors over 65
or whatever the limit is for that, get to enter free. ` '
Boyt: Do we have a second? I ' ll second it. Discussion.
Mady: Ed , that was meant across the board. That meant anybody who went in II
the park has to have a sticker?
Lash: I can' t go with non-residents paying the same as residents. Then
residents are still , we' re still paying the taxes.
Hasek: Would you like to amend the motion? 1
Boyt: Would you like it that out of town people pay more?
Lash: Out of town people pay more. ,
Hasek: How much would you like them to pay?
Robinson: $10.00. '
Lash: I was going to say $30.00.
Sietsema: It can't be more than twice the resident.
Lash: Okay, so $10.00 then. But that' s what it is now. I
Hasek: You' re in favor of leaving it the way it is and just charging
everybody?
IIPark and Rec Commission Meeting
November 28 , 1989 - Page 30
II
Lash: No .
IISietsema: Leave the fees as they are and just enforce it across the board
is what she wants you to amend it to.
IILash: No.
IBoyt: No , she doesn' t want it enforced across the board .
Lash : But I don' t want to change the fee structure.
1 Hasek: But then you' re not going to vote for it anyway so you' re not
amending the motion?
IILash: Right.
II Hasek moved, Boyt seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
recommend that the Lake Ann Park fees be $2.00 for the daily pass and $5. 00
for a yearly pass , seniors over 65 free for 1990. Hasek, Boyt and Erhart
voted in favor. Mady, Lash, Schroers and Robinson voted in opposition.
IIThe motion failed with a vote of 3 to 4.
4
IBoyt: Do we have one more motion?
Mady: I 'm consistent on this every year I 've been on the commission, I 'm
against the fee at Lake Ann Park and I will continue being against a fee at
IILake Ann Park so don' t ask me to change your motion.
Hasek: Okay, so then it's either Curt or Jan or Larry that we have to
Iappeal to. How can we make it agreeable to you?
Sietsema: Can I offer a suggestion?
IIRobinson: Yeah, please do at this point .
Sietsema: We want to charge for the beach because that' s the biggest cost.
IIHasek: I want to charge for the whole, excuse the language, damn thing.
I Sietsema: Okay, let' s charge everybody that comes into the park as a
casual use, the $2.00 a day, $5.00 for the season, $10. 00 for the
non-resident. If you're involved in a youth ball program, you get in free.
If you're in an adult program, you don' t have to have a sticker, but we' ll
Icharge. We' ll beef up the team registration fee and apply that toward it.
Whether we give them stickers and do that or one way or the other , what
happens is cities charge to use beaches and if they feel that they're not
II getting enough money, -they need money to help maintain fields, they beef up
the team registration fee. So if you want to beef that up and give them
stickers or if you just want to beef it up and not charge, it' s the youth
II ballplayers that are driving us crazy. That we get the biggest complaints
about .
II
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 28, 1989 - Page 31
I
Hasek: Parents of the youth. '
Sietsema: Right.
Hasek: I can' t hear a little kid complaining a lot but I can hear his
parents.
Sietsema: Oh you should have heard him. He said the f word to Todd. He II
was a 10 year old.
Erhart: Oh really? Is it coming out of his allowance? i
Sietsema: His dad told him to shut up.
Schroers : Can I ask a question? The way that the program was handled last II
year is just exactly what you' re describing with the exception of raising
the fee for the adult league, is that right?
Boyt: And anyone who would feel like, who didn' t feel like paying, didn' t
pay. . . . I don' t think I should pay because of this . . .
Hoffman: No, that's not correct.
Boyt: Well , that' s what you led us to believe last year . " '
Hasek: I talked to a guy at the gate last year about that. I said if I
complain enough, are you going to charge me? No.
Hoffman: That' s what I instruct them to do. He's not there to take. . .
Hasek : Well then what' s the point? I
Hoffman: He's not there to take that verbal abuse.
Schroers : At that point he should just take down your license number and
turn it in and let Todd deal with it.
Sietsema: There' s no way we' re going to be able to pay someone who' s big
enough and brawn and brainy enough to argue with every single adult that
plays softball and complains about that fee. There' s no way we can afford
to do that and still bring in money. '
Schroers : Was that a workable, feasible, decent way for you to operate
last year? Reasonably trouble free? We did collect funds for the park.
Maybe not the maximum that we could but we did take funds in for the park. II
It was a working situation. Until we can find something that' s
significantly better , I don' t feel that it' s worth changing stride halfway
through. '
Boyt: Alright, can we have another motion?
Robinson: I 'd make a motion that we table this. ,
IIPark and Rec Commission Meeting
November 28, 1989 - Page 32
IIBoyt: I' ll second that.
Sietsema: Until what?
IIBoyt: Until the next meeting .
Lash: I was going to make a motion on her suggestion. Can we do that and
take a vote. Maybe we'd be done with it.
Boyt: We have to vote on this first.
ILash: Okay.
IRobinson moved, Boyt seconded to table action on the Lake Ann Park fee.
Robinson voted in favor and the rest voted in opposition and the motion to
table failed .
Lash: I' ll make a motion that we leave the fee structure the way it was
I last year , $2.00, $5.00, $10.00. Beef Chanhassen registrations by $5.00.
Give them a permit and let the out of towner Little Leaguers in if they' re
in uniform for free.
IISchroers : I ' ll second that.
Mady: And the beachlot people pay. In other words, the only people we let
in free would be. . .
Lash: The little kids in their uniforms.
IIErhart: Okay, they' re the only ones that are getting in free?
' Hasek: You' re going to beef up the league and you're going to give them a
sticker?
Lash: Right .
IIMady: What we did 2 years ago.
Hasek: That' s what we talked about 2 meetings ago too.
Erhart: Would that be. . .for staff?
1 Sietsema: Well , it' s doable but we' re going to hear complaints about it
because we just changed it last year from the year before. We told them
last year they no longer have to buy the sticker and we' ll just deal with
IIit. I really would like to put this to bed. I don't think you guys are
enjoying talking about it anymore.
Schroers: Just tell them that. . .need to be paid for .
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 28, 1989 - Page 33
Hoffman: So this is the adult leagues we' re talking about? So up their
registration fee $75.00 and give them stickers?
Lash: $5.00 a head so it depends on how many people.
Lash moved, Schroers seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
recommend that the Lake Ann Park fees for 1990 be as follows: $2. 00 daily 11
fee, $5.00 seasonal for resident, $10. 00 seasonal for non-resident, raise
the adult softball league registration fee and out of town Little League
players in uniform will enter the park for free. All voted in favor except
Mady who opposed and the motion carried with a vote of 6 to 1.
Erhart: . . .putting up a sign. That kind of reminds people what they' re
paying for. Maybe they won' t complain about it, like Larry said .
Sietsema: We can put up a sign. ,
Erhart: Maybe that will help you.
Schroers: Those adult softball leagues are going to cry about something I
anyway so this is maybe just as good a thing for them to cry about as
anything else.
Lash: If they say something, just say last year our revenues went down
drastically and. . .
Erhart: Just put a sign up. Your fees pay for these jerks to collect fees II
at the gate.
Mady: I recommend that the staff hire big people and pay them double what II
they paid them last year so we can get bigger people.
Schroers : You can tell them if they don' t like go play in Shorewood . I
Hasek: I'll tell you what, Filly' s bouncers are looking for work all day
long in the summertime.
DISCUSSION OF ACCESSIBILITY.
Sietsema: What we' re talking about is a continuation of our discussion on I
accessibility before. I 've included information from the Minnesota State
Building Code, Accessibility. Information from Bloomington which is kind '
of the forerunner in handicap accessibility and also Hennepin Parks
accessibility study and since Ed kind of started this whole thing , I think
I 'll let him carry the ball on it.
Hasek: I don' t know that we've come any farther . I 've still tried to get
some information from the national level. I 've called the woman and she
said that she'd send it and I haven' t received it. I think it' s a small
organization. But, the question still remains, do we want to make some
tPark and Rec Commission Meeting
November
II28, 1989 - Page 34
sort of exerted effort to make at least a portion of each of our parks
II accessible and define what we mean by accessible or leave it as kind of
vague as it currently is within the policies in the Comprehensive Plan.
That's the question. I would like to see us tighten it down a little bit.
II I think I would like to see us begin to at least consider the old , which I
will be here in another 20 or 30 years .
Robinson: What are the benefits of tightening it down?
IHasek: Simply because it' s become sort of a local/national campaign to
begin to think about more than the healthy people in the community. . .
ISietsema: It's a trendy thing to do.
IIRobinson: Have we been called on it or have we had a problem with it?
