Loading...
1e Approval of MinutesCHANHASS~ CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION APRIL 28, 2003 Mayor Furlong called the work session to order at 5:30 p.m. ¢OUN~'IL MEMBE~ PRE~ENT: Mayor Furlong, Councilman Petcrson, Councilman Lundquist, and Councilman Ayotte ~TAFF PRF~ENT: Todd Gerhardt, Justin Efiller, Kate Aanonson, Todd Hofflnan, Teresa Burgess, and Sgt. Jim Olson DISCUSSION OF TH 101 SOUTH LF~ ~ STUDY. Dave Engstrom and Lynn Clarkowski from MnDot presen~ their findings from a speed study conducted Highway 101 just south of Highway 5. After providing their findings, MnDot's recommendation was that the speed limit as posted at 40 mph was appropriate. Ken Wencl and Bob Armstrong were present as representatives of the neighborhood. Ken Wencl stated the MnDot hadn't taken into account pedestrian traffic and asked for a reduction in the speed of 10 mph to 30 mph based on the road conditions, Le. curves, hill~, and lagk of shoulders. Mayor Furlong asked Mr. Engstrom to respond to Mr. Wencl's concerns. He stated that in regards to safety, perception may not meet reality. He admitted it wasn't a safe situation for pedesUiam, but that most accidents happen at intersections or dealing with access from driveways onto the roadway. Councilman Ayotte stated data could be thrown around all day long. He wanted to know what could be done to uddress the safety concerns on this road. Bob ~ outlined his personal account of the number and degree of accidents he's witnessed on this stretch of road. Sgt. Olson asked.how the accident data for this road compared to other comparable roads. Mr. Engstrom stated ~t was higher, but changing the speed limit would not affect that statistic. It could make it a more dangerous simatiom Teresa Burgess sts__ted that the City and MnDot were working together in addressing the reali~ and access issues for 101. Lynn Clarkowski stated the 101 south would be realigned in conjunction with the c. onstnt~on of 212, whenever funding becomes available. Teresa Burgess suggested setting up Project Leadfoot in this area. Mayor Furlong summarized that the City needs to address the safety concerns now. Councilman Ayotte suggested forming a task force to study the problem, and asked staff to come back as soon as possible with options and solutions. Todd Gerhardt reviewed the changes mude to the KFS sheet and asked for any comments before putting the item on a future agenda for formal approval. Justin Miller went over the specific changes that staff had made. Councilman ~ recommended a couple more specific changes in wording. Mayor Furlong asked how the Ci~ Council will accomplish these goals. Todd stated there were industry standard models available to help impl~t these goals. Mayor Furlong adjourned the work session at 6:40 p.m. Submitted by Todd Gerhardt City Manager CHANIIASSEN CTrY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING SUMMARY MINUTES APRIl. 28, 2003 Mayor Furlong called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was opem~ with the Pledge to the Fl . COUN~~E~ PRF~ENT: Mayor Furlong, Councilumu LabaU, Co~ AyoUe, Couucilman Lundquist and Councilman Peterson ~TAFF PRE~ENT: Todd Gerhardt, Justin Miller, Roger Knutson, Jill Sinclair, Kate Aanenso~ Todd Hoffman, Bruce DeJong, and Teresa Burgess PUBLIC rQR ALL Janet & Jerry Paulsen 7305 Laredo Drive PUSLIC ANNQUN : ARBQR DAY~ MAY 3~ 2003: PROCLAMATION DECLARING ARBOR DAY, INCLUDING CITY SPO~R~ ~$- Mayor Furlong outlined the schedule of events for the Arbor Day celebration being held at the Recreation Center warming house on Saturday, May 3~ from 10:00 a.m. to noon. He then read the proc~on proclaiming Saturday, May 3, 2003 as Arbor Day and asked for a mofion~ Resolution ~2(gl3-41: Councilman Lundqutst moved, Councilman Ayotte seconded to adopt the Arbor Day proclamation as shown in i~hibit A. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of $ to 0. PRESENTATION OF ARBOR DAY POSTER CONTF, ST WINNEP~, Jill Sinclair, the City Forester and Marcus Zbinden, Chairman of the F.u~ Commission were present to announce the winners of the Arbor Day Poster Contest The grand prize winner was Laura Wondra, second place was Molly Lass, and third place was Meredith Wc~man. PRESENTATIQN Or CERTWICATE Qr APPRECIATIQN TO DAy D PA S: AND RECRFATION COMMISSION, AND PI~..~]TATIQN QF MAPL~ .L~AF AWARD TO Si~F~ROL BROOKS HOWARD~ ~ENIQR CO~ON. David Happe was not present at the meeting. Mayor Furlong presented the Maple Leaf Award to Sherol Howard for her 12 years of service on the Senior Commission~ CON~ENT AGENDA: Councilman Peterson moved, Councilman Lundquist seconded to approve the following consent agemia items pursuant to the City Manager's recomm _~d~tions: b. Resolution ~F2003-42: Accept Utilities in the Big Woods on Lotus Lake, Project 01-12. c. Resolution ~)03-43: Accept Utilities for Vassermau Ridge, Project 02-10. City Council Meeting- April 28, 2003 d, Approval of Minutes: -City Council Work Session Minutes dated April 14, 2003 -Board of Review and Equalization Minutes dated April 14, 2003 -Summary and Verbatim City Council 1Wmutes of April 14, 2003 e. Approval of Modification to Business Subsidy Criteria. Approval of Metro Environmental Partnexship Grant for Project I-I~O; Authorization for Mayor to Sign Agreement. g. Resolution ~f2003-44: Approval of Chang~ Ordex No. 6; Chanl~ssen Library. i. Accept Donation from General l~tlls for Safety Camp 2003. Approval Amen~nt to Development Contract for Boyer Lake Minnewashta Addition, Project 02-11. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to O. VI~ITOR PRESE~A~QNS: Public Present: Name Address Loft & Mark Jesberg Ken & Garnita Wencl Shirley Robinson I.~mrie Strand Tom Houston Jo Thompson Fred, Greta & Freddy Kamps 1ohn & Barbara 1acoby 8407 ~ Plains Boulevard 8412 Gre~ Plains Boulevard 8502 ~ Plains Boulevard 8410 ~reat Plains Boulevard 8520 C:av~ Plains Boulevard 580 Mission Iqills~ Drive 8410 ~ Plains Boulevard 8516 ~ Plains Boulevard Ken Wencl spoke for the neighborhood regarding thek safety concea'ns on Highway 101 south of Highway 5. He stated the neighborh~ would like to see the speed limit reduc.~ from 40 to 30 miles per hour for the one mile stretch of road from Highway 5 south to the entrance of Chanhassen Hilla and asked the City Council for their help. Mayor Furlong informed the public of the council action directing staff to organize a task force to specifically address this issue. Tomu Houston, ,mother neighbor who lives on Cnwt Plains Boulevard, spoke about the need for enforcement of the speed limit on that road. LAW ~NI~R(~~F~ DI~AR~ ~I~DA~ Sergeant Jim Olson reviewed the statistics from the March area report and citation list. Councilman Lundquist asked about the dramatic increase in child abuse/neglect cases and if them was anything, one or two specific incidents that caused the much higher rate thig year than last year. Ctamcilman Ayotte asked Sergeant Olson to share with the council and the audience about the presentation he and Beth Hoiseth gave regarding child abuse. Included in the packet was a letter on tobacco compliance checks on all 17 businesses that sell tobacco products in the city and they all passed. A number of business complexes are getting hit with people breaking in and stealing car smmos and also burglaries in garages. He also st~md that law enforcement was targeting illegal passing on Lake Lucy Road and Powers Boulevard. Mayor City Council Meeting - April 28, 2003 Furlong thanked Sergeant Olson for the efforts of the sheriff's department in addressing the cone. ems of the City Council. Assistant Fire Chief Greg Hayes presented the fire deparunent overview. He stated fire calls year to date were up from last year, but that last year was a down year. The most notable incident was a 2 house fire in Eden Prairie that the fire department assisted in, while being able to keep the city of C~aanhaasen under protection. In Sune the Chanhassen F'Lre Department will be hosting an exercise evacuating 5060 people and providing medi~ care with several agencies. Councilman Lundquist asked about the bike helmet program, which is operated out of the Crime Prevention Specialist's office. PUBLIC iqEARINC~: ~)N~ER PROGRAM FOR ~ ~AN~ QF ~ BONDS TO FINANCE A PROPQSED 54-I)N~ MIJ'LTI-FAMiLY ~ENTIAL RENTAL PROJECT. LO(~ATED AT ~ NQRTI:I'E_A~T QUADRANT QF ~ ~:,qE~rION OF LAK'I~. DRIVE AND MAIN STREET, VOP I, LLC. Bruce DeJong explained that the City Council was being asked to issue revenue bonds for a multi-family senior housing project on the Villages on the Ponds. These bonds will not be obligations of the City of Chanhassen, but will be paid back solely through revenues of the project. This is a program that the State of Minnesota has in place that allows for developers putting together this type of housing to have access to lower interest rates to make the units more affordable and to encourage this type of development. Councilman Peterson asked how staff came up with the amount for the bond. Vemelle Clayton stated is was based on an underwriting criteria. Councilman Lundquist aslmd for clarification on why the project was using the City to issue the revenue bonds. Mayor Purlong clarified that the City had no financial ~t risk in issuing these bonds and then ~ up the public heaxing. Seeing no one wishing to spe~ the public hearing was closed. City Council had no timber questions. Resolution W200345: Coundinmn Labatt moved, Cound]man Ayotte seconded to approve the resolution authorizing the issuance of mulfifamily housing revenue bonds for a 54 unit multi-family residential rental project in Village on the Ponds. Ail voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of S to 0. ~0N~_mKRATION OF CHANGE ORDER No. 2, MARSH GLEN TRA Todd Hoffman gave a short update on this item. After a meeting Involving the City Manager and City Attorney, an agreement was made to approve a reduction of $11,869.63, bringing the total change order amount to $19,753.73. Resol~on 020(B-46: Councilman Lundqulst moved, Councilman Labatt seconded to approve Change Order No. 2 for Marsh Glen Trail in the amount of $19,753.73. Ail voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. CONSmER VARIANCE FOR $1GNAGF-,, GIANT PANDA. 463 WEST 79TM STREET. EY. Kate Aanenson provided baci?'ound information on this item and showed diff~ solutions for painting and screening the rooftop equipment. Councilman Ayotte questioned the city's liability if they required the applicant to cut into the roof. Mrs. Jill Ramsey, the owner of the building, requested that the City Council approve the sign variance with the condition that window dgnage be removed as recommend~ by the Planning Commission. She asked council not to endorse the request of screening the rooftop equi~t and outlined the reasons supporting that request. City Council Meeting- April 28, 2003 Coundlmnn Labatt moved, Councilman Lundquist seconded to approve the sign variance for the installation of wall signage on three sides of the building at Hi-Way 5 Centre, the north, west and south, with the condition that the window signnge be removed. All voted in favor and the motion cnn-led unnnimously with a vote of 5 to 0. UPDATE QN LIBRARY (~QNTINGEN~'Y FUND, BARRY PbTrrr, MS&R. Todd Gerhardt provided a couple of options which could be delayed until the contingency fund is solidified. Barry Pcttit reviewed the spread sheet he had ~ on the project Council members asked for clarification on some specific line items. There was no motion made on this item as it was an utxlate only. CONSENT AGENDA:APPRQVAL QF 2004 PROJE(~ (~ON~ILTANT WORK ORDERS (ROADS), PRO~ 04-01. Councilman Lundquist asked the City Engineer to clarify the phasing for this item and if the city planned to stay with the same contractor for additional phases. Councilman Lundquist moved, Couneilmnn Peterson seconded to approve Phase I for the 2004 project consultant work orders (roads), Project 04-01. All voted in favor and the motion carded unnnimously with a vote of 5 to 0. COUN~ PRF.,~ENTATIQN$. Councilman Lundquist provided an update on a nme~g between city staff, himself and MnDot on the Highway 41 river crossing. ADMIN~TRATIyE PRESEI~ATIQN~: Todd Gerhardt infonmd the City Council that the EDA packet will be coming out probably on Priday for the redevelopment of the bowling alley site. CORRF~.qPONDENCE DISCUSSION. Mayor Furlong brought up the information on Lake Susan. Kate Aanenson upd~otM the City Council on what Lori Haak, the Water Resource Coordinator was doing as it related to Lake Susan and the request for a no wake zone and erosion problems. Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman Ayotte seconded to adjourn the meeting. Ail voted in favor and the motion carried. The City Council ineeting was adjourned at 8'.25 p.m. Submitted by Todd City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL RFA~ULAR MEETING VERBATIM MINUTES APRIL 28, 2003 Mayor Furlong called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag, CQUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Purl~, Councilman Labatt, Cotmcilman Ayotte, Councilman Lundquist and Councilman Petewson STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Iustin Miller, Roger Knutson, lill Sinclair, Kate Aanenson, Todd Hoffman, Bruce DeJong, and Teresa Burgess PUBLIC PRESENT FQR ALL ITEM~: Janet & Jerry Paulsen 7305 Laredo Drive PI)BLIC ANNOUNCEMENT~. ARBQR DAY~ MAY 3~ 2003: PRO~LAMATIQN DECLARING ARBQR DAY~ INCLUDING CITY ~IPONSORED Mayor Furlong: Thank you and good evening. Appreciate evc~body coming this evening and those watching at home. First item on our agenda thi~ evening are a couple public announcements. I'd like to start with the Arbor Day thi~ Saturday, May 3~d. We'll be celebrating our Arbor Day festivities at the Recreation Cente~ warming house from 10:00 to noom A number of volunteer groups are going to be helping to clean local parks and gathering for a luncheon. At noon the community Arbor Day event bemoans. There will be seedlings given away. Master Crardeners are there for consultations. Trees and plants will be available at the same time. The Minnesota Zoo Mobile will be out there with some of their aninmls giving presentations. Should be a lot of fun. A lot of activities for the family so I look forward to seeing __r~ of you out there with me. In that regard, as Mayor I would like to proclaim Saltuday, May 3 as Arbor Day in the City of Chanhassen. I would urge all citizens to support the efforts and care for the trees and woodlands. To support our city's conmmnity forestry program. Further urge all citizem to plant trees to gladden the hearts and promote the well being of present and future generations. With that I would ask if there' s consent from the council to that proclamation. Councilman Lundquist: I'd move that the council adopt the Arbor Day proclamation as shown in Exhibit A. Mayor Furlong: Is there a second? Councilman Ayotte: $~cond. Resolution ~.O(B41: Councilman Lundquist moved, Coundlman Ayotte seconded to adopt the Arbor Day proclamation as shown in Exhibit A. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of $ to 0. City Council Meeting - April 28, 2003 Mayor Furlong: At this time too, as part of our public announc, enlgnts we have some children with us this evening that were part of the Arbor Day poster so Jill Sinclair, if I can turn it over to you. PRESENTATION QF ARBOR DAY POsqTER (~ONTE~T WINNERS. Sill Sinclair: I'm just going to go right up front~ Mayor Furlong: Gr~t, Fll come join you. Jill Sinclair: I'd like to invite the Mayor and our Environmental Commission Chaixpemon Marcus Zbinden to come up fi'ont. We had St. Hubert's School entrie~ this year and they were all wonderful entries. We have the top 3 here tonight. I would like to say thank you to Halla Nursery and Garden Center for donating a free tree for our grand prize Arbor Day winner. Atld without further adieu, we have Meredith Workman who came in as a third place winner. If she could come forward. And Meredith will get a free potted tree from the Arbor Day celebration on Saturday. Our second place winner was Molly Lass. If she could come forward. And our grand prize winner was Laura Wondra. We had her picture ~ and will hang here in City Hall and we also made little table tents with her poster on them to advertise our Arbor Day celebration, and these are handed out at Perking and Culver's until Satuntay and perhaps during the month of May, just because May is Arbor month so if Laura could come forward please. So congratulations to all 3 of you. It was a great job. Gte. at artists. PRE~ENTATIQN QF ~ERTIFICATE OF ~TION TQ DAVID HAPPE, PARK AND I~I~-~EATION C..Q~t.~ION~ AND PRF~ENTATION QF MAPLE LEAF AWARD TO SHERQL BROOKS_ HOWARD, SENIOR COMMISSION. Mayor Furlong: We have a couple other pmsontafions this evening too that we'd like to take care of at this time. Is Dave Happe here this evening? Did he make it? I guess not. I didn't see him with the crowd so I wanted to call. We'll try lat~. Sherol Howard. I saw her. Please come forward. Good evening. Sherol was a founding member of our Senior Commission and served for more than 12 years working for the issues of the senioes, and as I underslxM never missed a meeting in those 12 years. Sheml Howard: That's true. We changed the dates on quite a few of them. Mayor Furlong: That's wonderful. That's wonderful. She's been very involved throughout the city, throughout the histc~ of the Senior Commission working on issues for seniors. From the Meals on Wheels and working to see Centonnial Hall become a reality as well as a number of other issues. Sherol Howard: You've been studying up. Mayor Furlong: On behalf of the City Council, and all the citizcn~ of Chanhas~ I'd like to present you with this Maple Leaf Award for your service and recognition of all the good that you've done for our city so Sherol, congratulations. Sherol Howard: Thank you. City Council Meeting- April 28, 2003 CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Peterson moved, Couneilmlm Lundquist seconded to approve the following consent agenda items pursuant to the City Mamlger's recommendations: b. Resolution #2003-42: Accept Utilities in the Big Woods on Lotus l_zke, Project 01-12. c. Resolution 4~,00~: Accept Utilities for Vasserman Ridge, Project 02-10. d, Approval of Minutes: -City Council Work Session Minutes dated April 14, 2003 -Board of Review and Equalization Minutes dated April 14, 2003 -Summary and Verbatim City Council b~tn~ of April 14, 2003 e. Approval of Modification to Business Subsidy Criteria. Approval of Metro En~tal Parmemhip Cmmt for Project H20; Authorization for Mayor to Sign Agreement g. Resolution ~44: Approval of Change Order No. 6; Chanhazaen Library. i. Accept Donation from General Mills for Safety Camp 2003. j. Approval Amendment to Development Contract for Boyer Lake Minnewashta Addition, All voted in favor and the motion tarried unanim~y with a vote of S to 0. VISITOR PRF~ENTATIONS: Public Present: Name Addre~ Lori & Mark Sesberg Ken & Cramita Wencl Shirley Robinson Laurie Strand Tom Houston Jo Thompson Fred, Greta & Freddy Kamps John & Barbara lacoby 8407 ~ Plaim 8412 C. rreat Plains 8502 Crreat Plains 8410 Great Plains 8520 Caeat ~ 580 Mission Hill~ 8410 Great Plaim 8516 Great Phim Boulevard Boulevard Boulevard Boulevard Boulevard Drive Boulevard Boulevard Ken Wencl: My name is Ken Wencl. I live at 8412 Great Plains Boulevard, or the same as 101 South. Honorable Mayor and members of the council, I thank you far your a6~ntion this afternoon and we thank you for allowing us to speak this evening about a serious matter. On file there are over 450 signed petitions requesting your assistance in cruxecfing the present serious problem on Great Plains Boulevard. The daily disregard of safety on Highway 101 South, Great Plains Boulevard, is a ticking time bomb waiting for personal damage and fatalities, which can be prevented. To the point. We request the ~ limit on Highway 101 South be reduced from 40 to 30 miles per hour for only one mile. To be exact, from Highway 5 south to Chanhassen Hills entry into their complex~ Minnesota Depamnent of Trim--on Rule 169.14, a state law City Council Meeting - April 28, 2003 states, reduced speeds are required when. When approaching and crossing intersections t. here are seven intersections in one mile which we were refgging to on Highway 101. Seven intersections. Speeds must be reduced when. When approaching and going around a curve. I-~ghway 101 is as crooked as a coiled snake. There are unusual blind spots along this section of the road. State law says reduced speeds are required when. When approaching a hill crest, and when traveling upon a narrow and winding roadway. Highway 101 has line of sight of less than 100 feet State law says reduced speeds are required in reference to pedestrians. There are two walking and bike paths which cross 101 which are required in order to continue on the patl~ This all takes place in one mile. Reduce speeds by reason of weather conditions. With a wet or icy road condition it is impossible at 40 miles an hour to make the curve at the creek bridge without moving into the on line lane of traffic. According to the accident reports, we do have head-oh's ther~ We also note, Highway 101 south has little line of sight and no shoulder to pull off in case of emergency. I would like to refer to an accident matrix summary from the State of Minnesota which indicated there was 82 accidents on that road. There was head-oh's. There was rear end's. There's side smashes. Side swipes, but there were 36 out of 81 of the accidents were simply running off the road. Losing control and running off the road. This is an urban road. In the local traffic through there this is some of the cars and truck that participate every day. Rosemount En~neefing, 1,500 cars come and leave every day. The motel and the bike shop, 50 cars. Two re~aurm~ and the swim club, 120 cars. SC Hubert's School has 500 students. Many of those students are picked up by their parents in addition to having buses that go as well. Single family homes along that area, there are 45 cars. Mission Hills has 4~5 cars coming out of there every day. Chanhassen I-Iillg has 250 cars coming out of the~, and what comes off of Lake Drive, that's questionable but a lot of them, because there's a couple of factories down there. All of ~,~ cars are simply local cars which are using that thing and the tra~c is 40 miles an hotlr and it's incomprehenable. Along Highway 101 there's not one mention about SC Hubert's School. I don't know where in the country that Fve seen a school house where there wasn't something about approaching a school or slow down or something. There is absolutely nothing ~. According to Minnesota ~t of Transportation, a stopping chart. How fat does it tak~ to stop? The speed cars are traveling on 101 requires 241 feet to stop on a dry road. 455 feet on a wet surface. And in some areas ~'s only 100 feet of sighL Crosswalks and our children. Our children, and/or their mothers pushing a stroller in the crosswalk don't have a chance. All they can do is run like hell. Last summer we asked the works deparUne~ of Chanhas~ if they would make a speed study summary, which they did. They came out. Laid the cables for 2 days and it came up with some very interesting facts. Over the 2 days there was 23,139 cars traveled 101. 