Hasek: Yes we have. I think a couple of things. First of all there isn' t
a single tennis court in the city that' s accessible to a wheelchair . It' s
got fences all the way around it.
Hoffman: Meadow Green and North Lotus Lake.
IIHasek: Well , there' s two of them.
II Boyt : Do they have concrete ramps going up to them? They doon' t. They
have grass. If they' re accessible they need a concrete or some sort of
hard surface pad to the courts and we don' t have that.
IRobinson: So what' s the problem?
Boyt : We have citizens in Chanhassen who like to play tennis . I know of
I one who I saw crawl through the doorway and then pull his wheelchair in
behind him because his wheelchair couldn' t fit through the gate at the
tennis courts. He plays tennis.
IIRobinson: But have they complained to us?
Sietsema: Yes .
IIBoyt : I don' t care if he' s complained or not. ,
Hasek: Can we be proactive or isn' t that our job?
Boyt : I 'd like to be proactive on this. Who knows if it' s going to happen
to me tomorrow or one of my children and I would like to designate some of
our parks and portions of our trails as accessible. I don' t think we can
do it to every park and every trail but I think we can designate certain,
maybe an area . Maybe a park and portions of trails and then just see what
Ithey do. .
Schroers : Yeah, I thought that we went through that the last time we
discussed this and decided we were going to try to do what was reasonable
IIand start with one and see how much it gets used and how well it works and
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 28 , 1989 - Page 35
develop from that point as the need depicts. ,
Hasek: I think to me that ' s a beginning. That' s a very slow beginning. I
think if we' re really diligent about doing this, I think what we ought to
do is we ought to solicit input. I think we can do it through papers . I
think we could do it through local groups. I 'm not only talking about
handicap. I 'm also talking about some of the elderly in town and maybe
it's not only the parks. Maybe it's other programs that they'd like to see II
implemented . Maybe their idea of recreation is, I don' t know, shuffleboard
or something someplace. Who knows. Where do they live? Where would they
congregate? What would they be interested in doing and maybe that' s what
we need to look at. I don' t remember exactly what was addressed in the
survey that we did several years ago.
Boyt: I don't think this was. '
Sietsema: I don' t think handicap was.
Hasek: I don' t know what kind of response if any of that but I think ,
there' s a lot of people out there that, there are very few older groups.
There are very few handicap groups. I 'm a member of the DAV and I 've never
been to a meeting simply because you kind of wonder whether you want to be
involved with that. You separate yourself from those types of things I
think and as such, maybe the response is a little bit slow im coming but I
think if we solicited it, we'd probably get it. '
Boyt : How about a task force?
Hasek: A task force would be one way but maybe it' s just a matter of, '
there might be a simplier way of beginning and it might be a matter of some
sort of advertisement through the City or something. I don' t know exactly
how that might be orchestrated but through some sort of an advertisement
through the City or something , I don' t know exactly how that might be
orchestrated just to try and get a few people going out there. It' s not
like I 'm trying to get everybody in town to rebbleroust about it but I
think if there is a group, we may have to do the. . .to find them.
Boyt: Within our school district we have a higher than average number of
handicap children, different special needs and they don't all live in our
area but we have a higher than normal percentage that do. There are groups
around, parent groups, with physically handicapped, emotionally
handicapped . Maybe an ad in the paper asking for interest in this topic.
Hasek: Sure. Maybe if we get absolutely no response, then it' s a matter
of digging a little bit harder but I don' t think it 's a matter of just
assuming that they' re not there and not responding.
Schroers : I think that soliciting input or researching the need is an I
excellent idea. I definitely think that's worth pursuing but I would like
to say why I am conservative about just going ahead and making things
accessible and that is, I can show you many, many, many thousands of
dollars worth of accessible things that just plain do not get used. They II don't get touched. I think that I want things accessible but I also don' t
I. Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 28 , 1989 - Page 36
II
want money wasted needlessly. I 'd like to see them made accessible in an
IIarea where it' s going to be a benefit to someone.
Boyt: That' s where this group of people coule be our beginning . We don' t
1 have to spend any money. They can come up with plans and say, we have 30
children of this age that live in this one area that would use an
accessible playground area or maybe the seniors want something specific and
then they could come to us .
IRobinson: Or if you didn' t get a response, it would tell you there' s
really no interest in it probably also. I think that' s a good idea to take
IIthis approach.
Sietsema: Something ties in on this is the City has some funds through the
development block grant money that is going to be approved at the Council ,
I maybe it was last night . They didn' t meet last night, on Monday night it
will be approved by them to hire a consultant to do a senior needs study.
That will tie into this and Paul and I will both be working with that
II consultant and I will alert them that we' re looking for this kind of input
at the same time.
II Lash: Maybe you could get the guy from the paper to put, not an ad . I
don't think many people see those but if there was some kind of an article
put in just stating that this is sort of being reviewed and we' re
interested in getting input from the public. So interested could contact
I you.
Boyt : Do you want to do that?
IISietsema: Yes.
II Hasek: If you do that Lori , could I have a chance to review what it is
that you put in before you do it?
Sietsema: Sure.
IIHasek: Not to edit or anything. Just to make sure. . .
1 Sietsema: To check my work?
Lash: Edit it.
IIHoffman: It may be beneficial in writing an article like that, Dave likes
to sit down with a few people that have the ideas. To interview them
personally and that may be an option.
1 Mady: Dave is always looking for good articles.
II Hasek: He can call me if he wants to. Larry, it' s interesting that you
say that the equipment doesn' t get used because I called Hennepin County
Parks and they talked a little bit about their policies of putting things
in. Nothing but rave reviews.
II
r
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 28, 1989 - Page 37
_ Schroers: On what? '
Hasek: On the equipment. Yes , it gets used . . .
Schroers: What specific equipment? I think there are things that get I
overused and then there are other things that just don' t even get looked
at.
Hasek: Regarding or related to equipment for handicapped?
Schroers: Yes. ,
Hasek: Okay, that' s possible. All I did, I talked to I think it was a
woman over there that I talked to and whoever it was that I talked to over II
there said that the program was really good and they were looking at some
more things and maybe they weren' t rating things.
Schroers : I agree with you. We have many successful handicapped programs. '
We have the Courage Center coming out with. . .and we have modified some
canoes and boats for the handicapped so they can use them and that' s all
very successful but we also have the maximum number of handicapped
positions in parking lots and I haven' t seen a car parked in for 2 years
and the rest of the lot is full and people are going into overflow parking
and they can' t use. In one parking lot we've got 8 parking handicap
parking spots and I have yet to see a car in any one of them. And it is
hard to say, it' s hard to find out exactly where you need the accessibility
and where you don' t and too much, when we' re talking about accessibility
only to the handicapped . We should be talking about accessibility to
everyone. Just making everything accessible and do away with stairwells
and have elevators in buildings and things of that nature so that everyone
whether they' re old or whether they have a physical handicap or a mental '
handicap or whatever their situation may be, can use it and not target a
specific group. Accessibility should be equal accessibility for everyone.
Mady: Did we need action on that? '
Sietsema: No.
Hasek: I think we just directed staff to prepare that. I
Hoffman: The other instance which I mentioned earlier was the class that
we sponsored at the old Village Hall . We had a handicapped instructor that
had a wheelchair and couldn' t get in the front door. We had to build a
temporary ramp just to get into that building.
Mady: Are there funds available through the federal government or the
state government to make handicap accessibles?
Sietsema: Yes. Block grant money is available. I
Mady: Put a path from the parking lot to the gate in the park there and
take the stupid post set up you've got out of there. It' s going to cost a II
little bit of money but not astronomical .
I
IIPark and Rec Commission Meeting
November 28, 1989 - Page 38
II Sietsema: As a matter of fact we' ve got $7, 500. 00 to go towards making the
fishing pier we put out at Lake Susan Park handicapped accessible.
Mady: Does it have to go specifically there?
Sietsema: Yes .
IIMady: If we only spend $6, 000. 00 there, can we use $1, 500. 00?
Sietsema: No.
11
PRIORITIZATION OF AND MODIFICATION TO THE CHANHASSEN COMPREHENSIVE TRAIL
11 PLAN.
Sietsema: I don' t have a whole lot to add from my memo. We need to look
at the plan and determine what we want to prioritize. How we want to go
II about prioritizing and phasing this thing . It' s very clear that we' re not
going to have the funding to do very much of this any time soon.
Boyt: Jim?
Mady: Not this but later on in Commission presentations which isn' t on the
' agenda, I have an item to present.
Schroers : I 'd like to know who designed this agenda for tonight . I mean
we put a whole bunch of major things on here. The Capital Improvement.
IISietsema: I did . Sue' s never been late on any agenda so I knew she was
chairing. I was putting her to the test.
IRobinson : Do we have to do anything with this tonight?
Sietsema: You don' t have to do anything to it ever .
Mady: We have to come up with authorization though because there are. . . in
May we should know how we' re going to proceed.
IISietsema: We' ve already made the prioritization of Minnewashta Parkway by
allocating $7,500. 00 to go towards the feasibility study with the road
improvements as our share of that feasibility study so that that could be
done at the same time that those road improvements are made.
Hoffman: Is there enough funds available to worry about it? How much do
we have to work with here?
Boyt: $7, 500. 00 for a feasibilty.
IHoffman: For additional development?
Sietsema: That' s about all we have in the trail fund right now.
r
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
9
November 28, 1989 - Page 39
Hasek: Okay, but is Minnewashta Parkway on the State Aid Program? I
Sietsema: Yes .
Hasek: So that we can get a trail potentially developed, at least to a
certain degree through State Aid funds?
Sietsema: Yes. But we will have to kick something in and it may have to I
come out of the rest of our capital improvement program because the trail
fund was depleted with the Laredo Drive and Carver Beach Road sidewalks .
Hasek: When is Minnewashta scheduled right now for upgrading? '
Sietsema: 1992.
Hasek : That' s the bids are let or that' s when road is developed?
Sietsema: The feasibility study is going to be done in 1990 and I believe II
the bids might be let in 1991 and development. . .
Hasek: Beginning in 1992? Because that' s got to be a year long project I I
would think.
Sietsema: I really am not certain. I know that the feasibility study is
going to be done in 1990 and it' s either 1991 or 1992 that the upgrading is II
supposed to occur . That it' s scheduled on the State Aid program.
Schroers: What about along TH 101? '
Boyt: Are we talking about north and south TH 101?
Sietsema: Yes . 1
Schroers : If they're going to do a realignment of TH 101, it sure doesn ' t
pay to prioritize it and plan on doing anything before they realign it. I
Mady: They' re going to realign it in the next couple of years. For our
side. ,
Schroers: And. . .would be a part of that. It just should be done at the
same time.
Hasek: Yeah, that was the one thing, the realignment that I saw when I was II
here one night at a Planning Commission meeting, they made no mention
whatsoever of trails. None. It was a concept plan at that point but they
were talking about, well is there a trail? It was real hodge podge at that
point and I asked them to please let us know with that plan before it got
too far along and we still haven' t seen it. '
Sietsema: They are aware though. The Planning department is aware that
there is a trail proposed along TH 101 so it is in the back of their minds
at any rate. I
r
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 28, 1989 - Page 40
I
1 Schroers : Update them on that and let there know that we would like to see
it go in along with and at the same time of the improvement.
II Sietsema: I would think that one of our priorities would also be that we
have some kind of a trail system on the south TH 101 by the time the
Bandimere Park is developed because it is going to be an attraction for
kids to get down there and they should be able to get there safely.
1 Mady: That portion of the road is. . .
I Sietsema: So it may not be a bad thing to do table this. I can go back
and try and get some schedules from Engineering and Planning as far as when
some of the road improvements are going to be made and that may help you in
determining what kind of prioritization you want to put on these. But
II something else to consider is how, even if we do this as the streets and
the roads are upgraded, we' re still going to have to kick in money and so
some creative funding ideas are very appropriate.
Boyt : Do we have a motion to table?
IIMady moved, Hasek seconded to table prioritization and modification of the
Chanhassen Comprehensive Trail Plan for more information. All voted in
favor and the motion carried . 4
DISCUSSION OF ZAMBONI .
IIBoyt : Todd , are you our Zamboni man?
Hoffman: Sure. I was the Zamboni operator quite a bit last year and the
I
year before.
Robinson: Were you authorized?
IHoffman: Authorized and trained, yes .
Lash : It' s gone?
Hoffman: No, it' s still here. It' s in our maintenance shop. We had the
City of Orono, up north, they called and scheduled some ice time and we
II said it' s not available and we talked about the Zamboni and they said, well
maybe we' ll buy it.
ILash: How much do you think you could get for it?
Mady: At least 5.
' Hoffman: I hope we can get what we put into it.
Mady: We should at least start there.
IIRobinson : What'd we put into it? $6,500.00?
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 28, 1989 - Page 41 I
Hoffman: Yep.
Boyt : I think we should make at least another hundred bucks so we can get II
shirts.
Lash: I just want to say I thought these Minutes were amusing .
Schroers: . . .use the Zamboni as a bargaining item and maybe we could shine
it up. Put a wax job on it. Make it look real nice and take it up to the II
and see if they wouldn' t, since we already have such a nice piece of
maintenance machinery, that they would finance an indoor rink for us . A no
interest loan.
Mady: Is that a motion? 1
Schroers: No, not a motion. Creative thinking.
Robinson: I make a motion that we authorize staff to sell the Zamboni for
starting at a price of the $6, 500. 00 that we've got into it.
Lash: I second that.
Robinson moved , Lash seconded to authorize staff to sell the Zamboni at a
starting price of $6, 500.00. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Robinson: I'd still like to say I told you so. ,
Sietsema: But it served us for 2 years.
Mady: It served it' s purpose and did us a heck of a good job. '
COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS: ,
Boyt: At our next meeting would you report to us on morals and ethics as
adopted by the Council . I
Lash: Are you talking about this thing that the Citizens. . .
Sietsema: The Youth Commission. '
Lash: Is that what you're talking about?
Boyt: Yes.
Hoffman: They' re posted in our lobby. '
Boyt: I think we need a full presentation and it would have been helpful
when we were doing our mission statement when there was a concern that 11 voiced by the Commission that we don't want to dictate morals to people
when our City has adopted a plan to support a stance on morals and ethics .
I
IIPark and Rec Commission Meeting
November 28, 1989 - Page 42
I
That' s an okay thing to do so we need the entire presentation.
II Hasek: From?
II Boyt : From Lori or Todd . . .
Mady: Or the committee that did it.
IISietsema: That' s no problem. I can do that.
Boyt: Thank you. Jim?
IIMady: A couple things. We had on the agenda 2, 3, 4 meetings ago
something on naming parks and I don' t think we ever did anything.
IISietsema: No, you still haven' t named parks .
Mady: I think we need to start thinking serious about this. We have about
I a half a dozen parks that are going to be coming on line in the next 2
years that absolutely have no names.
I Sietsema: Right now they' re called Lake Susan Hills West 1, 2 or G, H and
I can never remember which is what.
Mady: So we have to do some serious thinking about that. Starting to do
IIsomething about them.
Sietsema: Also the Bandimere Farm Park is going to need a name.
IHoffman: Contest.
II Sietsema: Specifically we don' t have names for the Lake Susan Hills West
parks. There' s four of them. We don't have one for the Bandimere Farm.
We have not formally named Chanhassen Hills or Curry Farms or any of them.
We should adopt them as names if that' s what they' re going to be.
IBoyt : Maybe we should do an informal meeting .
I Sietsema: How about a Christmas party? At Sue' s house after the next
meeting which is the 12th of December .
Robinson: Put it on a light agenda item sometime.
IIBoyt: That' s fine. We can have the next meeting at my house. It' s all
the same.
ISietsema: Well we' ll have to have a formal meeting because there are some
things on the agenda but we could probably get out of here pretty good.
IIErhart: Lori , do we just have one meeting in December?
Sietsema: That' s what I was going to ask you. I think that we could
IIprobably get by with one.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 28, 1989 - Page 43
I
ADMINSTRATION PRESENTATIONS:
Boyt: Are there any questions on the Adminstration Section? I think Todd
did you want to talk about Breakfast with Santa?
Hoffman: Breakfast with Santa, just to make everyone aware of it, that 1
this is sponsored by the Chamber-Rotary-Volunteer Fire Department. I help
out as a member of the Chamber on the Good Will Committee per se and I
think if you were there last year, it' s a heck of a lot of fun so bring
your kids. Come on down.
Sietsema: And don' t you think that Todd should put also sponsored by the I
City of Chanhassen Park and Rec Department if he's spending his time on it?
Schroers: Absolutely. '
Mady: I believe so.
Hoffman: That was a suggestion by Lori . We' ll have it in there. '
Mady: One thing that was a heck of an idea I heard last night. I don' t
want to take credit for it but I did think it was a heck of an idea that
came from one of the members of the Lion' s Club. . .it happened to be an
individual that applied for the Park and Rec Commission open position. I
don' t remember his name but he was the guy who went to Arizona 3 months out
of the year . Well , in any event , last night at the community center
presentation at the Lion's meeting, he suggested that the City look
seriously into changing the new State property tax law that allows
localities to initiate a sales tax in their community and his suggestion
was that we charge say a 1% sales tax on all entertainment and motel and
hotel rooms and that that money be earmarked to park and recreation items
so it's really not a tax on the residents here but on the people who use
the Dinner Theatre and the people who sleep in our hotels and motels. We
do have a new motel breaking ground shortly. We have a couple in town.