56.1 percent exceeded the speed limit. 56 percent. Out of ttmt, that calculates out, 11,000 cars speeded on 101 in 44 hours. Mr. Mayor, Honorable Mayor and Council, we would like to see some red meat put behind your resolution of last summer. We need your help, and I think we all expect that you will take care of us. I thank you very much for your time. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Thank you Mr. Wencl. As you know this evening prior to our council meeting we did have a work session where we received the results from Minnesota Depamuent of Transportation on their speed study and while our hands may be tied a little bit in terms of the actual ~ in some of the areas, what we acted on as a council was to direct staff to organize a task force to specifically address this issue along 101. We expect that to be msd~. up of residents such as yourseff and other interested people and the staff, including Sergeant Olson or his designee from public safety, the sheriff's department, so that we can look for ways of calming the tm~c. Specifically loolcin~g at safety issues that were addres~ There are some hope in the long term with regard to road redesign but we can't wait for th~ I think that was unanimous. We need to find out what we can do and not just what we can't do so appreciate your bringing this forw~ to the council this evening and of course Mr. Oerhardt and his staff will be City Council Meeting- April 28, 2003 working on it and we will continue to follow up with them to make sure that we take action where Ken Wencl: Thank you very much. Mayor Furlong: You're welcome. Are there other visitor presentations this evening? Are there other visitor presentations this evening for the council? If there are none, we'll close visitor presentations and move on in the agenda. Oh I'm scary, okay. This will be the final, final call Tom Houston: My name is Tom Houston. I also live on Great Plains Boulevard. And I've replaced my mailbox about 3 or 4 or 5 times in the last 5 years and finally I just give up trying to have a nice mailbox. The sun can hit you on that road. I put a mailbox up, within 2 hours it was just smashed. And I know some pets have been killed on that road and Ken made a very good speech about a lot of things. One thing that I'd like to mention is that enforcement of what we have, you know if 56 percent of them are speeding, why can't we just enforce that area just a lot heavier, and one of the main reasons I assume you can't is because there's no place near the road for police and for pulling people over and things, but there's been cars gone off that road right in front of my house more than 3 or 4 times in the 5 years that I've lived them so I would like to really encourage you guys to enforce what's there and I apologize for that. Thank you. Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Somebody watching at home. Any other visitor presentations? ff there are none, then we will close visitor presentations at this time, thank you. LAW ENFORg~gMENT~ DEPAR~ I, JPOATE. Mayor Furlong: This evening Sergeant Jim Olson is here with the Carver County Sheriff's Depammnt for law enf~t update. Sergeant Olson. Sgt. Jim Olson: Good evening and thank you. What a beamififl night it is tonight I inclnd_oxl some things on the agenda packet. The March report is s___n:a_ ched to that. If you take a look at that, our total calls for service for the month was up 190 compared to last year. Part of that is attributed to, we have more tm~c details with that we had 9 last year the same perio~L This year we have 57 so there was quite a few more this year. Our traffic stops were up by 38. Accidents were up by 7. Our damage to propeWj, and I think I talked about this a little bit at the last council meeting, was up by 26. That will be down significantly this month. We had the windows that were being broken out last month and I talked about that at the last council meeting. Our miscellaneous non-criminal was up by 24, and that includes citizens assist, lost and found ~, general law enforcement questions, civil maua~ and also juvenile disciplinary problems. Medical and fire calls were up by 26, and I'm sure that Greg will cover that a little bit. Our citations were up by 87 over the last year for the same month. Same time period for the month and our thefts have been up by 19 for the month, and that included 5 gas drive off' s where people don't pay for their gas and drive off. Frequently that's people put a credit card through and it doesn't register and they think it did, or they just forget to pay or it's missed by the clerk. We also had 5 that were not, that were coded as theft but were not theft It turned out to be civil matters and then we had 5 thefts from vehicles, and I'm going to talk about that a little bit more also a little bit down the line here. That does seem to be going up recently. Were there any questions at all on the numbers for the month of March? Councilman Lundquist: Sexgeant Olson I was looking at the more in the year to date I guess on your report, and the one that bothered me the most was the dramatic increase in child City Council Meetin§ - April 28, 2003 abuse/neglect- Is there anything, one specific or two specific incidents that caused the much higher rate this year than there was last year? Sgt. Jim Olson: No. I mean nothing that I'm aware of at all. 2~nat would cause that. Something that I know that Bob has talked about a little bit is there's a lot more stress at hame and with job layoff' s, economy and so on, that can lead to problems, you know more stress at home and that could be pan of it. It went up from, let's see for themonth from0 to 5 and then fromyear to date from 5 to 16 for year to date. That could be pan of it. There are, with child abuse laws they're would include daycare providers, schools, law enforcement people, people that deal with kids on a professional basis. But other than stress, no I don't have an answer for that. Councilman Lundquist: Okay, thank you. Sgt- Jim Olson: Any other questions at all referenced to monthly? Councilman Ayotte: I would like, one of the absolutely outr, mtding presentations that both you and Beth did was just, was it last week? Sgt- Sim Olson: Thursday night. Councilman Ayotte: Yeah. On child abuse and I wonder if yon could share with the council and with the people at home and here what that was all about, and I'm hoping that there will be repeat oc_c~ions where yon present that material again. Very, very insightfifl, to address specifically the problem that Councilman Lundquist is bring up. Could you talk about that for a moment. Sgt. Jim Olson: We did a seminar on personal safety Thursday night, and Crime Prevention Specialist, Beth Hoiseth, Child Protection Workm', Sherry Christensen who does child protection and does interviews for the County and myself did a seminar at Chanhassen Rec Center for people. How to keep themselves safe. How to help their kids. How to talk to their kids. Sit down and talk to their kids if they suspect there's a problem or if their kid should sit down and say, mommy or daddy, you know this happened or that happened. It's i .mlxxtant' very, very important from that standpoint to keep the communication open with these c~ I can't stress that enough. Kids have to be comfortable in talking to adults and talking to their parents. If it's very hard as a parent, and I'ma parent, have a daughter and a son, if tbe child comes up and tries to tell them something that is, was maybe traumatic or detrimental to the child not to react from an emotional level. The problem with that is, when the child sees you start to cry or get upset or get very mad, the child is immediately going to shut down and will not talk so it's i ,m!x~am to try to do that from a non-emotional level. If you can't do that, to call, and it's i ,mpcutaut to call anybody but you call law enforcement, call social services, and have them come out. We provided a n~ of resources to call including social services, sextml violence center. The~'s some different literature that they can get and they can certainly talk to either myself or Crime Prevention Specialist Beth Hoiseth about that at City Hall here. My number is 22'/-1601 and Beth's is 227-1610. And if anybody wants us to come out and do a presentation on that, we're certainly open to that. Just give us a call. We'll be out. Any follow-up's or anything else with that at all? Did I answer that for yon? Councilman Ayotte: Yes, it was just excellent and I'm hoping to get more of that out in the community. You've got a great product It's preventive in nature. It's respondi~ to what this council has been asking you to do. It's just excellent and keep on doing it. City Council Meeting- April 28, 2003 Sgt. Jim Olson: Thank you, and again I encourage people to call. Please give us a call and we'll certainly come out, and not only just on that topic but anything relating to public safety, we'll certainly come out and give a presentation so. I also included in the packet a letter on tobacco compliance checks. We did check all 17 businesses that sell tobacco products in the city and they all passed. None of them sold to the underage decoys so that was a good thing and a positive thing for the retailers as well as the city. I talked a little bit ago about an increase in theft from vehicles that we're starting to see. We've had a number of areas, business complexes that are getting hit with people breaking in and stealing car stereos. I encourage people to lock their doors. If they do have a removable face plate on the car stereo, take that off and put that in the truck or take it with them, and also don't leave CD's or laptop computers, different things laying around on the seats that people can see. There are some different measures that we are taking~ I just go done talking to Detective Roger Schuller today and there's some plans that we have that I don't want to go into fight now, but we are worlcing on that problem. We've also seen an increase in the past few weeks in burglaries, and when I say burglaries, they're going into which is classified as a burglary. Make sure at night, or whenever possible to close your garage doors. Lock the garage doors. Keep them shut and that will certainly help prevent that because it is from open garage doors that we're seeing thin from. Something we have been targeting thin month as a sheriff's office is illegal passing that we've been seeing, especially on Lake Lacy Road and Powers Boulevard. We've been hitting that real hard. Deputy Keith Walgrave has been doing an excellent job with that and we've had a number of people that have called and thankedus, so he is going a great job. That' s been kind of our pet proj ect for the monflx Also it's warm weather. I know I talked about thin again last year, about thin last month. It's warm weather. Warm weather. Talk to your kids. Be aware there's kids out there that are outside playing, bike riding, walking. Slow it down a little bit. It's easy thin time of year to go a little bit faster but there's a lot more people out and slow it down a bit. Is there anything for the sheriff's office at all? Councilman Lundquist: Sergeant Olson, a question on the thefts and burglaries. Is that something that you see a trend this time of year at all as it starts, the nights are warmer and more people are outside doing things that it tends to have a little bit more of those type activities or is this something that's not showing a ps_tte:m but just generally on the rise? Sgt. Jim Olson: Those things do tend to increase this time of year. You know people are leaving their garage doors open more than they were during the winter. Leaving their cars out more than they were during the winter, and then it's also not 20 below outside so people are out at night. So yes, it is cyclical in nature. And again I also encourage people to make sure they call us. If they do see something at night that is suspicious, please give us a call We need community help with all public safety problems and by giving us a call we can go out them and hopefully prevent something. Mayor Furlong: Sergeant I guess I'd like to say thank you for you and your deputies for addressing some of the issues that are i .m!x~mnt to the council. Specifically I see the special traffic, or the increase in special traffic issues which I believe relates to the Powers and Lake Lucy road. The i~ passes which are clearly the citations are coming out and having, since I personally drive that way regularly, I can tell you it is making a difference. Instead of people passing on the right in the middle of the right turn lane, while someone's trying to turn left, people are stopping behind now so it does make a ~. And again, you were involved thin evening with the work session with regard to the 101 issue and we'll look forward to your input there in terms of making that a special issue as well from an enforcement standpoint as well and some other things that you do. City Council Meeting- April 28, 2003 Sgt. Jim Olson: Thank you. Mayor Furlong: Very good, thank you. Sgt. Jim Olson: Thank you sir. Have a nice evening. Mayor Furlong: Assistant Chief Greg Hayes is here tonight for the fire depaxtment. Welcome. Greg Hayes: Thank you. Wen at the fire depamnent, luckily this month there's nothing that's too notable in our city. That's always a good thing for us. Unfommately year to date we are up for calls. I don't know the exact number but I do know that we are up. Last year we were way down and for some reason around the metro area, everybody was way down but now we're back on the pace that we looked at a couple years ago when we trended out our calls. We're still trying to slow those down using priority medical dispatch and through our aggressive fire prevention program. We are out in the neighborhoods. You'll see us out, especially now when the summer hits, we do a lot of block parties, birthday parties. We come out. Drive the truck out. Sust do some real good fire prevention with the kids and have a little fun too. The most notable thing from response is we did respond to Eden Prairie a couple weeks back for 2 houses that caught fire essentially at the same time on the high windy day. A house started on fire which essentially blew it into the next door neighbor's house. And while we operated with 3 companies in Eden Prairie, we still were able to protect our city so I thought that was, I was lrretty i ,m?res~ with our organization to be able to cover our own city. Keep it protected while we had 3 trucks over there, and we spent a couple hours helping them battle that with Bloomington~ Also let's see, Eden Prairie, Bloomington, Minnetonka, us, Hopkins, and FAin~ The same number of people or same number of departments that we responded with on the house fires were the ones who responded with on the hotel fire from about 4 years ago. So that describes about the size of that incident. Overall we're getting into our high hands on for training. Right now we should be receiving some state grants for hazardous mstetials response. Helps us beef up our WMD restxmse at our level. We don't, there's different levels in the state at which different agencies respond and right now we're essentially above average, above your avexage fire dq~'anent and are equal with state hazmat teams. The one that is above us is a 50 foot civil support team who is the weapons of mass des~on team from the National Guarck C'mxexaly we are, or I am working on our emergency management plan. Up~_ating that hopefully by June 9tu. That will be all laid out, ready to go. We're going to go to the fire station, walk through some en~gency operations and that sets us up for an evacuation exercise that the fire department is hosting over at one of our local establishments. We will have approximately 50 to 60 patients whe~ we're going to have to help evacuate them out of the building and help get them proper medical treatme~ We do this about every 3 years just to test our operational plans. Make adjusunents as necessary, and move on and start planning for the next 3 years down the road. We've essentially been working for about 2 years trying to set this drill up. It will involve ~es locally. It will involve 50 civil support teams and also I have commitments from Minneapolis and the State hazmat teams to be there too. So it's a fairly large exercise. Other than that, that's about the most notable things that we're doing at thi~ moment. Is there any questions I can hopefully field for you? Mayor Furlong: Is there a date set for that? Greg Hayes: The date of the actual drill is June 16m. We would love to have council, if you're available, be involved at whatever level you'd like to be involved at. On the 9~ we are going to do a table top of the drill, both at the work session for the council. The fire ~'s going to come in after and do our, Monday's our normal drill nighC We're going to come in and actually table top this drill, then we do out that next week and put it all into motion. Come back the week City Council Meeting- April 28, 2003 after that and review how things did and make some changes to our operational policies if needed and move on from there. Councilman Ayotte: He really wants us to be victims. Greg Hayes: You're welcome to be victims. I will warn you that we will have to hose you down with water and cut your clothes off so Fll leave that up to you. Mayor Furlong: Sounds like a deputy mayor. Cn'eg Hayes: Any other questions? Councilman Lundquist: Greg, the bike helmet program that you, that the fire depamm~t does, is that still active? Oreg Hayes: The bike helmet program is active and our involvement with it is, I could lie and tell you stuff that makes us look great. It's actually Beth's program and we put it up at the fire station on our sign. We acUutlly get a lot of people that come into the fire depot and ask for helmets. It's actually through what Beth does and her work as a Cfin~ Prevention Specialist. They've done that every year and we get hundreds of helmets in up there that are all over the place and they sell them out pretty quick. It's a great program_ Councilman Lundquist: So they should come, the residents should coxm here and get them from Beth? Oreg Hayes: They should come here, up to the building inspections depaxtment and they have all the helmets them. Councilman Lundquist: Okay, thanks. Mayor Furlong: Any other questions? Good, thank you. Appreciate your time. PUBLIC B'RkR1NG: CO~ER PROGRAM FQR TIHr~ ISSUANCE OF REVENUE BQND~ TQ FINAN~E A PRQPQ~ED 54-UNIT MI~TI-FAMILY ~ENTIAL RENTAL PRQJE(~F~ I,QC~'I~D AT TFW. NQR'D:w-A~T Q~ADRANT OF THY. INT~~QN QF LA~ DRIVE AND MA~ ~rl"Rl~i~.T,n VOP L I.I.C. Bruce DeJong: Fll just nm through quickly Mayor and council members. What you're being asletl to do tonight is to issue revenue bonds which will be paid back by. Excuse me. Is that a little better? Thank you. Tonight what you're being asked to do is issue revenue bonds for a mulfi-f~ly senior housing project on the Villages on the Ponds. Those bonds will not be obligations of the City of Chanhas~en, but will be paid back solely through revenues of the project. This is just a program that the Stare of Minr~ota has in place that allows for developem putting together this type of housing to have access to lower interest rates to make the units more affordable and to encourage this type of development. What you're being asked to do tonight is to hold a public hearing asking for input from the public, and then approve the resolution that was in the packet. Mr. Roger Knutson has reviewed this on a brief basis. Not in depth but these types of programs have come before you before and it's pretty straight forward. The only thing that he found in reviewing the documents were a couple of disarel~mcies on the dates in the loan agreement. So I'd recommend that you hold a public ~g. Close that and then approve the resolution as presented. City Council Meeting- April 28, 2003 Mayor Furlong: Okay. Thank you. Are there any questions for staff at this time? Councilman Peterson: The only one that I've got Bnme is, it's, you're reque.4~ag 5.3 million. How did we come up or how did they come up, who came up with 5.3 million and why isn't it 2.2 million? Bruce De~ong: 5.5 technically. Councilman Peterson: Whatever. Bruce DeJong: That is a question that I'm not exactly sure. I know that when we approved this initially back last August, that we gnmted authorization for up to $6 million dollars. A detailed question like that probably needs to be addressed to Vernelle Clayton who is here representing the project. I don't honestly know. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Welcome. Councilman Peterson: Be sure to limit her to 10 minutes. Vernelle Clayton: In that case I can't go into the whole tmderwfiting criteria but that is what it's based on, is an underwriting criteria, much like a normal mortgage where they look at the incxm~ stream and the needs and the cost is several million more than 5, but the income stream will support the 5 million 3 for that portion. And there are other portions of the financ4ng that ~dds up to what will hopefully be adequate. Does that help you? Councilman Peterson: Yeah, that answers my questiom Mayor Furlong: Other questions? Councilman Lundquist: Bruce do you have a, or Vemelle do you have an estinmt~, on what the savings is to the project or the developer using revenue bonds at our ~ rate versus what you could get commercially available? Bruce DeJong: I do not. Vernelle Clayton: In today's market the answer is relatively tam.lex and somewhat vague because tbere m-'e some other types of financing today that are almost as low as the 3 point some that would be under this program. So it's borderline sometimes for folks but this can be a fix in some, one of the advantages is that it could be fixed for a longer period of time for example. Councilman Lundquisl: So that's the benefit then of using the city as the issuing the bonds versus something else is that you get a longer duration of fixing that rate? Vemelle Clayton: Right. For this type of project for this type of bonding there is no other way to do it other than to use the program that the Stat~ has set up where the City is kind of the enabling authority. Councilman Lundquist: Okay. 10 City Council Meeting - April 28, 2003 Mayor Furlong: Any other questions? Bruce, given the nature of these bonds, since it's revenue bonds and there is no general obligation from the City's c-n~t worthiness or standpoint, they really are not considered in a credit rating analysis, is that correct? Bruce DeJong: That's correct Mayor. Mayor Furlong: Okay. So that there is, from a risk stand~t as was menfi~ the City's acting as a conduit, not any way, the~ is no ~ddod risk to the city at this point from a financial standpoint. Bruce DeJong: There is no added rislc Them is no obligation of the City to offer any repast whatsoever, and that's fairly clear in the documentation. That the only fimds that are available to pay off these bonds are the actual revenue stream of the projecl~ Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Any other questions at this time? If them are none we'll open up the public hearing. If there's anyone who wishes to speak on this issue, if they could come forward and state their name and address. If them is none we'll close the public he~ng and we'll bring it back to council. Is there any discussion from the council's standpoint? Councilman Labatt: No, pretty slraight forward. Mayor Furlong: If there's no discussion is there a motion? Councilman Labatt: I move we adopt the resolution as presented. Mayor Furlong: Is there a second? Councilman Ayotte: Second. Mayor Furlong: Any discussion on the motion? Seeing none without objection we'll call the question. Resolution g2003-48: Councilman Labatt moved, Councilman Ayotte seconded to approve the resolution authorizing the issuance of multifamlly housing revenue bonds for a ~4 unit multi-family residential rental project in Village on the Ponds. Ail voted in favor and the motion carried unaninmusly with a vote of $ to O. CeONS~mERATIQN OF CHANGE ORDER No. 2, ~ GLEN TRAn~ Mayor Furlong: Mr. Hoffxnan, is them a staff report? Todd Hoffman: A short one. Mayor Furlong: Good. Todd Hoffman: Thank you Mayor, memtx~ of the City Council. At the direction of the council we hosted two additional meetings with all parties involved in thi~ projecC trtrst meeting was held on April 1'~, and that did not end in any C-real agreements. The second meeting, when we brought in City Manager Gerhardt, the City Attorney Roger Knmson, resulted in a settlement agreement between all parties. Essentially that agree~t reduced change order number 2 by not the $10,000, but I' m glad to report, due to a remindex by Paul that I did not add in one of the 11 City Council Meeting - April 28, 2003 deducts. A reduction of $11,869.63, bringing a total change order amount to $19,753.73. So again I apologize for the mathematics but it was an additional reduction over and above what I reported here in the written report. It's reco~~ the City Council approve this seXtlement agreement reducing the Marsh C_den change order number 2 by $11,869.63, resulting in a new change order amount of $19,753.73. I'd be glad to answer any questions or Roger. Mayor Furlong: Discussion. I guess one thing rd like to thank Councilman Lundquist for bringing this off the agenda a couple meetings ago. Brining it to the council's attrition and to staff and giving them the tools to get thi~ done so a comnxmdafion to the staff for getting it done and to Councilman Lundquist for bringing it to our ~_6ention. Is there any other issues or questions of discussion on this? If there is none, is there a motion to approve the change order as amended and recommended. Councilman Lundquist: Motion to approve the change order number 2 for Marsh Glen trail, $19,753.73. Mayor Furlong: Second made. Any discussion on the motion? Seeing none we'll the question without objection. Resolution #~,(g}3-46: Councilman Lundquist moved, Counei]num Labatt seconded to approve Change Order No. 2 for Marsh Glen Trail in the mount of $19,753.73. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of S to 0. CONSIDER VARIAN(~E FOR ~IC~NAC~ GIANT PANDA~ 463 WE~ 79TM ~TI~'~T~ Kate Aanenson: Thank you Mayor. Just take a minute to get everybody back up to speed on what this item is about. Giant Panda owner Mr. Pan wanted a sign variance. As a part of that condition the City Council and the Planning Commission recommended approval of that with removal of the window signs, which has taken place to date. When this item appeared before the City Council 2 weeks ago there was a discussion on screening of the rooftop equipment az shown. It's not az direct and visible on 5 when you're right in front of it, but az you're heading eastbound is where you can see it. And again just to give a brief history of how that got put in place. 5 years ago the previous owner did apply for a permit Received a permit and all, his due diligence until it went up, the planning department realized it was a violation and the fact that it wasn't properly screened. The corrective measure on that is that all permits get muted around whether it's a meclianicai equipment or plumbing just to make sure there's not an issue violation. So there was no intent to circumvent any ordinan~ at the time but we did cite in here the ordinances that are required. So what the staff did is kind of evaluated some alternatives and looking at, again this is another view. Perspective. This is a fresh ~ intake. Did speak to the building official about that. It's a large piece. These are the alternatives. Painting it blue. Painting it to match the parapet. Doing a parapet wall. And a different type use in the standing seam siding. We did put in the staff report that possibly it could be painted. Bob did meet with Mrs. Ramsey who is here tonight and looking at their first choices to not do the parapet wall In looking at that, there's some integrity to the roof itself. Gena-ally when you're putting in place, during construction there's a plate they sit on. This is what the building inspector told me. Normally you like to have it rest on that, while there's trusses in place to have that set in place so you're not aim/rig the membrane of the roof, so there was some concern about that Because you're doing an alteration later, the integrity of that. In looking at the painting, I did discuss with Mrs. Ramsey. She did, 12 City Council Meeting- April 28, 2003 this is a galvanized steel but it's coated and she did speak to the manufacturer and they said if it was painted they can't guarantee the life of the equipment. So while our staff report did say, recommended painting, there's additional information that she's just ga~ talking to the manufacturer that they believe based on the coating, that would affect the integrky of that piece of equipment. So that leaves the choices of painting is possibly not an option so again it's the integrity part. I guess that's where the staff left it as going back to the original directive. So I'd be happy to answer any questions. Again Mrs. Ramsey is he~ to answer any questions. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Are there any questions for staff at this time_? Councilman Ayotte: I have a couple. I'm vaguely familiar with built up roofs and knowing that if you cut into a built up roof, especially if you disrupt that and the items with crickets for drainage and integrity of the membrane itseff can cause a leak. If we were to ~xiuire them to put up any sort of covering around where they would have to kind of cut into the BUR, and if there were a leak, where would that leave the City? Kate Aanenson: FI1 let the City Attorney address that. Roger Knutson: We're not in the installation business. That's the short answer. Councilman Ayotte: So if we require them to cut into it and it leaked. Roger Knutson: I do not think we would have any city liability. We would tell them how to do it. It's something for you to take into consideration when you're i ,reposing the requirement but I don't think we'd have any liability. Councilman Ayotte: Question two. When the I-IVAC system, what's the tonnage of that thing? Kate Aanensou: I don't know. Councilman Ayotte: When that was put in, how long ago was that put in? Kate Aanensou: Approximamly 5 years ago. Councilman Ayotte: And did they pull a permit at the time? Kate Aanenson: Yes. As I indicated it was all done legally. They came in and got a building permit. It was inspected. It passed inspection, It wasn't until it was on that the phnner's recognized that a permit had been issued that was in violation of, or the planning code. Not the building code. So it was two different things ~. It's not in violation of a building code. It's the screening requirement. Councilman Lundquist: The permit application never went through the planning ~ just the building depamnent. Kate Aanensou: Correct. Right, because they figured it was just a roofk)p equipment, which we've remedied that process. Councilman Ayotte: So back in those days it was okay. Today it would not be. 13 City Council Meeting- April 28, 2003 Kate Aanenson: No, it did violate, it still violated the planning rule. There's 4 niles. At that time there were 3 in place which rexiuired all rooilop be ~ but the building impection at that time didn't see the fact that it was a larger pi_~:~_~- than was on there before and it might not be properly screened. They didn't see the connection there, if that makes sense. Councilman Ayotte: Okay. Alright. Mayor Furlong: Alright. Any other questions for staff at this time. Mrs. Ramsey I see you're here. Would you like to address the council7 Jill Ramsey: Thank you, good evening. Mayor Furlong and members of the council. I am here tonight to respectfully request that the council approve the sign variance for Giant Panda restaurant as recommended by the Planning Comnfission. Including as the comn~.,~sion recommended that the only condition be that Mr. Pan e 'lnninate window signs on the unit. I'm council rnee~g regarding the requiring of screening of the roottop unit, or the option of painting it for the following reasons. As Mr. Generous indicated in his report, the cost of screening the unit may well be in excess of several thousand dollars creating an undue burden for Mr. Pan or myself to assume. I've been infonmd by Mr. Genemns that installing, as has been disenssed tonight, a screening stmctm~ would require cutting into the roof. This is simply not an option as there have been leakage problems with the roof. Retrofitting screening has a potential to add to these problems, and may result in nullifying of the roof installation or roof lining wan'anties. Thus as a building owner this would be an unacceptable condition. As to the option presented to me by Mr. Generous at our April 22~ meeting of painting the unit. Since that meeting I've learned several things. More than I ever thought I would actually know about painting roof top units. I spoke to the manufacturer of the unit, which is Ruff Ah' Managemem Systems. I have been informed that the unit is eons~ with a Gg0 galvanized casing. This is a quote, cattxm steel sheet coated with zinc on both sides. The benefit of using Gg0 galvanized steel is that it will not flake, scratch or chip like paint. The manufacna~ highly discourages painting these types of units as they are not designed to be painted or to have paint adhere to them The ~y rep I spoke to could not guarantee that painting the unit would not disturb the inmgrity of the unit. Since my meeting with Mr. Generous I've also spoken to a ~ve from Manage Services system, a company that maintsin~ roottop units. I was told by them that painting such units has a high probability of creating problems with peeling and chipping of paint and that it could be necessary to chemically snip the exterior finish or grind down the unit in order to paint it. He could not give me an exact cost to do such a thing but assured me it would be very expensive. It would also require continuous ongoing maintenance. He mxmgly discouraged painting a 5 year old unit for aesthetic purposes. I also spoke with a representative at the paint man~ company Valspar. He explained to me that painting a galvanized Gg0 rootlop unit would defeat the purpose of the product. Painting such a unit would interfere with the integri~ of the product. They are, I was told, not meant to be painted. Finally as to the timeliness and fairness of od_ding this condition to the approval of the sign variance. As council is aware, the unit was installed 5 years ago by the previous owner of the Giant Panda restaumm, Mr. Harry Lee. Mr. Lee was applied for and grant~l a permit to install the unit. At no time since it's installation has the city the city, by city code, is within it's right to require a variance at~ the permit was issued to allow the sign to remain. I would assume the same procedures were in place, ~s I've learned something else tonight that they weren't, when Mr. Lee installed the roottop unit. I have been unable to receive a clear sn~wer from anyone I've spoken to at the city as to why after 5 years this is suddenly an issue. Or why it was not brought up at some point in the past while Mr. Lee still owned the business. As to the fairness of adding such a condition at this time, as council must be 14 City Council Meeting- April 28, 2003 aware, there are many buildings with multiple rooftop units, many of which are larger than the one on our roof, that neither screened nor painted in the city of Chanhassen~ I've aiso yet to receive an answer from the city as to whether each and every visible roofl~ unit in the city will be required to be screened or painted, or is it just the one on this building, and why. A_tt~ching this condition 4 years after the unit was installed and when the business is under new ownea'ship, resulting in either Mr. Pan or myseff being financially responsible to meet the condition. This would be an extremely unfair and ~le request on the part of the city. And just finally as a liule added note, if I may propose one compromise in the spirit of the Arbor Day procl~m~ion that was made today, ff you may or may not have noticed, thexe was a tree growing in from of that unit. It didn't have any leaves on it in the picture that was presented. Yes, there we are. It's not that big now but perhaps with a lot of l~mcle Gro and a little time, say 5 mom years, that will provide a natural camouflage for that unit. Thank you for your tirr~. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Any questions for the applicant at this time? Councilman Labatt: No. Mayor Furlong: No? Thank you. We'll bring it back to cotmcil for discussion on the issue. Is there any discussion around the issue. Councilman Peterson: Kate I assume that we've never had an experience or your knowledge of any experience of painting whatever the G9 galvanized is. Anyway there's always an issue with painting anything metal that you have to keep it up but. Kate Aanenson: Correct. We do have other painted. Typically those are identified prior to installation that that's a way to meet the standard. We do have some that are painted. But I certainly believe that if it's the treated type, it probably would be haxder to adhere. Councilman Peterson: Bob, you got any knowledge of that? Councilman Ayotte: Yeah, a lot of times what it will do is affect the heat transfer to some degree because it does have an affect on surface are~ And it is haxd to, there would be PM. Additional preventive maintenance that would have to be dealt with. I don't know to what degree it would affect it but it would affect it. I'm more concerned about the BUR, the built up roof that they are, I'll use a technical term because I know that our mayor is an ealgineer. It's a bugaboo...that it would be an issue and the manufactur~ will look at an opporum~ to not deal with the warra~ issue if they find a reason, and painting it would be a reason. Mayor Furlong: Other questions or discussion? Councilman Labatt: It's a pretty cut and dry issue. Let's approve it the way the Planning Commission did. Mayor Furlong: I agree. The question I have is when this was discovered 5 years ago, 6 years ago when it went in by your group, was there a decision rrmaa not to. Kate Aanenson: Mr. Lee was informed that it was in violation, but typically because it was issued in our error, there was in good faith that we issued in error, that if they were to do something else we would ask that it be screened. But since that time again it had sold and I think that's what Mrs. Ramsey's talking abo~ There was a lack of communication on how that got transferred. Again I don't think anybody purposely tried to circumvent. 