It's something that I think staff should seriously look into and make it
aware of the Council . He indicated that the City of Scottsdale, Arizona
did this and they' re obviously a lot larger community. . . That's how they
developed their park system.
Lash: So what would we get, maybe 50 bucks?
Mady: 1% of all the drinks. I
Lash: You didn't say drinks.
Mady: That' s entertainment. That' s a bar . Right now you' re already '
paying a tax, roughly 15% in this state anyway.
Boyt: Well make a recommendation and it can be presented to Council
because they have to do that right?
Mady: I'm not sure who but I thought it was a heck of an idea and it needs 11
further study to find out what the ramifications are.
IPark and Rec Commission Meeting
November 28, 1989 - Page 44
1 Lash : I like the water bill one better . The one that was in our packet a
long time ago about people rounding up their water bills and then the
excess goes to Park and Rec . Like if your water bill ' s $59. 00, you write
the check out for $60.00 and that goes to Park and Rec.
Mady: In any event, that' s an idea. I don' t think we need a
' recommendation or motion or anything on it but I thought it was a heck of
an idea. He thought of it in terms of a community center . I think it ' s an
excellent idea for anything. Maybe trails. Anything that's not easily. . .
' Hoffman: One more comment. The letter on the Regional State Softball
Tournament applicant that we were turned down. That does have a reflection
on, each manager gets a survey at the end of their tournament and some of
the results on that survey is that we didn' t have all the facilities
available at this park that other complexes do that host these tournaments
and that's part of the reason we were turned down.
Schroers: What specifically were the facilities that we didn' t offer?
Hoffman: Phone, water and restrooms. Electricity. That type of thing.
r
Mady moved, Robinson seconded to adjourn the meeting . All voted in favor
and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 9: 30 p:m. .
Submitted by Lori Sietsema
Park and Rec Coordinator
Prepared by Nann Opheim
1
1
I
CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION
MEETING UNE -t IT E
REGULAR
DECEMBER 12, 1989
Chairman Mady called the meeting to order at 7: 30 p.m. .
MEMBERS PRESENT: Sue Boyt, Jan Lash, Jim Mady, and Larry Schroers
' MEMBERS ABSENT: Ed Hasek, Dawne Erhart and Curt Robinson
STAFF PRESENT: Lori Sietsema, Park and Rec Coordinator and Todd Hoffman,
Recreation Supervisor
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Schroers moved, Boyt seconded to approve the Minutes
of the Park and Recreation Commission meeting dated November 14, 1989 as
presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
SITE PLAN REVIEW ZIMMERMAN ADDITION.
' Sietsema: This item was brought before the Park and Recreation Commission
previously only it was 100 acre site and 3 lots. 3 or 4 lots. They
revised the plan taking out the 80 acre outlot and it' s just a lot split so
it's 20 acres into 2 lots. At the time that we talked about this before,
the recommendation from the Park and Recreation Commission was to come in
with a trail easement along this border and then along the eastern border
to get up. It would have gone through the other outlot up to Tanadoona
Drive and eventually over to TH 41 and up to the Regional Park. Since that
time I've talked to planning and they're talking about a couple of
different options for a road in connecting Crimson Bay through here or
coming in with a road that would come in here and eventually connect to the
east. Now the latest is a road along the north boundary. It's unlikely
that the option of connecting Crimson Bay Road is going to go through. If
that doesn't go through, it doesn't make a lot of sense to put a trail in
there and cut off, divide that lot up. So staff would recommend that we
just continue with the previous recommendation. Going along the south and
east border of the property.
Mady: We' ll have the opportunity at a later date to do something else.
. . .develops this whole thing.
Boyt: Are you saying the road would go along the northern edge then?
Sietsema: Right but it doesn't make sense for us to come in along the
south and east and then go back down over. Our goal is to get up here. If
you're looking at, this is south and the regional park is going to be up
here so our goal is to zig zag our way through and at the time we make that
the next connection would be when the 80 acres comes through and that again
is one of the sites that was identified as potential community park
property. When that changes is apt to be long range when that ever comes
Iup for development.
Lash: Are you saying that our recommendation is based on. . . You've got
the Minutes attached?
I
IIPark and Rec Commission Meeting
December 12, 1989 - Page 2
I
Sietsema : Yes.
ILash: Okay, because this came back to us and we changed this. Remember it
went to Planning and then Mark Koegler came back to us at our next meeting
II and he said our recommendation really didn' t make sense with the Comp Plan
and they came back and we discussed the whole thing again and it had
something to do with Dogwood? I distinctly remember that. I remember the
night Mark was here.
IBoyt: You think it changed?
1 Lash: I don' t remember but I know it wasn' t this east thing and it went.
It has kind of a connection with Dogwood?
I Sietsema: What the connection was is that the next piece, I wish I had an
overall plan.
Lash : I 'm pretty sure it was the same thing. Have we done two different
ones?
Sietsema: What we had done was going all the way along this whole entire,
Iincluding the outlot and then shooting up this way.
Lash: And that was our first recommendation right? ti
ISietsema: Right.
Lash: Okay. I know that this came back to us a second time.
ISchroers: I remember something about that Jan. One of the things that
Mark brought up was we were talking at the same time about the population
1 projection for the next 25 years or whatever the projected population could
reach 35, 000 in the City and he felt that, if I remember correctly, it was
the opinion at that time that this additional parkland really wouldn' t be
necessary that far out in the City until the community reached that target
I population or close to it. That was something that we would consider way
in the future.
II Lash: You' re talking about a park. We' re talking about the trails.
That's what we' re talking about right?
I Sietsema: Trail , right. Staff' s recommendation was to go along Dogwood
and go through, straight through that lot connecting to Crimson Bay. That
was staff' s first recommendation. I don' t know if Mark was in the audience
then or not but it was changed then. What the Park and Recreation
I Commission had recommended then was to go along the south and east boundary
of the entire site being again the outlot included so what I 'm suggesting
here now, instead of bringing it way up here, which we could do at some
I time in the future, change that if that comes in, I 'm saying go along the
east here. If this turns out to develop into houses, we can get through
along the streets or whatever . Whatever this street connection is going
II to. If they put in a street here, whatever that street connection is, we
can tie into that.
11
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
December 12, 1989 - Page 3
I
Boyt: It would be the most. . .to the park. '
Sietsema: Yeah, if it becomes a park, right. And if it becomes homes,
then we can go along the streets to make the connection that we want to
make. I ' ll have to look. I don' t recall that.
Lash: Because I know I voted against it when it came back the second time .
I absolutely remember that. And on this one we all voted in favor and the
motion carried . I know it came back to us . It went to Planning like the
next week and there were a bunch of problems with it and Mark came and
explained to us their reasoning and then we changed it. I know it
something to do with Dogwood.
Sietsema: Alright I ' ll look but I don' t know. . . '
Mady: Do we need to act on it tonight?
Sietsema: Yeah. Unless you want to wait until you get that other
information but it is going to the Planning Commission at their next
meeting.
Lash: If you' re basing that we need to change it, based on our first '
recommendation.
Sietsema: I 'm just giving you that for background information. You can
disregard that whole, because that is no longer a valid plan and just go
based on this plan .
Sue Boyt's comments couldn' t be heard on the tape.
Sietsema: If you want to wait and I can go back and look that up. I
Lash: . . .the recommendation was to go on Dogwood here, then. . .
Boyt: I don' t think it was. I think it was a problem going along Dogwood. I
I think that' s what we wanted to do initially because that' s the one that
makes the most sense when you first glance at it but it seems like there
was something wrong with that. . . .couldn' t get it over on this side. . . I
Schroers: Well there is definitely topography over there.
Sietsema: Yeah, it' s very, especially when you get down to Dogwood, it 1
gets even more erratic. Severe. You have a couple options. If you want
to review it, what happened before, I can go back and dig out, see where we
discussed that. I don't think it was on the agenda though because I looked 1
back on all the agendas . That it just came up and I ' ll have to look and
see what that was. Otherwise, the old plan is no longer valid because that
did not get approval so you can base your recommendations strictly on what
we have in front of us today.
Mady: Thinking it through, the old plan really has some old basis on it.
A major portion of it or 80% of it doesn' t come in front of us. It' s just II
•
IIPark and Rec CorLnLission Meeting
December 12, 1989 - Page 4
II
this 20 acres . Ultimately we' re going to have an opportunity and it may be
I 20 years from now, to make that connection some other way but going along
that section line there, probably at this point makes the most sense. Just
going along the edges there. We don't have any other way of doing it.
ISchroers : That 80 acres that. . .cornfield?
Sietsema: What it is is, two different people own these properties and I
I believe that the guy with the smaller piece, what you' re looking at today,
wanted to divide, get more lots out of it and he needed more acreage to do
that because it's a 1 unit per 10 acres so if you threw the 30 acres in it
I was 100 and he could get 3 lots out of his and make the other piece an
outlot but it didn' t work out that way so he' s coming back with just 2
lots.
ISchroers : I would think we could make a recommendation on this.
Mady: Go ahead.
IISchroers : Okay, I ' ll move to accept park and trail dedication fees in lieu
of parkland and trail construction and to require a trail easement straight
I north from Crimson Bay Road to Tanadoona Drive and also recommend to
consider at the time of further development, neighborhood park needs.
Mady: Is there a second? 4
IIBoyt: I thought that was the place where there was a problem putting a
trail in and going along Crimson Bay Road. Isn' t that where this problem
1 with the trail . . .
Sietsema : Along Crimson Bay?
1 Boyt: Yeah. If that ' s the motion.
Sietsema : Your motion was to connect Crimson Bay to Dogwood or to Lake
IStreet?
Schroers: North. . .
ISietsema: Yeah.
Schroers : No, I was following staff' s recommendation to require trail
Ieasements straight north from Crimson Bay Road to Tanadoona Drive.
Sietsema: Okay, that' s the old recommendation. Go back to the second page
Iof your report.
Lash : While you' re getting your thoughts together Larry, can I make one
comment?
r Schroers : Sure.
II
II
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
December 12, 1989 - Page 5
Lash: I don' t want to appear to be real nit picky but I have a question.
You guys will discover that I have a very good memory for details and I
specifically remember making a correction on these minutes and it was not
done. I 'm wondering, when we make corrections if that then is go back and
correct it or . . . I
Sietsema: Usually I do.
Lash: Because this ends up becoming the permanent record correct? 1
Sietsema: Right. Where' s the correction?
Lash: It was on page 15. I 'm just saying that this is really nit picky
but I remember that this happened because I was the one who was questioning
about this budget that we had started for Lake Minnewashta and I was asking
these questions about it and Nann had gotten Dawne and I, I suppose because
we were new at that time, our voices mixed up so she has down that Dawne
was making the comments. Asking the questions and I was asking the
questions and correcting that and it wasn' t done.
Sietsema: The reason these aren' t corrected is because when the Minutes
come in, I go through them all and label them for the files. I got these
Minutes out of the files, not out of the Minutes so when I go back to a
file that' s regarding trails or regarding one issue, insteading of paging
through a huge book of Minutes and trying to find it, I can find all the
pages I need by finding that date and pulling it out and copying it and
those Minutes go in right away into the. . .
Lash: Before corrections? I
Sietsema: Before corrections usually. Sometimes. Not always but usually
when I get them, I put them in there because they' re needed. They need to I
go in there.
Lash: But the corrections are needed.
1
Sietsema: Yeah, for the official record they are made.
Mady: Ready to go?
1
Schroers: No, as a matter of fact. I managed somehow or another to
get. . .and I 'm still somewhat confused so I 'm not ready to make a
recommendation.
Sietsema: If you want to go with the option of going from Crimson Bay
Road, which is here, along the south boundary up, that would be the second
scenario . If the street goes through between the two lots or along the
north side, then the previous recommendation regarding the trail should
stand going along the 'south boundary from Crimson Bay Road to the southeast
corner of Lot 2 and along the east boundary of Lots 1 and 2.
Boyt: Yeah, that was our last recommendation. '
IIPark and Rec Commission Meeting
December 12, 1989 - Page 6
Sietsema: Except that instead of going up here, it went way out. That was
one recommendation.
Schroers : What' s kind of confusing me now is like if the street goes here.
That kind of leads me to believe that we don' t know exactly what we' re
doing, at least that' s what I felt.
Sietsema: That what?
IIBoyt: We' re trying to project into the future what' s going to happen.
I Sietsema: What Planning has told me is that they want a street down in
this area somehow to get these people out of here. That would connect, so
that not everybody is feeding onto what' s labeled here as Lake Drive.
Okay? So if they put it in and connect Lake Drive over to Crimson Bay Road
or if they put it inbetween the two lots and at a future time that the
other piece develops, they continue it out or if they put it up along the
north side, those are the 3 options . There's only 2 in your packet because
the north side just came up today. So if they go through, put it through
Crimson Bay Road, Crimson Bay Road to Lake Drive, then it would make sense
for the trail to go along there but it' s not likely that that' s going to
' happen. What you would do is just make that recommendation. If that
happens , then you want the trail here. If it goes between the two lots or
along the north side, then you'd want the trail along here because what we
want to do is connect Crimson Bay Road over. to Lake Minnewashta Park.
ILash: Is there some way that we can just wait until we have confirmation
on this so we know what ' s happening?
' Mady: Basically what we want to do is run it along whatever road they
decide to put in. I don' t know anything else. . .
ISietsema : Basically. We can look at it after Planning but typically we
make our recommendation before Planning looks at it because we' re on the
same schedule as the City Council and that would hold the developer up
Ialmost a month if we have to look at it after them.
Mady: The likelihood is that they' re only going to put more road in?
Sietsema: Yeah.
I Boyt: And really what the two options are, since we want to connect from
Crimson Bay in the southwest corner, the two options are to go straight
north and that probably isn' t an option.
' Sietsema: Right. If they don' t put the road in, then that isn't probably
what we want to do.
Boyt: So our only other real option is to go the southern boundary and the
eastern boundary and it doesn' t matter then where else they put the road
because our goal is to get from the southwest corner to the north.
Mady: So moved.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
December 12, 1989 - Page 7
Boyt: Second . '
Mady moved, Boyt seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend
to accept park and trail dedication fees in lieu of parkland and trail
construction and that trail easements run along the south and east
boundary. All voted in favor except Lash who opposed and the motion
carried with a vote of 3 to 1.
SELECTION OF PARK NAMES FOR SITES LOCATED AT:
A. CURRY FARMS
B. CHANHASSEN HILLS
C. LAKE SUSAN HILLS WEST (4 SITES)
D. SOUTH PARK SITE (BANDIMERE FARM)
Lash: Should we do something real novel like Curry Farms Park? '
Chanhassen Hills Park? Bandimere Park and then. . .
Sietsema: It would make a lot of sense to go with the subdivision name in II
most cases. I would think that Curry Farms and Chanhassen Hills are
Hoffman: Are very pleasant names. `
Mady: My thoughts on this were basically what Jan's are. Use the
subdivision name whenever possible and if you have a situation where
there' s more than one park, you can bet almost every situation I can
remember in the 3 or 4 years I 've been here, there' s always been one major
park and then there's been bits and pieces here and there. Use the
development name for those and the little bitty piece parks maybe if
there's nothing else that really strikes us, we can just use the street
name that they' re on.
Boyt: How about Chanhassen. . .and there were a lot of indians in this area II
and a lot of the roads have the Frontier indian derivation, if we go back
to some of that. Some of roots . . .
Lash: Do you have a suggestion? 1
Boyt: No. I think there' s a list of street names.
Lash: Okay, but. . .Kiowa is one. Do you think there'd be a problem with
that.
Boyt: . . .that' s confusing because there' s 3 of them in town but we need,
but that will give us some indian words. We don't want one like Kiowa Park
and people will never ,find that. They' ll know there' s like 3 or 4 Kiowas
around.
Lash: Or are they set up, I mean I 'm not even sure where these all are but
is it set up in a way that there's a directional thing where one is north
I
II Park and Rec Commission Meeting
December 12, 1989 - Page 8
I
or one is west and you could say Lake Susan Hills East Park or West Park? •
IBoyt: One of them is good for sledding and you could call it the sledding
park but I think there' s four of us here, there' s four park sites . Jim' s
Park, Jan' s Park, Larry' s Park and Sue' s Park. We have Lake Ann and Lake
Susan.
Schroers : Then we have to come up with a staff park.
ISietsema: Well do you want to go one at a time? What's nice is for a park
that there' s only one park in the subdivision, it is nice to call it that
subdivision simply because we changed the name at Meadow Green and between
Ithe people that live there and it depends on who you are what you call it.
Oh, you mean Chaparral Park? You still get that and when I first started
if I said Meadow Green, not even Dale would know what I was talking about.
IHoffman: So who changed that? Who changed the name?