15 City Council Meeting - April 28, 2003 Mayor Furlong: Gtxxt, thank you. Councilman Peterson: I think to Mrs. Ram~y, ausweling one of your que~ons about other screening. I think that if another orgaxfi2~on, another entity comes in asking for a variance and they have a non-conforming item, the same thing would have happened and will probably happen as time goes on so you certainly weren't being singled out. This is just the process that the City doesn't have any leverage unless the entity comes to us asking for something so. Mayor Furlong: Good. Councilman Peterson: And I think it's disappointing that we can't fix it but I've not been a proponent of spending thousands of dollars on it if s~ is, if we can put a $50 paint job on there and would it last for a few years, I think that was reasonable but unforttmately with the galvanized you know, I don't think it is reasonable. Mayor Furlong: Is there a motion at thi~ point? Councilman Labatt: I'll move we approve the sign variance for Hi-way 5 Centre to permit a wall signage on 3 sides of the building, north, west and sou& Mayor Furlong: Just for clarification, is that conditioned, including the condition set foF, h by the Planning Commission with regard to. Mayor Furlong: The prohibition on window signs for that southern unit? Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Is' the~ a second to the motion? Councilnmn Lundqulst: Second. Mayor Furlong: Any discussion on the motion as made? Seconded. Councilman Labatt moved, Councilman Lundquist seconded to approve the sign variance for the installation of wall signage on three sides of the building at Hi-Way $ Centre, the north, west and south, with the condition that the window signage be removed. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. UPDATE ON LmRARY CONTINGENCY FUND, BARRY PE~ITr, M~&R. Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, council memlx~. Before Mr. Pettit starts his presentation I did put a list together of the, some additional expenditures that were included in this report or Mr. Pettit's spread sheet. From our last repor~ he also had highlight a couple a_ddifional deducts as a part of that and one was a fireplace. We were looking at possibly a donation for the fireplace as a part of that I would like to see that we hold off on tha~ As we get closer to the end of construction or whenever we can put the fireplace in at the last minute and see ff we have enough contingency money for us to pay for that, other than soliciting a donation. The second item was a deduct the stairs and sidewalks that would go between Ci~ Hall building and the pm-king ramp,. This one is I believe $6,436.00. This is another one that we should monitor as we go through and see how 16 City Council Meeting- April 28, 2003 much we have left in the contingency fund Right now to make a north/south Ixglestriaa ao:e~ you have to go through the parking ramp and go behind the cars to get to the stairs that takes you down to the lower level of the ramp, and there was not accommodation for a sidewalk in front of the cars. So we think the sidewalk between City Hall and the ramp is still a desired need for this area. Just wanted to make those highlights before Bau'y started to go through his presentafi~ so he can make comments also regarding my comments. Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Barry Petfit: You know the real reason I came here when I saw bfike Ramsey on, I said hockey player. Is that the hockey player? Kate Aanenson: Yes. Barry Pettit: Is it really? Todd Gerhardt: Yes. He wasn't here. I-Fas wife was here. Barry Pettit: Yeah, I figured that. Just you know sort of an overview, as an upda_t_e, And I'll make an interesting confession and I think if someone in scat of the architecture design business disagrees with us I think they're to some extent they're icind of lying because what I find fascinating is when you do a building, it always is, I mean if you sort of do things right it always is a first time this building's ever been done so in a large measure you're always fasciuated with how it really turns out because you've never seen it before. So we draw it and you sort of hopefully you've got enough experience and so on and so forth that you have some confidence but it is interesting to see buildings really unfold because there's nothing to point at. It's like not buying a car. I want that car that color, whatever. So I ~ that it's, there's a lot of, and sort of when I do my own personal grading Fm feeling Invtty good about the way things are unfolding, and I know there was a tour the other night where folks got inside and I think in texms of the volume of the spaces, Fm probably more excited about that than anything part of it because it really I think is going to work well. Is a great h~rary and it also, what's fascinating is how big it begins to seem. When you start out with early constructions and projects, and it must be the context of the project, they always seem smaller because you only have the footing foundation and then it's sort of the context of this endless space around it and it beans to actually build and fill in it gets bigger, and it's always an interesting phenomena but if the building seems like it's going to be a sort of a good scale. And again it's a confession where, ~'s always this leap of faith when you design that it actually is going to be kind of what you're hoping it's going to be. So that probably doesn't build a lot of confidence but that's what I'm telling you is the fascinating part about the profession~ It is just it's nature. I think we're be~nning to uncover all the final issues that are sort of dangling out there, if you will and thi~ coltmm 9 antici~ changes. Those are still, I think things are turning more solidifying more than they were a little bit loose, and actually the third item. I take that back. The fourth item for example, millwork modifications. We've been spending a lot of time worldng with all the subcontractors and vendors because we know that we're, that obviously because of all the soil issues and those earlier issues, that we really need to work these prices over and we took, I spent a couple hours with the millwork guys. The company on I think Friday or Thursday last week, and we went from an add of $3,8000 to actually a deduct of about $1,077 so that in itseff is about a $4,00(O $5,000 swing, which was, it's kind of the process we're into. It's really fine tuning every one of these areas right now that's a little bit loose and really working those over. We're, maybe it's best if, I mean if folks have scat of gone tlmmgh this, I could go through thi.~ if you think that's 17 City Council Meeting- April 28, 2003 the better way to do it or if there's just questions Todd that I should take from folks and see if there's anything like that. Maybe that's the best way. Todd Gerhardt: Can you talk about the expanded snow melt and the additional fin tub heating. Barry Pettit: Does that say tub? T~ Gerhardt:Y~. Barry Pettit: There's no e on that deal? Todd Gerhardt: No. Barry Petfit: You know when you can't spell it just doesn't matter what spell check does, does it? Todd Gerhardt: I was guessing what it was but I Was way off. Barry Pettit: The snow melt, what we originally started out with of course was where the stairs coming down from the deck, it be essential that we have a snow melt system and what that is, that's the heating underneath the stairs so that you never have to shovel and it goes on when it reaches a certain temperature, it's actually a neat system. And then we began to ask if we could do it, not only down the stairs but sort of the whole central plaza. The sort of entry plaza up to the front door of the library. And we had hopes that we could afford that, and the prices came in and it started to flirt with just sort of $40,000, which surprised me because we've done it before and in areas at least that big. Different parts of the country and that may be it. Some parts of the country are just more used to maybe doing this and so the price, or the system might be a little bit more of an anomaly and maybe the price comes in higher yet. So we had to retreat back to just doing the stairs. The good news is, because the plaza is primarily a paver plaza, there could be a point where you could install it in the future without having to rip up concrete and so on and so forth, but the key thing was to making sure that we had the stairs because we had to have that. That's kind of an essential way to get down the building so again as we retreated back to that, it's a good system It should last a long time. It's a proven system. And so what that does is on the yellow sheet that Todd did, we're aco-~lly back to the, let's see March-ApriL We're back to right around, somewhere between 9 and 10 and we're getting that finalized and I should have that on actually tomorrow. I'm hoping to have that tomorrow. Todd Gerhardt: So not the 19, it's down to 97 Barry Pettit: Right, and I think how does that. Yeah, the expanded snow melt When you see that on there, that's where we axe now. On the white sheet. On column 9. And that's at 9,800. Actually it reverses what you have here. That's maybe the deal. But it's been an interesting baffle you know and it's been a great challenge. I think we're going to make it. I think we're going to make it. Mayor Furlong: You sound surprised. Barry Pettit: Well you know to be perfectly honest Fve never run into a project where we put that much money into, percentage of construction to get out of ground. Never. Never even close. And we put a hole in the ground and hit something that was bad, and you know $20,000, $30,000 later you have it fixed but thi~ is, that's a big deal so yeah. So I'm kind of you know, to some extent but I think we're going to make it. 18 City Council Meeting- April 28, 2003 Mayor Furlong: Todd Gerhardt: lust a last point. How about the fireplan? Do you want to talk a little bit. Barry Pettit: Well you know we, you know the theory on it was, it's about a $10,000 deal and it was really never part of the original program but of course with the favorable bid we had originally, it was just sort of a no bmin~ to put that in there. And so we're at a point right now, and it' s sort of as a safety valve deal that says look at, if we do bump into additional problems, is there an oppommity to split the difference7 The city pays for half and then maybe gifting from the Friends for the other half. That's kind of what it's really saying. And I think Todd' s point is, you know look at, if it does go the way we're saying that it turns out the way that we've got it here now, then we'll be fine. We can fund it. And so we, if you want we'll just take that out of the column and keep on moving forward. Todd Gerhardt: Council, any thoughts or ideas ca that? I would say that wait as long as we can and see where we're at in the process. Mayor Furlong: Great Councilman Labatt: Maybe MS&.R would be willing to make a donation. Barry Petfit: You know this, I swear this is the la~ fireplace I ever do. I don't know what it ia. These things have a life of their own. They really do and, but no. We, sure. We'll buy the Mayor Furlong: Did you get that Nann? Barry Pettit: It's got that little red bulb in there you know, it's one of those babies. Mayor Furlong: No, I think unless. Councilman Labatt: What was the additional tubing? Barry Pettit: What it is, there's the high windows. You know the clear story windows and there's a spine down the middle that goes east and west. And then there's 2 othea' pL_oce-s. This comer on this side which is the big meeting room, and then the opposite side which is the periodical. They have the high clear story windows. And what happened is, the mechanical fin tube. It's heating. It's hot water heating. It didn't wrap around the cxnxters of all four of those areas. In other words it was just left off the plan from the, on the mectumical side. And the good news, we caught it at the right point because they're up there working on it right now so it, and frankly it's a guess and I'm hoping, I'm hoping that it's not that much_ Because it's really a pretty simple piece of the pu~le right now. Councilman Labatt: How about tbe miw, ellaneous for $64,000? Can you break that down a little bit? Barry Pettit: You know it has. Todd Gerhardt: That's kind of our catch all area. That as we move ahead, any tmforeseen items that might come around. We've got a couple possibilities so right now we're not sum. 19 City Council Meeting- April 28, 2003 Barry Petfit: Yeah. What it does say, and it's a fair quexdon Steve, is because if you take that along with your contingency, you're re. ally hovea'ing around the $100,000 contingency. I mean that's kind of where we are. So that's still kind of good news. I mean when everything's said and done but. Councilman Lundquist: Barry, if I understand your sheet right, remaining contingency just under $42,0OO. Barry Pettit: Right. Councilman Lundquist: Does that include column 4 on wish list? That $22,0~? Barry Pettit: Yep, that's alre~y in there. Councilman Lundquist: That's always factored in, and those items. Barry Pettit: Yeah, literally the 41,000 is everything not on that sheet. Councilman Lundquist: Everything not on the sheet. Okay, and the 11,790 on that wish list is the fireplace itself. Barry Pettit: It is. It is. And actually that came down because we rededgned iL We went through an iteration of it that brought it down about $2,000. Got us down to roughly in that $10,000 neighborhood. And again, all under the heading of just kind of beating on these things slowly but surely and you know it's, fox what it's wo~ Just get on soap box for a second, is I believe when you have dollar issues, it's always great if you can find the one big homenm to save the budget or help with the budget, but I don't believe that's what it really is. The bottom line is just hard work and picking up a couple hundred dollars here and a thousand there and it really ia, and it's doing it a number of times. Because there really is no panacea usually in these things. Councilman Lundquisc And all ~ savings with the millwork and the fireplace and the redesign and all that are those savings being offset by fees from your group in design work? Barry Pettit: You know it's at a point where thexe's a certain amount of money that's just a function of the consmmfion administration side, and I don't want to seem like I'm doing some kind of noble cause but some of that is a little bit gratis you know. Just under the heading of trying to get this under control but none of those have any fees attached m them Councilman Lundquist: So it's, some of it is offset by fees or none of it is offset by fees? BalTy Pettit: Yeah, we haven't attached fees to any of those numters. Right, fight. It's our mission to make people happy. Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Any other questions? Councilman Lundquist: How comfortable, I mean I know you said you think you're going to make it but the piping, all the mechanical is in? And the electrical is awarded and in or? Barry Petrie You know all the, from the bid side, everything is a solid number. And then what happens with the changes happen because of either things that were misinterpreted. Things may City Council Meeting- April 28, 2003 have been left out and so forth. Electrical side, I think we're in pretty good shape. I know we've got 2 lights that don't fit in there, because there's a duct in the way. But that's pretty solid. Mechanical actually is in pretty good shape. So you know those kind of systems if you will are, I'm pretty confident of those now. I don't see any real stumbling blocks. They're that far down the road I guess is the critical piece. Councilman Lundquist: And the last time we talked the millwork was really the only other big contract to be awarded so then them wouldn't be any other, them isn't any other large contracts to be awarded to the city's. Barry Pettit: Right. All the contracts from your, let me think about that. All the contxacts from the city, that's right. I think that's right. I think you've got everything locked on that. Councilman Lundquist: The rest of the County, the signs and everything. Barry Pettit: Yep, signage. Yeah. Well okay, you know that, there is an allowance, and did that show up on here? Councilman Lundquist: Exterior signs I saw. Barry Pettit: Yeah exterior, 17. Councilman Lundquist: 17.5, yeah. Barry Pettit: I would say that's, and I'm glad you brought that up ~ that is still one that's out them. We're working on the number. But that was a number that was from, we originally had signs in the original bid and then they were taken out, and that was the number that was taken out and so. Councilman Lundquist: Okay. I thought we did son~, didn't we do some ~or signage in the park, the City Centar Commons? Barry Pettit: Yeah, you did. Todd Gerhardt: Yeah we had this item on as one of our first change ~ and then we took it out to make sure that the signage was corrtpamble to the park signage. So that's what we're doing right now is making sure that they're both the san~. Barry Pettit: Right The landscape contract right now has sort of the manmne. Councilman Lundquise The momnmnt sign. Barry Pettit: Exactly. And then what will happen is the sign, the signage folks then will be picking the same font type for that sign as well as the library. Councilman Lundquist: So in our original contract we didn't have anything in for signage at all? Ban'y Pettit: We did. We did. We did. We had an allowance item in thom, right. Councilman Lundquist: Okay. But this is an ,_d~tional 17.5 over and above the allowance? 21 City Council Meeting- April 28, 2003 Barry Peltit: No. It's still the allowance item but it's still being worked on. And back to your point is everything figured out. I said no, this is still the one that we're woricing on. Councilman Lundquist: So then in the original contract we did not have signs in the original contract? Mayor Furlong: Did that come out on the first. Todd Gerhardt: It did. We processed that as a change order early on. Barry if you remember, we had a change order. Barry Peltit: And we didn't accept it, is that the way it was. Todd Gerhardt: The council didn't accept it but it's my belief then that we didn't include outdoor signage as a part of the bid package. Barry Pettit: Right, we had it as an allowance item. Todd Gerhardt: Under the consuuction budget but not as a pan of the bid with Kra~-Andei~ Barry Pettit: So the signage folks now really are working on two contracts. They're going to be doing a little bit of work for the park side, because they're going to pick the lettering for the monument, and then completing the extra signs for the library. Councilman Lundquist: Okay. Barry Pettit: So, I think we've got those things buttoned up. That's probably one of the nebulous ones right now. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Barry Pettit: Anything, okay. Mayor Furlong: Any other questi~? Thank you. Appreciate the update. With that we will move back to consent item n~ l(a), which was pulled from the consent agenda. CONSENT AGENDA:APPROVAL OF 2004 PRO~ g~-~ONSI.~TANT WORK ORDERS (ROAD.q), PR0.1ECr 04-01. Mayor Furlong: Councilman Lundquist, did you have questions? Councilman Lundquist: Yeah, just had a couple of questions for Teresa. Make sure, I just want to make sure for my clarification I understand. What you're asking for in the requested action on this is just authorization for Phase I of this contract or these projects? Teresa Burgess: Correct We are requesting that you approve Phase I, the work order for Phase I and we will bring back Phase II and Ill if council authorizes the work at that time. Councilman I. amdquist: Okay. In your, would it be your intention then that the transition from Phase I to Phase II and Ill would remain with that same contractor or would we then re-open that for, depending on if it's 6 months from now or a year from now or whatever it is, would we re- City Council Meeting- April 28, 2003 open that or would these prices and conditions hold and then we would just simply go to Phase H and Phase Ill? Teresa Burgess: What we typically do is stick with the same consultant We look at these in an entire package. When you switch consultants you end up with problems. However, because thi~ project has not been clearly defined by doing a feasibility study we would negotiate with that consultant for the second work order to make sure that we are not going to have a scope change halfway through. C. ouncilman Lundquist: Sure. Teresa Burgess: And council will see those back when we do that. Councilman Lundquist: That's all I had Mr. Mayor. Mayor Furlong: Any other questions or discussion for the staff on this issue? Is there a motion to approve? Councilman Lundquisu Motion to approve consultant work c~lers for Phase I feasibility study of 04 street improvement projects. Mayor Furlong: Is there a second? Councilman Peterson: Second. Mayor Furlong: Made and seconded. Any discussion on the motion? Seeing none we'll call the question without objection. Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman Peterson seconded to approve the 2004 project consultant work orders (roads), Project 04-0L All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to O. COUNCIL PRF~ENTATION$. Councilman Lundquist: Mr. Mayor, we had a meeting with MnDot and most of the city engineering staff and other members of the planning staff on the 41, or river crossing. Where that's at now is looking at a preliminary scope and getting, trying to can'y 3 or 4 different alternatives through to get into the Environmeo~ Impact. It's not a project that's on the MnDOt 20 year plan, so it's a ways out there. It's not cunenfly fimded or really anything but very preliminary at thi~ point so thea'e's a number of different alternatives that aff~ Chanhassen and surrounding communities in different ways so it's early on but Teresa, you're going to have link~ on the web, on our web page to that information and the maps and different things like that, is that correct? Teresa Burgess: The linkg are on, in place on our web site. Councilman Lundquist: Yep, so for more details you can just hit the Chanhassea web site and find out from there. Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Any other council reports? Liaison reporm. If there's none, administrative presentations Mr. Gerhardt City Council Meeting - April 28, 2003 ADMINISTRATIVE PRE~ENTATIONS: Todd Gerhardt: The only thing I would like to update you on is the EDA packet will be coming out probably on Friday, so look for that in your doorway. For our redevel~t of the bowling alley site. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Gotxt, any questions for the City Manager~ (~O~PQNDI~ DISCUSSION. Mayor Furlong: Any questions or discussions on the correspondence packet? I did notice in there that there was a follow-up to our last meeting. It was letter sent out regarding Lake Susa~ Kate Aanenson: Thank you for bringing that up. Loft did put a pretty ~tailed report in there, and I guess I wanted to put that in context with the discussion Mr. Klingelhu~. We have had other calls from people on the lake that do not want to do no wake, so there's always two different opinions on the wake, but just to put it in context of we have spent a lot of money on that lake. We are doing that larger pond that you just, the coumil just recently approved the bid, so we've been working really hard on water quality on this issue. Again Lori works with all the lakes. As a matter of fact this Saturday she's going to a neighborhood picnic on Lotns Lake regarding lake quality. She'll be speaking at that this Saturday, but we have spent a lot of money on this lake and certainly no wake is one issue but there's a lot of other thing~ that we're doing. As indicated there are some erosion problems that I. za'i's working with the Watershed District and we sent correspondence to them to get some ideas about how the shoreline, where it's i ,mpacfing a trail so if you had questions on that or wanted to speak to Lori, she'd be happy to talk to anyone if you have additional questions on that. Or direction where you'd like ns to go with s~ae additional education to some of the neighbors on the lake. Mayor Furlong: And even though this was an internal memo, I assume copies were sent to Mr. Klingelhutz and Mr. Wentz and others that called expres~ an interest as well? Todd Cmdmrdt: I know Mr. Klingelhutz did call in for a couple of clarifications and staff responded. Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Very good, any othex issues for the eotmeil this evening'/ If there ~re none is there a motion to adjourn7 Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman A yotte seconded to adjourn the meeting. Ail voted in favor and the motion carried. The City Council meeting was adjourned at 8:25 pan. Submitted by Todd Gerhardt City Mmmger Pt~ared by Nann Opheim CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING VERBATIM MINUTES APRIL 22, 2003 Clmi~ Franks called the meeting to order at 7:38 p.m. ..MEM~ERS PREqENT: Rod Franks, Tom Kelly, Amy O'Shoa, lack Spizale, Paula Atldns, Susan Robinson and Glenn Stolar ~TAFF PRF_~ENT: Todd Hoffman, Park and Rec Director; Jerry Ruegemer, Recre. afion Superintendent; and Dale Gregory, Park Superintendent APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Atkins moved, Stolar seconded to approve the agemta as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with u vote of 7 to 0. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS. None. VI~ITQR P~ATIONS: None. APPRQVAL QF MINUTES: Atkins moved, Spizale seconded to approve the summary Minutes of the Park and Recreation Commission dated February 25, 2003 as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with n vote of 7 to 0. NAAONG QF NEW PAR~ LQCATE~ IN FRQNT QF ~ HAt.t. AND ADJACENT TO NEW t.mRARY. Name A~d~ Linda Landsman Melissa I. Brechon Kathy Perschmann ~ill Shipley 7329 Frontier Trail 4 City Hah Haza Hoffman: Thank you Chair Franks, members of the commi~siom One of the most exciting thing obviously that is happening is the old bank hag finally beeo demo~ making room for the new parle The park project has always been referred to as the City Centex Corn _rrmos, and the plans that are shown on the ovedmad indicate the general configuxafion of that area. It's fairly large and very nicely laid out. What you would call kind of a town plaza feel or town commons, but it did not have an official name and with the placement of the sign, which is located right down at the intersection of Market Boulevard and West 78a'. This sign was an add all~rnate item at just over $8,000 which was accepted by the City Council as a part of the project so we need to find a name for the park and go ahead and get that name off to the contractor so they can order letters for that. Before I go into a little background on the park location and the history itseff I'll show you the schematic. We have it in your packet. This is a schematic of what the sign would look like. It has a concrete footing underneath it. A brick sign. It has the radius which follows the edge of the planter. Has a very prominent location oil that intersegtion. It will have Charlhas~l with the maple leaf and the park name ~ and it's a 3 ½ inch letters underneath the larger Park and Recreation Commission - April 22, 2003 letters here, 8 inch letters which spell Chanhassen~ So that's the design of the sign. City Center Commons again was the project name. It has never been officially adopted as the name for the park by the City Council. Little bac~und. First of ail on the project, this site was set aside in on the late 80's by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority. It was purchased at a price of $4.50 a square foot for the bank ~, and then the litrary ~ as well And the thinking like the idea of a McDonald's or a Burger King sitting out on that comer in front of City Hall. They thought there was a better use, preferably a public use for that ~, so it was purchased and set aside and then remained as the festival location or what did we call the ballfieids out there? Do you remember? The Little League. Coulter Field. The Little League Coulter fields out there where kids actually played Little League or t-ball fight on main street for a number of years as well. The library location or the referendum was approved. The library location was selected at the intersection or the corner of Kerber and West 78m Street, and then the plan started to become a reality for what would tie these two public uses together, that being the commons area inbetween or the plaza. The plan itseff was ~ through a design committee which the council thanked recently after the award was made for the project. Damon Farber and Associates is the ar~hite~t on the desigll. There was some real e~ de. sigl~ going in alld ! think the the bank standing there it was very hard to visualize what this space would actually look like. Now with the bank gone it's starting to become a little easier to visualize exactly what that space will look like. History on naming parks in the past in Chanhassen. Many of the parks have been named, either by their general location, the development, the developer, or city staff or generally the Park and Recreation Commission. So his~y them has not been a large public process going into naming parks in the city. The larger parks, I.,ake Ann Park, Lake Sugar Park obviously have names which are associated with geographic f~ that are, they are near or that they are featured. Many neighborhood parks that were named simply the night that the Park ami Recreation Commission visited them as they were brought onto the system and the commission talked about it as a group, or if there was a neighborhood that was working with the commission at that time in the development of that park, they were tben, ideas were solicited from those groups. There have been some suggestions from the community to date to name thig location and those include, the City Center Commons, which is a name that people still appreciate. Central Park, again due to it's predominant location in the center of the city. But Central Park many people feel has already been taken and has a...somewhem else in the country. Library Park has been suggested a number of times, and I think members of the s-dience here are hem to support that idea. Town Square and City Center Park so those are just a few of the ideas, or the ideas that have really been tossed about the majori~ of the time we're talking about this topic. Other ideas are, you can always name it as a memorial or there's a variety of diffe~ot ways to look at it. In this instance it's the staff position that there's a ~imple and obvious choice and that is City Center Parle It's very descriptive. We have a City Center Park already, which is behind City Hall and City Center Park can be renamed City Center Ballfields or City Center Fields. There's also a requirement that you should be aware of. The two fields that are north of the school property, north of the tennis courts, have a requirement as a part of the purchase agreement to be named Hansen Fields, so right now they have a, it's a s~gory. It's City Center Park, Hansen Fields. The propezvff was purchased from the Hansen's. As a part of that purcha~ agreement they wanted that, those naming rights as a part of that. So those, whatever City Center Park is known as, those fields will always be known as Hansen Field as well. And we have a sign in our shop for those, to name that Hansen Field, City Center Park, Hansen Field. The existing again the existing City Center Park can be renamed. The signs that we have are made in the shop at a cost of probably $200-300. Gregory: Yeah, a couple hundred dollars. Park and Recreation Commission- April 22, 2003 Hoffman: For the wood. And that's staff's recommea~lation that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend the City Council officially name the new park site City Center Park, and that we rename the existing City Center Park to City Center Bsllfields. Franks: Thank you Todd. What I'd like to do is of course, provide plenty of time for anyone in the audience to make their comments, but before we do that I'd like to, if Todd, if you're willing to take questions from any commission me~, we'll do that first And Susan, just to give you a break we'll start at the other end. Robinson: Thank you. Franks: You're welcome. Stolar:. Just one quick question. Is there a mquiremem that that has to have a distinct name? Because one of my questions was, isn't this all just City Center Park. Hoffman: Yes. Stolar: This is the whole City Center Park. Is that allowable or does it have to have a distinct name? Hoffman: It's allowed. You could do that. My only concern is that when there is a specific program or event taking place in this location and you say City Center Park, it may be confusing for folks. Space starts to get large, but I had the same thought. Atkins: So the reconnmndation by staff is City Center Park? Atkins: How will this be decided? Will we be making that decision? Hoffman: You can make a recommendation to the City Council. Atidns: Will the sign be lit? Hoffman: Lit? Yes. Atldns: That's all I have. Franks: Nothing? Kelly: No. Franks: Todd, when you say the monmmnt sign will be lit, will the letters be bacldit or will it be flood lit from down below? Hoffman: Base lit from down below. Franks: Staff didn't come up with any other real creative ideas? Stolac. Not that they will tell us. Park and Recreation Commission- April 22, 2003 Franks: Well had we considered offering the naming fights to the park for sale to ~ entity? Hoffman: Hadn't, well we talked about it. Yeah we talked about it. Franks: Okay. Alright. I guess that's really all I have at this point. O'Shea: Does staff see it a plus or a neutral to try to fie this whole area in ~ City Center, the hockey rinks, City Center ballfields, or does that? Hoffman: I think what would occur then is this would always be known as City Cent~ Park and you'd start getting imick names for the other. People would just say the ballfields. O'Shea: By City Center Park. Hoffman: Yeah. You're going to go to the ballfielcls. Because there are, then again by default if you're reading a softball or baseball schedule and it says City Center Park, you're pretty much going to know where those ballfields are. So depending on the activity which is scheduled. If you say the 4"' of July is at City Center Park, there's going to be activities going on in both locations so people would know where it's at O'Shea: Okay. In the new park by the library, is there going to be activities held there c~ Hofhnan: Oh sure. O'Shea: Okay. Hoffman: Both by the library and by the city and by other people, the Chamber of Commerce- It will be a very public space and many public events will be held ttsm~. O'Shea: That's all I had. Franks: Commissioner Robinson: Robinson: Thank you. My only question was what types of public events would be held there? Like different 4~ of July types of thin~. Hoffman: Music, art, farngrs market, reading programs. I'm sure your list is very long. There will be a variety of activities and the space, we have ideas already but the space is going to generate additional concept There's a farrmrs market that people are talking about in town. We're not sure if this space is large enough with parking needs but. We want to bring back our music program in the parks. Just some of those types of activities. Spizale: Just one question. Is this like sandblasted into masonry type of thing or is it free standing letters? Hoffman: Yeah, they're free standing letters. ~4 inch aluminum lettering painted black. Off-set 1 inch from the brick. The maple leaves are ~A inch water jet cut aluminum painted black. And the Park and Recreation Commission- April 22, 2003 brick facing matches the existing library and then the letters with the name are ~A aluminum letters painted black. Spizale: Okay. That's the only question I had. Franks: Are there any other questions? Alfight, thank you. Thanks TodtL What I'd like to do now is open it up for comment from memlx~ of the audience. If you want to, if you have a comn~nt, please step to the podium and state your name and address and if you would, ff you're representing a group or organization, your atfiliafion as well so we have some undgrstanding. Linda Landsman: Hi. My name is Linda Landsman and Fm at 7329 Frontier Trail. Acnmlly I come with many hats. First and foremost Fm a resident I am the Carver Coumy Library Trustee for Chanhassen. I was on the ariginal task force for the library. I was on the outside design committee for the library. I was on the inside design committee for the library. I'm on the art committee for the library, who was meeting tonight to talk about artwork in and around the library. My position on the Carver Board also puts me on the Nriends of the Chanhassen La'brary Board itself so as I say I wear many hats when I appear before you tiffs evening. Last but not least I was also part of this park design, and it was a very invigorating and fun process. The City at tl~ time had asked the. landscape specialist to tie the park design to the library, and they did a very good job in doing that. Tbe same lines can be seon in the park design, the room concepts are somewhat similar. The City had asked the landscaper to nmteh the landscaping in the park and the landscaping in the library area together. He did that very well. I guess in this time of cost constraints I'm questioning why you would want to name an existing, a brand new park like this with such exciting ideas, an existing name of an existing park that normally people don't reme~ now. When they talk about the ballfields they talk about the ballfields behind City Hall. They don't remember City Conter Park or City Center Commons or whatever it's called now. If we do make that change, yes you can do the signage in your shop for a few hundred dollars, but ~'s still added cost of changing maps. Of changing ~ plat names. Updating web sites if you've got web sites showing where you parks are in Chanhasse~ There's a cost associated with that, and with this deficit balamm that we have, I would like to think that you would avoid any extraneous costs that you have at this time. There are some other issues througl~ When you have two pa~ that close togeth~ with a commou name I tMnk that invites confusion within the public. And that again is going to add a cost to the calls to City Hall as to well yeah it's at City Conter so~. Is it up above or is it down by the library, and we're seeing and hearing a lot of people ref-gn'ing to it as the park by the library. You know let's keep it simple. Library Park, that's what people are going to call it. I do believe that you can use a name in this park also to bring some statement or excitement to our downtowm It can be used to indicate to whoever drives into town for a meeting or drives through town to get to somewhere else on 5, or even a residont that comes into downtown for any mason, that we are a town that truly embraces life long learning and ~. We embrace the e~ and promote the adventure of expanding the minds of our cMldron through stories, pictures, programs, whatever. And that we also believe so strongly in those th~n~ that we stuck a library in the middle of our town. That in and of itself is awesome. You've got an opporumity to make a ~ It could point to the fact that we are well read and limmm. Or you could make a ~t of loyalty to our country. You don't want to deuact from the design or from the hard efforts of all the people that have worked on this with confusion. There are many ottmr names that would stand out and have the dignity and decorum of this park. Authors Park. Poets Park. Nreedom Square. The~ are so many opportunities here. Don't miss ~ Thank you. Franks: Linda, do you want to take a question? Would you mind? Do you want to come back? You just had a list. What's at the top of your list? Park and Recreation Commission- April 22, 2003 Linda Landsman: Oh that's hard. I am partial to tying this park to literacy. To learning. To that excitement of new lands and new wonders that you can find in that library in many different mediums, so I lean towards something like a Library Square or Library Commons. I also feel strongly towards Freedom Square because it elicits a lot of pride in our country and our community, but it also talks to the fact that we are pwbably one of the few countries that you can list that have such a mass of freedom of right to read, and that is highly. ~ in our culture. So I guess if I had to choose, my favorite would be Freedom Square. Franks: Okay, thanks. Linda Landsman: Any other questi~? Franks: Well now you