I Sietsema: Fran. It was before me. It was Meadow Green Park before I got
here and actually I think Chanhassen Pond Park used to be Western Hills .
Boyt: Chan Pond Park.
ISietsema: I don' t know how it ever got to be Chan Pond Park. I think it
used to be Western Hills Park or something. But anyway, it' s Chan Pond
I Park now. So if you want to go one at a time and agree on those names and
then the difficult part about the Lake Susan Hills West one is that the
name of the subdivision is so long and then you start putting directions,
Idifferent directions in there, it would be Lake Susan Hills West North.
Boyt: . . . i want to find completely different names for Lake Susan since
they have four of them.
ISietsema: For Lake Susan Hills West, yeah.
IBoyt: For all 4 of their parks .
Sietsema: The other thing is, if you named one of them Lake Susan Hills
West Park, which one?
I
Hoffman: We already have a Lake Susan Park.
I Mady: We have a community park so we should try to stay away from Lake
Susan period .
IBoyt: Go with Bandimere, Curry Farms and Chanhassen Hills?
Sietsema: We already have a Bandimere Park too.
Lash: Yeah, but it' s 'the same.
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting ,
December 12, 1989 - Page 9
Mady: It's in the same, we call it Bandimere Farm Community Park, everyone
will be happy. They' ll find that out when the people are here for the park II
plan.
Sietsema: This is Lake Susan Hills West . This is a piece of parkland , and II
this is.
Schroers: These are just neighborhood parks where you're not going to have •
scheduled events mostly.
Mady: There' s a pretty good size park though.
Sietsema: This one will be real active. This one won' t be too much going II
on. I think this one will probably be more active and then there' s this
big piece between there. It's part of Lake Susan Hills West and part
of Chanhassen Hills but it' s a natural . . .
Lash: Outlot E.
Mady: Outlot park.
Schroers: If we were going to be having scheduled events and things like
that at some of the parks, it seems like the most logical way to handle
that particular Lake Susan Hills because there' s more of them. . .and that' s
not very imaginative and I realize that but just to keep thiflgs in order .
At least you know what you' re talking about .
Lash: It' s a very neat, tidy idea Larry but.
Mady: But no one knows what field they' re on up here. When you say
diamond #3 and they say, well that's where, which one is it?
Hoffman: This has got a stream running through it. '
Lash: Beautiful Creek Park.
Hoffman: Have Creek in there. Stream.
Boyt: Indian Creek Park. 1
Lash: What's the name of creek there?
Hoffman: What is the name of the creek? 1
Schroers: Call it Susan Creek.
Sietsema: Who knows.
Lash: How about Sunset Trail Park. Is that the name of this street?
Mady: Is it there yet?
Sietsema: It stops right here. '
1
1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting
December 12, 1989 - Page 10
II
Mady: It goes down to that guy' s house and then walk through. . .
Schroers: If you' re going to name it after creeks, you have to attach a
II length to it. 9 mile, 6 mile and we've got one that goes all the way to
Purgatory.
Boyt: Is that a park joke?
IISchroers: I don't know. I just came up with it.
IILash: Creek Drive Park?
Mady: That' s nice.
IIHoffman: Sure is . Creek Drive Park?
Mady: Outlot G, Creek Drive Park.
IHoffman: Sunset Trail Park?
I Sietsema: The only thing is, no one' s going to know where Sunset Trail
Park is . When you' re here you have no idea that you' re that close to this .
4
Lash: Just name the street and then we' ll look at it.
II
Mady: Name the street park.
ISietsema: This is Lake Susan Hills West Drive.
Boyt: Huron, that makes a lot of sense doesn' t it?
Mady: There' s another Huron in this town.
Sietsema: Well we have about a zillion Dakota ' s.
IBoyt: We have a lot of Chippewa ' s. 2 or 3.
I Lash: Do you think we could just wait on it until they name the streets
and then.
I Boyt: We can come up with more creative names too. Creekwood. There ' s
woods there.
Mady: There' s Creekwood Park and Creek Drive Park.
ISchroers: Do we have to have it associated with something in order to give
it a landmark or an area or location or something?
IMady: How about Audubon Park?
Boyt: There are areas known for certain type of natural topography. You
I
could take some of that. We have prairie. We have forest. There' s acorns
II
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
December 12, 1989 - Page 11
1
up in here. We could come up with something that describes prairie or
forest or something. 1
Mady: Creekwood is the name of a road.
Sietsema: Karen lives right over here.
Mady: There you go, Karen' s Park.
Sietsema: And she has a red fox in her area all the time and she lives
right around this park right here.
Lash: Fox Creek.
Mady: Fox Hollow. Fox Chase. Red Fox Park.
Sietsema: What about Red Fox? Well I can see why I never got very far
with. . .
Schroers : If we want to pick kind of a theme, that would narrow it down
and make it easier .
Boyt : What was the type of indian that. . .Dakota and Sioux right? 1
Schroers: I thought it was Chippewa but.
Mady: Trees .
Sietsema: Well , the streams that run through the town are types of trees , 1
types of indians, and.
Lash: Things that have nothing to do with this. 1
Mady: Like What? Big Horn.
Boyt: Calestoga. 1
Mady: What' s a Calestoga anyway?
Lash: Covered wagon. 1
Sietsema: That' s frontierish.
Schroers : Frontieriesh , pioneerish. How about Pionner Park?
Sietsema: We could name it after Jim Curry. 1
Lash: We should name it after that sportscaster .
Sietsema: Sid?
Hoffman: So we're trying to stay with the natural theme right? Is that
correct?
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
December 12, 1989 - Page 12
I
Sietsema: Let' s name them after . . .
Hoffman: Water? Pond Park?
' Boyt: We're part of a group of what they call mini-waters . We' re part of
a region called mini-waters.
I Lash : One says open space and the other one says public open space. . . Now
here's a circle that' s down here called Oak Side Circle.
' Mady: Was this a particular farmer' s property at one point in time?
Sietsema: . . . it was Jim Curry' s after that.
Schroers : Creekside. I like Sunnyside.
Hoffman: Creekside Park, because there' s a lot of people. . .
' Mady: TH 212 ' s going to go along the one. That' s the Chan Hills park,
never mind.
ISietsema: Really the only two that really should have names right now are
probably these two because they' re being developed.
IIMady: G and F you mean?
Sietsema: If you wanted to wait on the others.
ILash: What did you say the name of the street is up here? Creek Drive.
Sietsema: This is Creek Drive that goes through but it' s not in yet.
Lash: Okay, but that's what it' s going to be called?
' Sietsema: Do you want to go with prairie at all?
Mady: None of them really reflect a prairie. Outside of Outlot E, there
aren' t a whole lot of trees out there.
ILash: Which are the two that you want?
Mady: G and F.
Sietsema: We don' t have to do any of them now. It' s just when you' re
1 talking about them. I can' t remember the letters.
Schroers : Go with the hilly one and call it Susan Knolls Park.
ISietsema: Susan' s Knobs?
Schroers : Susan' s Knobs Park. I didn' t say that.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
December 12, 1989 - Page 13
I
Mady: Why don' t we call it one of them Van Doren, one Hazard, one
Stallings. Hazard Park. I
Schroers: Cottonwood Park is nice. There' s probably only about 8 ,000 of
them in the state. . .but I think if you' re going to do something like that,
you've got to actually physically go there and make sure that the large
cottonwood trees are in the park. We named area Sumac Knoll and then. . .
Mady: Since we moved the geese out of Lake Susan, call one Canadian Geese I
Park.
Sietsema: Gooseless.
Schroers: Missing Geese Park. That sounds like an indian name doesn' t it?
Lash: Running Geese. '
Sietsema: Critter Creek.
Lash : I guess I 'd be interested in finding out what the name of the creek I
is here.
Sietsema: Do you like Critter Creek? ,
Lash: I'd be interested in finding out what the name of the creek is here
and then I 'd be interested in finding out what the names of the street will II
be by the other before I make any rash decisions here on what we may end up
naming. . .
Mady: This is forever . '
Lash: I'll make a motion that we wait until we have the creek names and
the name of the streets in Lake Susan.
Mady: And name the other three?
Lash: Well did everybody think that Bandimere. . .
Sietsema: You want to name it, since it' s going to be a youth athletic
complex, do you want to Bandimere Athletic Complex or Athletic Park.
Mady: Bandimere Community Park.
Lash: Bandimere Community Park?
Mady: Sounds good to me. '
Lash: Okay, so we want to go Curry Farms Park, Chanhassen Hills Park,
Bandimere Community Park and we're going to hold off on Lake Susan Hills
until we have more information.
Mady: Second.