opened it up. If you want to stand up there for a second I'll check and make sure so you don't have to keep coming back... Linda Landsman: Okay. That's fine. Franks: Are there any questions from any commission members for Ms. Landsman before she sits back down, and we'll just keep them to questions and not comments. Linda Landsman: And I am standing. O'Shea: I do. Franks: Sure, go ahead. O'Shea: You spoke of ~_ddifional cost incurred by calling it City of Chanhassen, City Commrms. Linda Landsman: City Commons Park. Well if you're going to be making changes in the name of the park where the fields are, that's where I'm talking about additional ~sts. If you don't change the name of that park up the~ you don't incur costs of making new signs for the old park_ Of changing that name in maps or changing that name in web sit~, which yes we have emplo~ that do that but we pay them taxpayer dollars for their salary. So yeah there are costs atlsociated with re-using that name. O'Shea: Thank you. Robinson: I have a question also. Franks: Sure, go ahead. Robinson: I was wondering if you talked this over with, you talked, named kind of all the committees you were on. Have you discussed this with other people? And if so, were they in agreement with you for the Library Commons? Linda Landsman: Library Park, Library Commons was probably the one I've heard the most. From neighbors. From library staff. From a lot of the people in the committees that I've been on. The Friends of the Library. They want the concept of reading and literacy evident. Funniest thing. Park and Recreation Commission- April 22, 2003 Franks: If I can just expand on that a little bit, when you say tha~ I'm wondering, we plunked the library fight in the middle of town, like you said and I am hard pressed to think of a greater staten~nt that this town supports learning and literal. And so I'm wondering about how the park, whatever that name is going to be I think can add to that statement already. Linda Landsman: I think it can, and if you wanted to take it, or extrapolate a little further. If you wanted something like Authors Park or Poets Park. When we start getting into actually doing some of the fun things in that park that we've talked about with maybe some of our park benches or maybe engravement in some of the pavers that we're going to have. You know put a poets name engraved in there or an artist's name and it might promote curiosity in children or adults saying huh, well I've never read that one. I've never read that author. It could be they come into the library and check it out, so the~ are thin~ we can do within the library intrinsic to starting some of that excitement. I think the fact that it sits in the center of town is also very evidenL And I just, I'm hoping that we take this opportmdty to take a step up from that so. Franks: Thank you. Linda Landsman: You're welcome. Any other questions? O'Shea: Actually I do have. Linda, do you have need to really distin~ the parks behind City Hall and the one by the library? Do you want to see them, like do you want to have that identity as two separate parks or does that not botber you that if they flow together? Linda Landsman: I agree with Todd. I think in some minor ways that will cause confusion~ Sometimes the celebration or the activity that's going to be taking place will be self evident to where it's going to be, regardless of what you call anything. You can't hold a football game on 78~ Street. It's just not going to happen~ But I do believe that it is, the park that we are building is intrinsically such a different feel. Such a different propose that I do believe that we should keep them somewhat separate. Granted some of our celebrations may run into both locations, and I think that's great. ! think they should, but they are so different in ttmir feel that I think we have to differentiate. O'Shea: Okay, thanks. Linda Landsman: Anything else? Thank you. Franks: Is there anyone else wishing to address the commission? Sure, come on up. Melissa Berchon: My name is Melissa Berchon and I'm the Director of the h'brary system within Carver County, but I'm not a resident of Chanhasse~ I just wanted to give a few of my views on this park. I have had experience with a park that's adjacent to a library and that happened in Austin, Minnesota. They have a lovely library, about the same size of the library is he~, and there's a park there. There's a walk around a pond and a park whe~ we have programs. Where they have programs with the library, and no rru~_tter what that park was called, it was always the library park because it was adjacent to it, and because there were so many activities. So that was one of the things. The other thing is, I've been in on this process since we started with the referendum and all the way through and this has been such a public participation, this library. We had focus group meetings. We had lots of discussion about how this library was going to look and how it was going to reflect the community. We bad a focus group a couple months ago with the artists in the community about how we wanted to have public art and that public art is not going to be just in the library. It's going to spill out. I guess I had always thought, and quite Park and Recreation Commission- April 22, 2003 frankly I hadn't thought much about the name but that it would be mom of a public participation. That there be a contest where you would be the judges of names. Maybe it would be something where the community, maybe children, maybe families came together and ~ a variety of natrr~. I don't know, but I do know that the history of this project has been one of major public participation. Now what that means to you I don't know but I guess it always meant to me that there might be more discussion about it and quite frankly, have I thought about name? I haven't. I just know from my experience that no matter what you name it, it's going to be library park. Unless it's something that connects internally in your head with a library somehow. Maybe the poet or the authors or something like that, but just for whatever it's wortl~ I just wanmd to tell you that. ff you have any questions for me. I just know from the example that that's how it falls out, and how I see all of this hat~q~g. When the park is going mgethor in stages and again being presented, the programs that will be presented will be through the Friends of the Library and through some of the children's services we do in the p~rk. We want to make sum that we have portable microphones that we can take our story time out them. We want to make sum that we can have ice cream on the park, and that kind of thing so we see a lot of time, s. Fve seen envisioned perhaps some stone monmn~ts or something out ~ with authors words on it. I've seen that, or sentences or poems or some~ even kids do. So Fve seen a lot of activities going on in that park that involve the whole c~a~nmunity. That's all. Franks: ~ thank you. Well seeing that there's no one 1ell we'll bring this back to commission memhem. Before we do that though, ~re them any follow-up questions for stall'? Seeing that them aren't any, I have just a couple Todd. One is about how the funding breakdown has occun~ for...the library construction and how much is coming from either city general fund expenditures or park development funds to complete the project. Hoffman: A minor allocation is coming out of the, it was sutxracted from the library as a part of landscaping, and that came over to this project The vast majority is park dedication dollars, which are dedicated to the common of the project Franks: So they're coming out of that 410 park dedication fund? Hoffman: Correct Franks: Do you know about what the amount is projected for'that to be? Hoffman: The contract is $670,000. And somewhere less than 70 of that is coming out of the library budget. Ymnks: Okay. Kelly: In this budget you had, I don't know if it's thia packet but it says 1.5 and 575. Hoffman: Which budget7 Kelly: In the packet we had the capital i .mprovement program. Hoffman: Yeah, that number may have been driven down by change orders on the library side. Kelly: The 700 has but our amount has gone up. Park and Recreation Commission - April 22, 2003 Hoffman: Correct. Your amount has gone up, the library amount has gone down due to increased expenditures on the library budget So there's more money going into the library out of that fund. Kelly: We'll talk about that later tonight? Hoffman: Nothing to talk about. Kelly: Well I'll make a sta~ment anyway then. Franks: And what was the portion of the land that the city acquired that's going to the park? I can't remember the size. How much to the lot percentage to the library and how much to the park? Hoffman: It's about 50/50. Frank~: About 50/50. Robinson: I have a question Todd. Has there ever been a time in the past, you talked about the park naming process, the history of it. Has them ever been a time in the past that it hasn't been ~ according to like location or a description like that? Like where it's gone out to have a, has that ever happened, and how does that process go? Like it went out tn a contest or something like Linda said, or anything different from the, or has the commission always trade a Hoffman: All the instances, I'm not opposed if you want to go through a public naming process Robinson: No, I'm just asking. Franks: We always make the recommendatiom The most recent example I can think of that points to getting away from location or histou, is the naming of Sugarbush Park~ I don't know if you've been by Sugarbush Park but that was whe~ the neighborhood and some really involved people got together and they researc~ this and they helped install the playground equipment and they had some investment in the park and came to the commission and proposed that idea so. Robinson: Then the other question I have is, how soon do we need to let the company know who's making the signs? Is that a pretty quick process we need to form? Hoffman: Couple of months. Robinson: Okay. Franks: You know I'm just going to break with our format for a minute and I see that Ms. Shipley has just arrived in the council chambers and knowing how involved for a long time you've been with the library, we'll back off if you'd ~ to address the commission. If there's no objection from commission members. Ah-ight. Jill Shipley: Thank you Rod. Franks: You're very welcome. Park and Recreation Commission- April 22, 2003 Jill Shipley: I would just like to reinforce what I think Linda l_andsman has. Franks: Would you state your name and ~_dd_ress for the record please. Jill Shipley: Fm Jill Shipley, 261 Eastwood Court, Chanhassen, and Fd like to reinforce what I know Linda Landsman said was, that I think that this park should be named after something that reflects education, life long learning, the h'braxy. Our voters sanctioned thi~ park. They voted to spend the money. I mean not the park, but the library. They value education ami they value this commitment, our city's commitment to education and life long learning, and I would like to see it reflected in this park area so I respectfully request that you try to consider a name that reflects that and is indicative of it. I would love to see the motto for Chanhassen changed to a wonderful place to live, work, learn and play also. I think that we need that reflected in our motto. So those are just my comments for the evening. Thank you. Franks: Alright. Are there any additional follow-up questions for staff? Stolar: I just have one. Franks: Yeah, go ahead. Stolar: Todd is there any reason these other names, staff didn't put forward the ~ecommend_~tion like is there anything against them or you just picked one name and said this is the one we think. Hoffman: Any of the name~ that I list~l or that the audience listed? Stolar: Either. Hoffman: No. Stohm. You have no particular, just wanted to get something out there on the table? Hoffman: Well my whole overriding philosophy about naming this park is that we can nmke it as complicated, we could name it a hundred different things, but City Center Park is very simple and straight to the point and so I don't, I feel. I un~ and I can certainly apprecia~ all the conversation about the fie in to the park and I really don't hav~ any objection to that, so ~ lies the opinions of the 7 of you. How do you want to handle the process? You know whe~ I stancL You know w~re at least a few people in the andience, their opinion so you either make a recomn~ndafion to the City Council and send it on up or create a process of your own to name this site, but I support City Cent~ Parle When it was first named, the project name, we differentiated from City Center Park because we had a park project going on at City Center Park so we named it City Center Commons. And them was a conversation at that time about what would we name the space in front of City Hall and people just said the commons so it was given a project name but. Stolac But you see no negatives with any of the names that have been discussed? No inherent situations you think would be a problen~ Hoffman: Some of them are belier than others but You want me to start giving my rank I'll do that Stolan What I'm thinldng more structurally. Evea'ybody has opinions. 10 Park and Recreation Commission - April 22, 20(B Hoffman: Stmc~y? Stolan. Yeah, there should be. Hoffman: Put anything you want in those little letters underneath Chanhasse~ I mean it is what it is. Franks: Well Glenn we'll bring it right back to you and if you have some comments, we'd like to hear them. We'll just continue fight on down. Stolan. I first of all think I agree with Todd that we should, well I think we should mak~ a recommendation today. Just send it up to City Council We can come up with a million processe~. Let's give our opinion~ City Councils can do what they want with it. They may decide to make the ~, but at least let them know our thoughts. I do like the idea of tying this to the literacy concept. I 100 percent object to the fact that park dedication fees are being used for this park- lOOpe~ento~m~ ButIthinkit'sthere. Litetacyisi~andI actually like the idea of, I don't know if I like Freedom Square because I look at it and it doesn't look square. Linda Landsman: Well square is also a term for a public location so. Stolan. Yeah, I was just saying, but Freedom Square or Freedom Park, I actually do like that idea. We live in a time where that meam something and it reflects the times. Atkins: My first inclination is to leave it ~ I feel that it's the city's park Not the library's park, although it is adjacent to the library but it's Chanhassen's park. But the more I just am doodling names underneath there and I also thought that possibly any confusion we could have upper commons and the lower commons or something like that, because ultirrmtely everybody knows where City Center Commons is and they're going to know that that's part of it But I still am a lillle bit undecided. I do like Chanhassen Library Commom. I think a public naming process, that sounds pretty complicated. Like a huge ordeal. Franks: Paula for clarification are you suggesting that it be City Center Park and City Center Commons? Okay. And not like City Center Cornmon~ North and City Center Commons Sout~ Atkins: No. Franks: Okay. Kelly: I do like City Center Park Imeanit'swhereitis. It'sintheci~centn. Thear~has always been referred to City Center something. I do like that name City Center Park and the fields adjacent, they can be known as the fields at City Center or sormthing. They can still play off the City Cente~ name but I do like the area called City Center Park for as Paula says, it is the city's park and you know, park dedication funds, however we may not like the fact that so much is going into the park, that's where they're going. I think we're going in the fight, but my opinion is I do like City Center Park. That's it. Franks: Alright, thank you. Commissioner O'Shea. 11 Park and Recreation Commission - April 22, 2003 O'Shea: Okay, I agree also that we need to make a reco~on tonight. And coming into tonight I liked City Center Pare Trying to tie in the fields, the hockey rinks, the skate park. All of that, but then I look at, after listening a little bit more and thinking as a user of a park and answering questions, you know where the activity is at City Center park. Well you know next to the library, and I agree that you'll always have to clarify which area. And I'm thinking now is what would make it the easiest way for the person, or persons using the park to find the location. So if you say Library Park, to me it's very clear. Now I liked Freedom Square and other thin~gs but again I think you'd get into, it doesn't depict location at all. You say well that's next to the library. So I think, and also living next to Sugarbush Park, nobody knows, I shouldn't say no one. It' s, a lot of people don't know where ~ush Park is because it doesn't depict location so, and that's why I don't want to open it up to a contest because I think people can get really creative and come up with some great names but again we'll be going, well that's the park next to the library. So after hearing all this, the way I make a decision is what will cause the least confusion for people to find locations for activities, and that's why Fm leaning towards Library Park because it's so clear and still keep the one, City Center Park behind. So that's where I'm leaning right. Franks: Anything else? O'Shea: That's all. Franks: Alright, great. Commissioner Robinson: Robinson: And I would also agree with my fellow commissioners thus far that I think a simple choice or decision needs to be made tonight as far as making recommendation to the council to avoid any long and drawn out process type of thing. I like City Center Park, but af~ hearing the library folks talk and that sort of thing and hearing the history from Todd about the naming ofthe location. A lot of times it's named by location, and me being a very landmark person, I would be one of those people calling, saying is that the one by the library then. I would be one of those people because that's how I work and I know a lot of people do have that same sort of thought process. So I guess I'm leaning towards either Library Park or Library Comm~, as well just because it's more descriptive. You wouldn't get as many questions and the confusion level would be less. Spizale: I agree with you. I just think that no matter what we name the park it's going to, everybody's going to call it Library park. I mean the building's there. The space is there. It's connected to the library. I just feel that Library Park kind of says it all and tells us whe~ it's at. That's it. Franks: Okay. I'm not going to stand up as high on a soapbox Glenn as you did, but I also have some feelings about the majority of that park being funded from park dedication fees, but that's the way it's going to be. It's a ~ park. We're going to love it. We're all going to love being out there. You can just picture the kids sitting on the stone benches hearing stories and the farmers market in the parking lot there. It's going to be w~ except for the wind blowing in from the noRh... A little cool breeze in the summer. It will be nice. But then again this is a park and the city is the one that's maintaining the identity of the park and maintaining the park and is paying for the park and it's going to fit into the rest of the city's park system so I think the city's identity, the park needs to be maintained in some forn~ However, we all know that people are going to be saying the park next to the library, which af~ a number of years is going to turn into Library Park. I think people are pretty well set with City Center Park right now, understanding that that's the fields behind City Hall. I haven't heard, oh that's the fields behind 12 Park and Recreation Commission - April 22, 2003 City Hall. I haven't ~ that in a number of years so I think that's pretty well established so names do become established with it's location. I sat on the commission when Sugarbush Park was named. It was a weak moment in my career as a commissioner. I will admit that now. That was, we were presented with a name for Sugarbush Park that has historical reference to the City of Chanhassen. It related to Chanhassen's symbol of the maple leaf. There was a large contingent of residents who had invested themselves in the park who proposed the name, and it was hard to say no. And yet thinking back on it, and considering how the names played out and nobody knows where Sugarbush Park is, we probably should have taken a little bit closer look at that. And so I'm very much interested personally in not making that mista~ agalm And so, in my wordy way I've come up with just an idea and that is to really take both and put them wgether in the sense that we've talked about City Center Park being, but iv. ally both of these areas are the fields and the commons area by the library. You can laugh. He's reading my notes... And the idea is to really take one and call it like the City Center Recreation Fields or City Center Fields and then the other one is the City Center Library Park or City Center Library Co~m~ous. To really combine the idea that this is the city's identity. It's the center of our city. It's in the city center where we've placed this wonderful park and the library, but that was the city's choice to do that right in the center of the city. And but also to give it a distinct location name as well. Todd, I appreciate the City Center Park. It makes sense, but you know you've heard me say it before that people are going to delineate that area with the library. And my feeling is, if we just call it City Center Park, people aren't going to call it City Center Park. They're going to call it something else. Park by the Library or whatever. I think that's just going to happen, but if we can combine our identity in the city with that, I think that we'll maintain the ci~'s identity as well as the library's identity too. I know staff probably is not going to agree with that. Hoffman: How come nobody said City Hall Park? There's another big building on this park Franks: You really don't see City Hall much anynxge. Hoffman: You do now again. Linda Landsman: Not for long. Franks: Not for long. Yeah, well Jill Shipley: You know won't the city's name be very prominent on that Chanhasson is going to be the largest thing on the sign as you look at that in that comer. Franks: Yeah. One of the things that Fm concerned about too is that people be very much aware is that this was not, this is, the people that voted for the library referendm and used the library are just not the only people who have funded this park. Is that this is part of the city's complete park system and if you've never stepped foot in the hlxary at all or beefed about the referendum and it's showing up on your property tax bill for the h~, but this is your park as well. They paid for it. They've earned it and they can use it. And so that's the piece about identity that I really am sensitive to maintaining. Not everybody's going to use the library. They are cemdnly able w, but everybody is also needs to be welcomed inw this park as they're welcomed into all parks as well. Stolac. A question going to the concept of fields. We have these Hansen Fields as part of City Center Park. Rod, are you suggesting that we call this City Center Park and then undea'neath that Library Commons, so that it's tying it alw~. City Center Park. You have the fields, you have the library commons. 