IIPark and Rec Commission Meeting
December 12, 1989 - Page 14
I
Lash moved, Mady seconded to name the following parks : Curry Farms Park,
1 Chanhassen Hills Park and Bandimere Community Park and to hold off naming
the parks in Lake Susan Hills West until street names and creek names have
been identified. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
IUPDATE ON YOUTH COMMISSION AND ADOPTED ETHICS.
I Sietsema : At the last meeting Sue had mentioned that she would like an
update on the Youth, what was happening with the Youth Commission and the
Ethics that were adopted by the city. I put in the packet the resolution
II that was adopted. The resolution containing the youth development plan and
the ethics and the Minutes from the City Council. Also the Youth
Commission proposal . I think what I ' ll do is just have Margie go over , is
I that alright, from start to finish how we kind of got to where we' re at. I
know a little bit about it, enough to kind of have a grasp on how the youth
commission evolved and the four different aspects and everything but I
don' t think these people do at all and I don' t feel confident enough about
Ithe details to really make it clear to them.
Margie Karjalahti : About 2 years ago it kind of evolved that there was
I just like a real concern. People really started to voice concern about
what kind of input is going into our kids in our communities. . .who they
become as adults. What' s going to be the foundation for . . . ,Where do they
get this type of character developing input so a lot of people got together
I and started talking about it. What really came about was community effort
with people from Chanhassen, Chaska, Carver . . .and Victoria all coming
together at different times and discussing it and coming up with a plan.
I The plan became known as the youth development plan. There are four
aspects to that plan and it's just kind of way to meet the needs of the
youth. One is . . .how the schools meet the needs of kids. Another one is
I formation of . . .and there may be a lot of duplication going on and it may
just probably real helpful if there' s a resource center where if we come up
with an idea that say our Park and Rec would like to do, it may already be
done someplace else and we could get some information that would help us
I from having to reinvent the wheel . And maybe work in conjunction with
those people. So that' s cirriculum and resource data base. The third was
the adoption, the formation and adoption of the Set of Values which I
II believe you probably, do you know about the values that have been adopted
by the City? Those values were comprised from several public forums and
questionaires. The last thing that brought it all together was last May we
had an open forum for the public to come to which they had taken a list of
I28 values and set them, kind of put us in groups and there were
approximately 50 people there and people from all our communities and we
just kind of prioritized what we thought was important. It came down to
I the 8 values that we have so that 's how they came about. It was just one
person or even. . .and we really thought what they were was what people
already have in them. Values that we already have. The purpose of
I adopting the values is to to mostly encourage people to hold them up and to
make people really realize that they can be bold about displaying them and
modeling them for kids. Then the fourth component, let' s see there' s, are
you tracking with me? Okay, the fourth component then would be the
Iformation of a youth commission. The youth commission would be one source,
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
December 12, 1989 - Page 15
see now I wasn' t. . .on this myself because I kind of came in on the values
part. The youth commission I understand would be a source of . . .one paid
person who would coordinate the efforts of a lot of volunteers . They would
continue to look at the needs of youth, particularly in the area of
character development. Whether there are problems. Whether there are II things that can avoid problems. . .throughout all communities. That would be
the purpose of the youth commission so that 5 years from now we wouldn' t
look back and say, gosh that was a good idea to adopt those values. . . But I
the youth commission would be accountable to all of the communities it
serves too through a Board of Directors and they haven' t finalized all of
that yet.
Sietsema: They have the Youth Commission proposal in here for 1989 and the
cover letter on that has letterhead Youth Development Task Force from
Stephanie Young and it talks about that the youth commission would continue I
the four aspects and catalog that resource center so that they would have
all that stuff together and look at duplicacies and what not like Margie
was talking about. But it'd be an ongoing thing that could be updated and I
identifying needs. Update the needs and what the kids needs and I got the
impression that that commission isn' t going to have one on one contact with
the youth but with all the people that deal with youth.
Margie Karjalahti : When I did talk to Stephanie Young she said that the
youth commission, where they are right now is pretty much. . .to avoid
duplication by finding out what' s already going on and then filling in the II
gaps where they' re seen. That would be the first year. . . The second year
would be looking at. . .so that' s the two year plan for the youth commission
so far.
Sietsema: So in a nutshell , that' s what the task force is all about. The
bottom line is that I think that the City Council has embraced these
values, these ethics for the City to follow and I think they also, didn' t
they approve the Commission' s proposal but they haven' t designated any
money.
Margie Karjalahti : I think that' s right. I
Sietsema: Okay, so the next thing is that the Commission would come back
and see what kind of funds they need from each one of the different
agencies or cities or whatever is involved.
Margie Karjalahti : What they were looking at is probably a 30 hour a week II
position. Maybe not even full time position. 30 hours. And the basis
that they were looking at the funding would be, by the way the. . .that they
had come up with was $1.00 per capital per person within the School
District #112 so for Chanhassen it would just be for the people living in
School District #112 so it wouldn' t be the entire city. And that' s purely
volunteer . It' s just a way to start somewhere.
Boyt: The reason I asked for this to be presented to Park and Rec was
because when we were working on our mission statement, there was some
concern voiced that we not tell people what their values should be. It' s I
already been decided that we can do that. That we can take a stance. That
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
December 12, 1989 - Page 16
' this is the way that we' re going to try and act so we want other people to
do that.
Margie Karjalahti : The purpose of the values is mostly to make people
I aware of them in themselves so they can be conscience that they' re modeling
them and to know that that' s just a part of working. . .no matter what you
are, you are always modeling something so let' s really try to model the
' good qualities that we like to see in our children.
Sietsema: Now is the values committee going to be putting on seminars and
Itraining sessions for people who work with youth?
Margie Karjalahti : We are real happy to do that, yes. I have. . .getting
back to people. A letter has gone out and I have not had time to contact.
IOne other things, I talked to Todd last week I think. He' s doing a
training session for rink attendants and we talked about how good it would
be for them to be able to pick out one or two of the values and figure out
I for themselves how they would be modeling that as the attendant. The
training session we have developed is one that, we don' t tell people what
they' re supposed to be doing but we give them the opportunity to identify
the values that they particular want to be. . .and focus in on those. So
' that there' s ownership from them and it comes from them because you can' t
teach values. They can only be modeled and talked about. Unless you have
them, you can' t teach them but we see that people have them. * So we do have
I a process to help people identify them. There' s another program too that
we' ve just come up with and it' s called you' ve got to be kidding . It was
developed for educators mostly but there' s also a parent program that
Ireally anybody could watch because I 've seen quite a bit of it, could apply
to their own lives and kind of fit it in. It just kind of teaches you neat
little ways to respond to kids so we really have two different programs in
the organization.
IIBoyt : . . . is available to neighborhood groups too.
IMargie Karjalahti : Yes.
Boyt : To anyone who wants to have it at their house could have it at their
Ihouse for the neighbors.
Margie Karjalahti : Yes, and we have facilitaters for that and we also have
facilitaters now. . . We can go out and do this now. We have about 15
Ipeople who will . . .
Boyt: I 'd love to have you get at coaches.
IMargie Karjalahti : Most of the people on the values committee are hockey
players. That was our first priority.
Boyt: How' s it working with that?
Margie Karjalahti : Well we haven' t gotten there yet. Been able to kind of
Italk about them. . .
Park and Rec Commission Meeting ,
December 12, 1989 - Page 17
Boyt: You might want to contact Jeff Bros because basketball starts in
January so the coaches will be training any day now. I
Hoffman: As a result of Margie and conversation, a list of these values
has been included in our employee orientation packet. When we go over our
employee rules and guidelines , we' ll just discuss for a moment these
values, this program. How it has been adopted by the City Council and we
would like those people as employees of the City to try to exemplify these
values. With their job there at the warming house.
Boyt : Thanks Margie.
ADMINSTRATIVE SECTION:
Sietsema: Is there any questions about the Adminstrative Section?
Schroers: I did have one. I read it through and I felt that. . .and let' s
give them that information and tell them that under the circumstances. . .
skating rink there.
Hoffman: I saw Craig Nye. He brought his kids up here. '
Schroers: Did he say they want it?
Hoffman: Yeah , I talked to him. He said yeah, I heard about it.
Lash: Does it sound like. . .next year?
Schroers: That or like it was suggested in the adminstrative section, look I
at possible different locations. Or if in fact a new well gets drilled and
there aren' t any problems with it, it may work out there but right now I
can understand why if they' re having pipe freezing problems they plan on
doing construction in the area, it certainly wouldn' t make any sense to put
a skating rink in the way. So I agree with that.
Sietsema: And it' s just a matter of how that all gets graded out and where I
the ballfield fits on that other piece. I would think that that could
probably be worked out. It's just the logistics of doing it. It' s
certainly not level enough to do anything with it this year. The other
piece.
Schroers: And because it was in January right , that they plan on drilling 1
the test well?
Sietsema: Right, but that won' t be on the other piece. There' s two I
different pieces down there at South Lotus Lake. One' s the welihouse site
and then the other one' s above the parking area for the boat access.
Schroers : That well ' s going to be on the upper site then?
Sietsema: No, it' s going to be right on the same piece the existing well
is. '
1
IPark and Rec Commission Meeting
December 12, 1989 - Page 18
I
I Schroers : That' s what I gathered when I was reading it so that' s why I
thought it would be in the way. why
Sietsema: Right but I mean if we want to do it on the other piece, it' s
I not likely that we can this year because it' s just not flat enough. If we
want to include that when we move forward with plans, the detailed plans of
that park will have to take that into consideration at that time and that' s
Ischeduled for next year .
Boyt: Did anything happen with the zamboni?
ISietsema : I haven' t taken it to the City Council yet for their approval to
sell it. The Minutes aren' t available so it won' t be on the next agenda .
It will have to go on the next. . .
ILash: The memo that you have to Don about the Lake Ann Park fee. It seems
like you call it the non-residential seasonal pass was to remain at
I $10. 00. . .
(There was a tape change at this point.)
IMady: . . .make it as uninviting as possible. . .because the grass will have
to be cut occasionally while it' s growing. . . Have we gotten, do we know
what's happening with that old train depot that we got a year ago?
ISietsema: I haven' t heard a thing about it. I don' t know if the money' s
actually changed hands. It was supposed to be purchased.
Mady: My thoughts are we haven' t really committee to where it should be or
what should happen with it but with the HRA redeveloping the downtown,
specifically like it along the railroad tracks along there, obviously HRA
Imoney could be utilized to put it in place and rejuvenate it.
Sietsema : There' s actually a spot that would work really well that would
I be right across the street from the new bank that' s going in down there.
And the bank is , they' re working out a deal with HRA. They don' t want that
piece to be developed and they' re willing to pay the City to not develop it
further for commercial uses or something. I don' t really have all the
I details yet. That will be coming to the commission but at any rate, if
that all goes as planned, it will be a good place for the depot to go. It'd
be a nice green area by the railroad tracks .
IMady: I just wanted to find out. Had that just been dropped or . . .
I Sietsema: I' ll have to check and see. I don' t know if the money ever
changed hands. That was an HRA deal too so.
Mady: The other thing I 've got is. . .named spelled right but that' s fine.
IHoffman: We've been getting increased public comment each time one of
these goes out. New people in town. New people from, a woman from Kansas
Icalled the other day to sign her kid up for just about anything that she
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
December 12, 1989 - Page 19
could in here and said this is just great. Where we lived before we never 1
had anything like this and that kind of thing.
Sietsema: Welcome to Minnesota and isn' t that picture nice?
Mady: I didn't realize we had a contest for it.
Hoffman: Just started. We didn' t get a picture so we needed one.
Lash: Last time we talked about having something in the paper for
something. Ask the guy with the paper to do a little blip asking people
for input on something.
Sietsema: It was for the accessibility stuff. I talked to Dave about it
and he'd like to do an article about it in January so I put it on the back I
burner to do some of the other groups and stuff about it and put it all in
with his stuff.
Hoffman: That was one other thing that Ed wanted to pass along that was if 1
you all received your NRP magazine, the whole theme of it is accessibility
and that kind of thing. Then also in our past MRPA, local keeping up I
issue, they also had a recreation integration park article in there as well
so it is kind of a hot topic right about now. So Ed wanted to make sure
that we were all aware that this was just not Ed Hasek' s issue. That it is
a national issue. It' s not just his knee. '
Mady: Ed's just jumping on the band wagon.
Schroers moved, Boyt seconded to adjourn the meeting . All voted in favor
g
and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned.
Submitted by Lori Sietsema
Park and Rec Coordinator
Prepared by Nann Opheim
1
PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION MINUTES
DECEMBER 14, 1989
PAGE 1
PRESENT: Wayne Wenzlaff Bill Boyt ABSENT: Richard Wing
Bill Bernhjelm Craig Blechta
' Candy Takkunen Barb Klick
STAFF PRESENT: Jim Chaffee, Public Safety Director
Meeting called to order at 8: 05 p.m. by Chairman Wayne Wenzlaff.
(Preliminary tour and canine demonstration at Sheriff' s Office)
Approval of Minutes: Barb Klick motioned, Craig Blechta seconded
to approve the minutes of the Public Safety Commission meeting
' dated November 9, 1989 as presented. All voted in favor and the
motion carried.
Visitor Presentations: None.
' Carver County Sheriff' s Report: Chief Deputy Jim Castleberry
mentioned the DWI saturation that will be occurring during the
Holiday period. He stated that an additional officer will be on
board but will not be affecting Chanhassen. Captain Bob
Pagelkopf will now be doing patrol 50% and office duty `0%
' Chanhassen Fire Department: Jim Chaffee reported that Dale Gre-
gory was re-elected Fire Chief for another two year term, 1990
and 1991. This will be dependent on Council approval. The aerial
' truck should be arriving the end of January or first part of
February. After its arrival, the City will be looking into
lowered insurance rates. The Savage Fire Department has hired
the same architect (Jack Andersoon from EOS) for their new fire
station.
' Public Safety: Steve Beckman and Joel Spielman will be switching
positions at the 1st of the year. Joel will be with narcotics
investigations and Steve will be patrolling.
The Police Study Committee will consist of 9 members. The study
should be completed by 1991, with 6 month interval reports.
Discussion followed on the role of the committee, its members and
' its development plan.
The MN State Patrol will be moving their sub station to the
Chanhassen Public Safety wing on January 3rd. The City will be
benefiting from the extra officers in the area.
The animal control contract with the neighboring five cities was
' tabled by the Council until the Finance Department fine tunes the
numbers. The present contract was extended an additional three
months. The five cities were contacted to find alternative ani-
mal control service if necessary.
I
PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION MINUTES
DECEMBER 14, 1989
PAGE 2
NEW BUSINESS
' Certificate of Occupancy: Per the current ordinance, a Cer-
tificate of Occupancy is not required for closing on a home.
Barb Rlick motioned, Craig Blechta seconded, to change the
wording on the ordinance to read from may be required" to
"shall be required". All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Redwing Lane: Discussion was had on the stop sign requests
' made by the residents. Jim Chaffee will be contacting Jeff Bros
to inform him of the need of a petition or survey from the resi-
dents to escalate these requests. Craig Blechta will invite Jeff
' to the January Pulbic Safety Commission meeting. Discussion
followed on various traffic concerns and the stop sign issue at
Laredo and West 78th Street.
' Verbatim Minutes: The Council vetoed verbatim minutes for the
Public Safety Commission. The minutes will be taped, typed up in
this fashion, and could be typed verbatim when a particular issue
' is in question.
Traffic Safety Committee: Jim Chaffee spoke of this committee,
Scott Harr, Dave Hempel and Tim Thompson, that meets once a
' month. Discussion followed on the relationship between this com-
mittee and the Public Safety Commission. . .stepping on toes? The
possibility of having a staff person from the Engineering
Department present at Public Safety Commission meetings was men-
tioned. Wayne Wenzlaff motioned, Craig Blechta seconded, to dis-
band the Traffic Safety Committee, put those functions back into
' the Public Safety Commission. All voted in favor and the motion
carried. Jim Chaffee will provide the process for citizens to
follow on requests, petitions, etc.
Elections: Wayne mentioned that elections will be coming up for
the position of chairman at the January meeting. Candy Takkunen
submitted her notice that she will not run for another term on
' the Public Safety Commission. Craig Blechta will stay on for
another two year term. Jim will contact Richard Wing for his
decision on another term. Wayne Wenzlaff motioned, Craig Blechta
' seconded, that Jim Chaffee go before the Council on 12/18 to
request the placement of an ad for the opening(s) on the Public
Safety Commission. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
t Misc: Discussion followed on registered and unregistered alarms,
and meeting informally for the Commission meetings. Craig
Blechta motioned, Candy Takkunen seconded, to move the future Public
Safety Commission..jneetings to the Atrium Conference Room. All
voted in favor and the motioned carried.
I
PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION MINUTES
DECEMBER 14, 1989
PAGE 3
Barb Klick motioned, Craig Blechta seconded to adjourn the
meeting at 9:40 p.m. All voted in favor and the motioned
carried.
NOTE: Craig Blechta's term is not up. Bill Bernhjelm's term is
up December 31, 1989, but he has indicated his desire to be reap-
pointed
to the Commission.
1
w
•
I/