13 Park and Recreation Commission- April 22, 2003 Franks: Yes, that's the idea. City Center Park, Library Commons. City Center Park, you know reerea~on fields. Or north fields. That's what I, I'm sorry maybe that wasn't clear but that was exactly what I was suggesting. Kelly: How about Library Park at City Commons? I'm just txying to throw a pretm~ition in there. Franks: My idea is to get away from it. You know this sounds nice now. It's a little trendy. The idea is that we've got this City Center park. We've got the library commons and we've got th~ recreation fields. Now up by those nc~th Hansen Fields, that's going to be a long. Hoffman: City Center Park Hansen Fields. Franks: City Center Park Hansen Fields, fight. City C. xager Park north fields c~ City Center Park fields or recreation fields. Hoffman: Ballfields. Franks: You know I bristled at ballfields. Athletic fields, yes, ~ we have the hockey rinks are up there. We have the skate park is up them. There's you know the play equipment adjacent to the school and there's the tenni~ courts. Hoffman: How about City Center Park? Stolar:. Yeah, I mean we wouldn't have to change any of the si~, over there if we just cai1 it, call of this area City Center Park and just sub-label that Library Commons, we shouldn't have to change anything up there. Franks: Well those are my ideas so. I also am in agreement that ff we are able to come to a majority on a recommendation of a name, that we should do th~ tonight if we're able to send that up to the City Council. Yes, Commissioner Stolar. Stolar: I'd like to just make a motion so we can get going. Franks: I'd just love to entertain, the Chair would love to ~ a motiom Stolac. I make a motion that we name the park next to the library, City Center Park Library Commons. Atldns: I second that motion. Franks: As a point of clafifi~m Commigsionel' Stolar, are you considering about the athletic fields? Stolan. No changes to any names that side. Franks: Okay, so those would still stay City Cente~. Stolar: Right. I mean it goes to my first corrm~nt. This is all City Center Park. We have a bunch of stuff there and we have the library commons over there. 14 Park and Recreation Commission - April 22, 2003 Franks: Okay. Commissioners Atlcim, were you a second to that motion? Atkins: I seconded that. Franks: Okay there's a motion before us. It's been seconded. Is there any discussion? Kelly: On the sign, what would actually be written on the sign? It would say Chanhassen City Center Park Library Commons, so it'd be 3 lines on the sign? Stol~. That's part of my motion because I would like people to see this as part of the entire City Center Parle It's part of your park system- There's a bunch of stuff associated with it and then the Library Commons to give someone the feel, because I still support the literary concept and the feel that we want to have in that park. They can see that as part of, we have multitudes of different fields. We have ballfields. We have skating parks. We have a thinking, education, learning area. It' s part of the City Center Park. That's who we are. Kelly: So you're hoping to see 3, all 3. Stolac Lines. Yeah I mean, Fm not sure how much extra cost that is. Fm interested in understanding that. Hoffman: On a million 5 project. The cost associated with naming or rensming anything are not a factor. Stolac Well we have to reprint the maps anyway to put it on the map. Hoffman: Wben tbe maps are reprinted, the name will be changed at no additional cost. Franks: Is there any further discussion on the motion? O'Shea: I wasn't sure if thi~ was where, if I disagree or do I wait for the nay? Franks: Well, if you had a quexfion for the author of the motion or if you're looking for some clarification this would. O'Shea: I'm just thinking it's serving, I totally agree. When I came in I agreed to try to tie all the parks together. But then practi~ wise, are we the only group of people that are going to call it City Center Park Library Commons? Stolar: No actually I'll be calling it Library Commom is what I'll call it. The idea is you can still call it that. You know how people refer to it, the idea of the location, they're going to shorten the name. But it just ties for people visiting or people entering, it ties it Wgether. So Fm assuming everyone's going to call it Library Commn~s just in the common speai~ But let's have the sign say what it really is and how it flea it together. O'Shea: Okay, and I guess my point is, what it really is, is going to be a library park. It's only going to serve a p~ to this group I think. Franks: Well save that but do you have any other discussion regarding the motion. O'Shea: No. 15 Park and Recreation Commission- April 22, 2003 Spizale: I just think it's a good solution because I also liked both names. I thought they're great names. I think it ties in both nam~ perfectly. Good idea. Franks: Any furt~r discussion regarding the motion that's before the commission? Just for my clarification Commissioner Stolar if you'd restate the motion. One more time. Stolac. Motion is that we name the park adjacent to the new library City Center Park Library Commons, and on the sign it would list 3 lines. Chanhassem City Cont~ Park, Library Commons. Is that agreement on the second Paula? Atldns: Yes. Franks: Seeing that there's no further discussion regarding the motion we'll call the question. Stolar moved, Atkins seconded that the Park and Recrea~n Commlg~ion reemnmemi to name the park adjacent to the new library City Center Park Library Commons, and on the sign it would list 3 lines. Ch~mlmssen, City Center Park, Library Commnns. All voted In favor, except O'Shea who opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of 6 to 1. Franks: If you would care to state your objection we'd entertain that. O'Shea: I just think it's going to be called Library Park and we should just name it that is the reason I objected. Franks: The motion carries. Thank you. Thanks for showing up tonight. We really app~ciate it. ¢~TY CQDE ~_.,AI~WIC~TION: SIDEWALKS AND TILAH~. Hoffman: Thank you Chairman Franks, members of the commission. A number of years ago a clarification was made between sidewalks and trails. Their main~ and consmL~on in the city. Essentially to get away from developers having the position that trails or park funds should pay for the installation of sidewalks in residential communities. So them was no clear differentiation between the two. Developem would come in. Planning staff would say we need sidewalk~ on all these collector streets. They would come back and say well we want to get paid for that out of the city's trail fund or park fund, and so originally sidewalk development, sidewalk reconunendations were with this body and with park and recreation staff. That was changed a number of years ago. Put over into the planning folks so they would msnaste sidewsllc~ as a part of community planning. Subdivision ordinance. But then the waters muddied further because there was never clear indication that sidewalks would always be required in certain sulxlivisions The Planning Commission currently is going through an ~ of the Comprehensive Plan and what they would like to see, as ordinance language, is on the second haft of this memorandum in the italic where it says sidewalks shall be required on at least one side of local streets. Trails shall be located on collector and arterial streets and off street connectors to city parks, to neighborhood commerci~ uses and adjacent neighborhoods and schools, or as designated in the comprehensive plan .... that is what the Planning Commission would like to hear from the park commission is do you have a position on this issue. Do you feel strongly that sidewalks should be everywhere in the city, including up and down od-de-sacs? Some neighborhoods have them. Some of you live in neighborhoods that have them. Some of you live in neighborhoods that do not have sidewalks. 16 Park and Recreation Commission - April 22, 2003 And so the Planning Commission sirra, ly is asking for your position on this issue prior to making their final recommendation to the City Council. Franks: Thank you Todd. I'll open it up to questions from commission me~. Jack, we're going to start with you. Any questions for staff? Spizale: Not at thi~ time, no. Franks: Commissioner Robinsom Robinson: None at this time. Franks: Amy? O'Shea: I just have one question. Axe they brining it forth because it's a safety issue that they want sidewalk~ on all, on one side now? Hoffman: I think there's a variety of issues. Safety is one of them. Recreation is also one. Access to the city's trail system- O'Shea: Okay, that's the only question I had. Hoffman: Commi.~sioner Kelly. Kelly: A couple of questions. I think you said, sidewalkg shall be required on at least one side of all local streets. Thatdoes include cul-de-sacs? That's what they're pmposing? Hoffman: Yes. Kelly: And the only question I have is, why is thi~ coming? If sidewalks are a planning commission, why do they even want or need our input at all? Hoffman: They're looking for additional support or additional input. We from time to time send up issues up their way and they feel it's appmpria~, at least out of a certain courtesy if nothing else to ask the park commi.~sion about this item. Franks: Anything else? Kelly: No. Franks: Paula. Atldns: This is a change that would affect developmem from now on. Hoffman: Currently it can be required. It's not rrumd,~t~_ So that's where the, depending on who is working with which developer, you may end up with sidewalks or no sidewalks being a part of the recommendation. Atkins: That's all. Franks: Commissioner Swim'. 17 Park and Recreation Commission- April 22, 200~ Stolar. I've got a couple of questions. Does this impact park dedication fees for the cost of the sidewalks are taken out, net against park dectic~on fees? Hoffman: No. Stolar: And it doesn't clearly state that it won't, but it starts talking about trails. Is that to make sure that the delineation then of where a trail goes. I guess Pm confused about why they would even put trails in there. Hoffman: SoamL I' m not sure that it needs to be in tlzxe. Stolar: Yeah, I mean I think they should just say sidewalks shall be required on at least one side of all local streets. Take the trail verbiage out so there's no confusion and it's just something they' re changing. Hoffman: Good idea. Stohm That's how I would direct it Okay. Franks: Anytl~g else7 My question was very similar in that I thought that the way they have this worded here sets us up for argun~ms about what is a sidewalk and what is a trail on a collector street Is this a collector street7 Is thig, or a resident and are they responsible for the sidewal~ in, like down West 78~' Street which you know is a collector street through coxmnetcial area. I mean it's just sounds like it's opening the door for lots of unintgnded negotiations with developers. Of course they're going to be looking to be as cost effective as possible. And so I'm perfectly okay with sidewalks being mandn__t_nd as part of any future development, but I agree. Let it talk about sidewalks and leave the trails off. The comprehensive plan is pretty clear about where we're looking for trail construction. Hoffanan: Correct Franks: I think it just would save the Planning Commigsion a lot of headache, and save us a tremendous amount of headache as well. Are they looking, this is just for their information purposes, so you'll pass on our. Hoffman: Right. You can make a recomnzn,~tion for that clarification would be appropriate. Franks: Does that require a motion Todd from us? Hoffman: It doesn't require one. Franks: No. Okay, well what I'd ~ to do then is to bring this back to the commi,sion and just really see ff there is consensus of commission membem about deleting the language on their proposed change to city code beginning with the word trails. And really letting the, passing up the information that sidewalks be sidewalks and trails he trams and it might be more helpful for the developers and for the city not to necessarily combine the two in one paragraph s~ I'll just look for kind of a nod of the heads them. Cansensus or whatever. 18 Atldns: I have a quesfi~. So if that wording was changed, the Planning Commission's recommendation, would that change these Section A, Section L and Section T on ~,~ next two pages you've got these circled. Item about specifically about trails. Hoffman: No, it would not change those. Franks: No. The only one that would change I would imagine is in that Section B, number 5. It would probably say sidewalks will be required on however it is their language says. Hoffrnan: Correct. Franks: Shall be required on at least one side of all local streets. Everything else will stay the salxle. Hoffman: And item T speaks specifically to the trails. The City's comprehensive trail plan. That subdividers of land, abutting sueets that have been designal~ in the city's comp plan shall dedicate land and consmmt those trails and au appropriate trail fee credit shall be granted. Franks: Because we already negotiated enough about that as it is. Alright, well if you could pass off the consensus of the commission. Hoffman: I certainly will. Franks: Appreciate that. Hoffman; Bob Generous, Senior Planner...and I'll pass that up to Bob and he'll take it back to the Planning Commission. ~'.CI~E&TION REPQRT~: 2003 4TM QF JULY Ck':I.i~IRATION. Ruegemer: Thank you Chair Franks. Just to update the commission from Corey. Kind of the progress of the 4~ of July celebration coming up here July 3~ and 4~. Corey's been busy talking to food vendors and getting stuff kind of lined up for thaL I know that he's in a daily or weekly contact with people and Dale cemdnly could comment to this too but we really beefed up our power up here to City Center Park. Right up here to the north. But really to address a lot of issues that we had af~ last year's celebration and reaflly kind of beefed up atea~ and we're going to kind of lay out that a little bit differently again this year to maximize our power that we have available to us. So really should fit. There are certainly certain pans of the park where certain components have to be as far as the tents for 220 power that we have for the band, that sort of thing so those types of things will stay the same but food vendors will probably be moved around a bit this year to maximize the component of electrici~ that we have set up and put into place~ The parade is coming up again. We've had contact with the pa~_de committee and we have applications now available at City Hall and also up at Chanhasson Recreation Center. I know that information will be going out very shortly to all the past participants as far as mailers and flyers, that sort of thing. And then also the~ will be some information on our web site pertaining to the parade, that sort of thing. Also our news article coming up so hopefully we'll get the word out again on that, so that should be coming out and hitting the smmts very shortly. The parade route will stay the same this year, and so we'll probably have anywhere from around that 80 float kind of parade as we've had in the past so. I know Comy's been warking on securing our promotional kind of stuff and getting the t-shirts and all that stuff ordered up here and have those on the streets 19 Park and Recreation Commission - April 22, 2003 here probably sometime in I supposed mid-May to late May, so they're out in plenty of time so, does anybody have any questions at all? Franks: Just one. In that I'm concerned about any preparations that be made regarding security of the upper and lower parking deck with the new library. And Fm especially thinking during the street dance portion of our festivities. I think there's just some new things that we maybe have not considered and that's just the one that came to my mind right away. There might be others and I'd appreciate it if you'd pass on to Corey to start maybe thinking of what this parti~ space may mean to the whole celebration and what to be ~ for. We don't want anybody falling off the deck. We don't want unwanted activity occurring in the lower portion of the deck either. Ruegemer: Great suggestions Rod. Franks: Parking ramp. Parking deck I think they referred to it as. Atkins: The library won't, I mean be nearly completed at that point, or probably nearing but a lot of people always sat on that, they'll be sitting really close to the building and around that corner, all the way up that street, right? Ruegemer: For the parade? Atkins: Yeah. Ruegemer: Yeah, the libra~ is I think it's August 12~ I think is that Thursday night and the 14m then is the grand, grand opening for the library so it will be close~ Within a month I think. Afldns: I also was wondering if Joe Scott has done anything about arganizing the teen band thing. Ruegemec. There's those rumors out on the streets and I think Corey's had some cxmvemafions with him. I can't, I don't know what those conversations are to expand on that tonight but I'll certainly get back to the _oammission on thaL Atldns: Yeah, maybe I'll call him. Hoffman: That would come after the commnnity parade, h~between the community para_de and the fireworks at the back end of the tent. It's always been the feeling that after the parade is done, all these people are downtown, just get up and leave and there's no activity downtown that they can stay. Franks: How much of the library, City Centex Park I.a'braty Commons, ff that's spproved, will be completed? Will the grading be done? Any of the consmxction? Hoffman: Oh sure, yeah. There will be the hard surface done. Franks: Would ~ be anything that we could have available at, in the recreation depaxtmeat's trade fair booths saying that says you know, check out our new and expanded City Center Park Library Commons. I'm interested in nmking sure that the city owns that park and if we can get the jump on. Park and Recreation Commission- April 22, 2003 Hoffman: You beL Franks: Little map of both parks. You know City Hall in the middle and the library showing City Center Park, the fields and City Center Li~ Commrms. Hoffman: That will be our focus for this year's trade fair. Franks: Sounds good. Hoffman: We'll announce the grand opening and have the broc~ for that. Franks: Great. Thank you lea'ry. SELF UPPQI TmlG l OO : fi ItmlG ON a BASS TSAI Ruegemer: Thank you again Chair Franlc~. This is a kind of can'y over from last month_ It just was intended as an FYI to make sure that I'm doing some work during the day, and this is certainly a fun league that we've started within the last couple three years of 3 on 3 basketball It's kind of maintaining popularity so it's, our biggest league is winter. We have anywhe~ from 14 to 16 teams and then fall and spring we normally have around 8 teams for that so it's additional revenues for us with minimal work hem so we continue to look for revenue ~ and low expenditures and high revenues so it's a pretty good thing for us. Franks: Which team are you playing on? Ruegemer. I'm not playing on any baskeIball teams. Franks: Great, thank you. We ~ ic It's been popular for a long time. AlrighL Franks: We have a report from Susan regarding the recreation center. Todd, are you going to handle that? Hoffman: Thank you Chair Fr~. In Susan's absence the biggest things happening at the Recreation Center are that operations, expenditme ~ with revenues had the smallest gap of any year in history. The Center is operating in what I would call a very skinny budget currently and one of the repercusfim of raising the fees thi~ spring is that people were accustomed to that skinny budget at the $2.00 fee, but once the fees were raised they had a higher expectation for knpmved equipment, higher ttmintetumce and so we are starting to hear the concerns that the weights haven't been replaced. We don't have enough weights so. The gap was only about $13,700, and so that's a si~ificant i ,mpmve~t over the initial years that the Recreation Center. It has to do with two thin~. Higher level of operations and reduced ~ costs, dramatically reduced s~ costs at the front desk The day will come when we have to invest in new equipment and refin'bish some equi~t and as we jumped up those fees we corning up on May 3'~. That' s the largest recreation program that the City of Ctumhassen offers is the children's dance. $7,000 in ticket sales for the recital to date. So it's a great program and Susan Marek has done a wonderful job. We lost our long term dance coordinator, Maryanne and Susan is helping a younger, new dance insmLetor carry out the program. We've had some staff changes. The art exhibits, if you haven't seen it, are absolutely wonderful. We currently have a 21 Park and Recreation Commission - April 22, 2003 husband and wife team artist and photographer. Recreation Center is in good hands and it continues to be the center of our department as far as programming and public contact. Franks: Todd, are you saying that we're $13,000 away from break even? HoHman: Yes. Franks: Is the City Council, are they aware of this? Hoffman: The Mayor is. Franks: Alright. Will you let Susan know if she were here we'd all be verbally patting her on the back but we'd all apprec~ if you'd pass that onto her. It's looking really good. I know that that's something that I never e~ to see. Any other comments or questions? AlrighL PARK & TRAIl. MAINTENANCE. Franks: Dale, thank you so much for your patience this evening. We'll move right on over then to park and trail maintenance. Gregory: Thank you. I'm going to back you up a little bit. We're going to go back into the winter, our skatin~g season. This past winter we set two records again with skating. One of them being Sanuary 12Was the latest that we got going for slxrting our skating rinks and also it was also the longest we've ever went and that is March 12m. So we starl~ late but we ended up with a 60 day season of skating which ~ me. I didn't think we were really going to make it that long. I also added in a skating rink opening and closing dates. I kept track since 1982, for anybody who hasn't seen it before and that will give you some idea of our openinE and closing dates. I've also included a skating rink cost report. I ~ keeping fir. se far about the last 5-6 years and gives you some idea exactly what it costs us to maintain the rinlc~. Now this year was one of the years that we did not maintain all the family rinks. It was just the 4 areas where we have warming houses. In the report towards the bottom where it gives you the total rink cost, there's a mistake there. It says 2000-2001. It's actually the year 2002-~. Anybody have any questions on those areas? Franks: How does the cost of, that's over the 60 days of $962 per open day. Gregory: That's what the comp~ said on an average per what it costs to ~int~an it per a day. Franks: If you could just think back to like a year where we had fairly good, all the neighborhood rinks open as well. Gregory: I can even do you one better. Gregory: The year 1999 and 2000 we mn the exact same amount of days, 60 days. Franks: Greah And we had the neighborhood. Gregory: And the neighborhood parks opera Our total cost that year was $77,214, and operations per day cost was $1,286. So it mn about $20,000 more when we had all 7 finks open. Park and Recreation Commission- April 22, 2003 Franks: Now tell me you adjusted this for inflation too? Gregory: Nope. Actually the only, we even gave you the update to dote costs on fuel. The one I have here for fuel in the year 2000, we paid 48 cents for diesel fuel and we're paying $1.13 last year. Hoffman: Actually it is adjusted because all salaries are adjusted. All costs are. Gregory: Yeah, tlwa~ are all cun~nt salaries. All current everything. But I was, I found that tree so I brought it along. I thought you might want to, in case you wanted some compa_fisom. Franks: I guess what I'm saying is if we were open 60 days with all of the neighlx~ood rin~ this year, it would have been substantially higher than what, in today's dollms. Gregory: Correct Because, and a lot of it shows up in the salaries because we're not running 12 of the other parks. A lot of that, that's where you're going to notice the diffenmce because we are, we've got 7 more areas that we have to run to. And it's going to take us a lot longer to get the rinks up and running. When we only have 4 of them, we can do it pretty quick. Hoffman: Four locations. Gregory: Locations, correct. So it just adds a lot more time and then fuel costs and everything all add up more. Okay. Then getting into spring and that, the guys went out, all the park staff, we cleaned all the wood ducks houses. We've got approxim,t~ly 32 to 34 duck houses out~ This year was really good. We ended up with a 63 pewent were used compared to 53 percent last year. So we did have a real good year. We were also running short of wood duck houses so we talked to the senior men's. They came out and they built 20 more houses for us this past winter, and 10 of those went up this spring already. 2 of them were down by Cen~ Hills. They requested a couple down by them. We put 8 nx~re up down at Lake Susan Hills, down by the trail. There's a swampy area down there. That's one of our best areas for wood duck houses use. So we did increase that area and put 8 more in there for the next year, so we'll be looking at about oh well into the 40 houses next year. So it will be interesting to see what our remm will be ~ Other than that we've been just pretty much working on spring work and that right now and the guys are pulling in the park signs. We re-stain every one of our park signs every year. They get pulled in and they'll do it early in the year. With the lack of snow this winter we did an extensive tree trimming through a lot of our parks. We hit every one of our trails. We were able to get that stuff all cleaned up so that's already looking in good shape now. All of our preventive maintenance is pretty much done. All of our lawnmowers are gone over so we're really ready for the spring to get started. Ckcrrenfly fight now softball is starting Thursday night so we've got fields. They've got those all worked up. They are ~y mar~ out all the soccer fields and they'll be painted by the beginning of next week I think we staxt so we're kind of on the getting everything done. I have contacted all my se, asonah. I've got about 12 out of 15 coming back this year, which is really good. And I have hired 2 nxge people to fill in the spots so we are full as far as summer help. And I put one interegt/ng note on there in that I have one seasonal that has worked for us for 3 years and he's gone into the actual field. He's gone to Hennepin Vo-Tech for grounds maintenance and ev~ else and he's dc/ng his internship with us this year. So he's looking at going off to being in this field so it's some of the seasonals are actually getting into what I'm teac~g them so. And that's pretty much all I've got for my report unless anybody has any questions. Franks: Are there any questions for Dale? Park and ~on Commission- April 22, 2003 Spizale: I've got one. Do we fertilive the parks? Fertili?e the ground. Gregory: Yes we do. We do actually, thi~ year we have cut back on our fertilizing quite a That was one of my big hits in fertilizing. We do use, we do not use any phosphorous in our fertilizer. We haven't done that for at least 8 years, so we're doing everything we Call. This year our major concerns on fertilizing is athletic fields and we'll be hitting those and trying to keep up on that because that's where we really take the big hit. We get soccer. We get football and baseball and everything running on the same ones and they really take a hit. So if we can keep them fertilized and keep the weeds and everything out of them, we're trying to stay ahead of the game. Hoffman: Do you recall the budget item Dale? It was in the, the reduction in fertilizer. Cn'egory: $9,000 this year. Franks: And do any of the large chemical con~es interestmt in adopt a field. This is the Bandimere Socc~ commons p~sented to you by Tru~ Gregory: They could adopt iL I don't know if they're going to do it for nothing fox us though. Spizale: Maybe we could name the new library park alter a fertilizer company. Gregory: Like I say, this year our major concern on fertilizing and that is going to be athletic fields. We will be hitting some of the outside, like Lake Ann will all be feitilized but it's going to be just with a farm grade of fertilizer. We're cutting way back on the fertiliTers. So we still will be doing the weed spraying and everything. That will continue. Bm like I say, that was one of the big cuts that they wanuxl this year was in our mainte~ence end of it and the fellow that we deal with is a professional mff and that is, he's kind of drawn up our program and that and he's done a real good job and he's helped us cut back where we need to and make sure we stay with what we have in our soccer fields and stuff like thaL Franks: Any other questions? Good job. Keep those fields green. MEMBER C,.QMMfrFff, E RgPQRTS. Franks: Just one. The AUAR, I can't even remeanbex what that stands for. What does that stand for, do you rememl~ Todd? Hoffman: No I do not. Area Wide Assessm~ but Fm not sure how you get that out of them. Franks: Anyway we're meeting mostly with the Planning Commission and some other imerested people to take a look at the ~ we looked at as a commission off 117. Hoffman: The Degler farm. Franks: Yeah, but the property right south of Deglex too. Park and Recreation Commission- April 22, 2003 Hoffman: Bernardi piece. Town and Country now. Franks: Bemardi. Town and Country/Bernardi piece and that whole area. It's about 200 acres. Hoffman: 600. Franks: 600 acres[ Figuring out exactly how thi~ is going to be guided and so there are ideas to really instead of guide portions of development as they come in across thig ~, to really take a comprehensive look at this entire piece and begin to guide the development in it's emtimty so. O'Shea: This is the Planning Commission? Franks: It's a special committ_~_-, but most of the Planning Commission members look lilm they sit on the committee to me. Hoffman: Staff, Rod, Planning Commission members. Franks: The mayor. Hoffman: Yep, the Mayor. Hoffman: Yeah, they've been meeting. Franks: They've been meeting as well so I have to hand it to Kate for taking this om It's just a real proactive approach and I think it's just great so, if anybody has any input about that ~ from our perspective, please give me a ~U or e-mail or wt~ve~ and let me know what you think. Hoffman: It' s the most irr~, ortant segment of this city left. Iu~t so there's no confusion. It' s just a big triangle and if you drive to Chaska you drive it all the time. You go down Lyman and down Audubon. Audubon doesn't go to the nouh, and then it's the triangle is the future 212, which cuts it into a triangle so this is Lyman and Audubon, going down to Chaska, and then 212. And that's the triangle. That's the 600 acres. It's a very large area. Lyman Boulevard to Pioneer is about a mile and then Audubon over to 101, which winds it's way through this area, is about 2 miles so it's a very large are~ And then Bluff O'eek is one of the major factors that winds it's way down through hem. Bluff Creek winds through in this confi~on and he_~d~ off down to the gorge. So Bluff Creek's a driving factor. This is the Town and Country ~, fight here, These are the Degler farms, stacked in here 1 and 2. The piece owned, this piece is owned by Sever Peterson, and then there's a couple Lsrge ~es left over on this side... Wh~ are the roads going to go? Where are the parks going to be? What is high density developn~t? What is low density development? We're meeting with the school district We feel very strongly that this is a fine location for a future school location in thi~ city. District 112 will have a referendm this fall. It' s important that we get these ideas up and on the table and so talk to your friends and neighbors. Talk to the other people in the community and Rod will keep you updated on the process. It's very key. This is one of those important endeavors. There will be no 600 acres left in the city to plan for. This is it. Stolar: Is there any easements or such, protection for Bluff Creek on that? Park and Recreation Commission- April 22, 2003 Hoffman: Yes. Stolar: So that's probably just drawn along like a ridge or whatever. Hoffman: Yes. The Bluff Creek study which dates back 6 or 7 years desigual~ that area and bluff requirements will be as a part of that for the Bluff ~ setbacks. There's a primary and a secondary setback. And then the idea is, those setbacks, you just can't take that ~ without some compensation. That's the desirable. That setback is desirable. Before that setback then you need to upzone for increased density in certain areas, if that's an acceptable solution for the commissions and the council. Stolar: And the ~ owners there, they've all decided they're going to sell it and develop it. Hoffman: Well, they all know it's inevitable buL Stohm. Why is it inevitable? Hoffman: Well. Swlar: I guess I'm just wondering, have they already said that or is that. Hoffman: No. They're just inmmsted in the process. They won't tell you what they're going to sell or if they're not going to sell or if they will sell. Stolan. But they want help, a guide if they sell what they could sell to7 Hoffman: Well the City is putting thig prtr~s onto them. They're cooperating with the process. Stolan. Okay. Franks: But Town and Country is, fight they were here before us already so they're. Stolar: They're for sure going. Hoffinan: The landowner said one day that Todd, I was asldng about that land and he said Todd, the ship will come in one day for my family on that land and if you're on that ship writing the checks, that's fine but that's the family piece of property and they'll be paid for it and they'll move on. Similar, most of the other property owners, they've moved on and started up again in more rural areas. It's really a difficult thing for these people to go through because yeah, the~ are benefits. The per acre price is wonderful but they lose something in that transition so it's a difficult process for all the people being involved in it, so as staff we're very sensitive to ~ issues. Franks: Are there any other committees7 Kelly: Yeah, we had a meeting about the Dave Huffxnan 51(. We had that last week and the run, it's going to be Septe~ 13m. Same route as before. Staxting at Iaflm Ann: ending at the America Inn. Last year, despite the rain, it rained until 8:00 mm. that morning, we still had more runners than the previous year ram The inaugural kids nm had 40 rn-.ners despite the rain. We're hoping for this year's marketing, we want to get the word out on the run to more people and Park and Recreation Commission- April 22, 2003 we're looking for ways to do tha~ Both on the normal ~X and on the kids portion as well so if anyone has any ideas as to how to get the word out, some good avenues to promote the run, please call me or e-mail me. Particularly I'm sensitive towards the kids run. I really want to get, I really want to build that n~ from 40 to maybe 60 or 80 hopefully so. But everything else is pretty much status quo right now. We're just in the initial stages of it. I don't know if I mi~xl anything with that update. Ruegemer. No, that's fine Commissioner Kelly. Ken Crarvin, Committee member and myseff had a conference call with KFAN radio on Monday and they are on board again this year with air, radio advertising. Also with on air personalities like Mike Morris is going to come in again and so they're a good partner for us, as far as kind of getting kind of our mouthpiece to a wide variety of an audience as well too so...to come on board again. Dan Seamans is a general manager. He's a resident of Chanhassen so hopefully we're near and dear to his heart being in town here. We did certainly try to talk his pocket book open a little bit on Monday as well so hopefully that could come to here too so everything, like Tom said earlier, is starting again and I think we're going to try to mention it or kind of promote it as a flirt rrm/walk to try to get that walking element in there as well. And hopefully that will invite more people to attend versus just I think a natural running event so. Franks: So are we going to be rmming by the new City Cen~ Park Library Commons on farmers market day7 Ruegemer: We will be running past the new area, yes. That's con-ecL Franks: Right on farmem market day. Kelly: Is that farmers market day? Hoffman: There is a farmers market committee being, it' s implamented so if you're interested in teaming up with the Chamber of Commerce, those folks, they would be so excited if you would send somebody down their way. Kelly: Also might want to add, because the kids run this year I may not be able to nm so them is the mandatory participation of at least one commission member to nm the 5K so I'm looking to see who's going to step up this year and nm. Freaks: I did it last year. Robinson: My son will definitely be there. He wanted to do it ~ year but something came up so he will definitely be there. Franks: My kids ran it East year. They loved it. They still talk about it. Kelly: And we had, they were handing out medals to the kids. Robinson: Awesome. Just awesome. Franks: Thanks Tom. Any other commission member committee reports? Seeing none we'll move on to commission member presentations. Park and Recreation Commission- April 22, 2003 CQ~$ION MEMBER P~ATIQN~: Franks: We'll save you from having to talk about yourself because Todd was nice enough to include your application and resume in the administrative packet. Robinson: Oh I have more to say. Franks: I'm sure that you do and you've got the next 3 years. If you thought this was a short stint you were mistaken. But we all want to formally welcome you to the commission and we really look forward to serving with you for the next few years anyway. Robinson: Thank you. I'm looking forward to being part of it. Franks: Great. We're an intimidating bunch but once you get to know us, I think it will be olay. But again welcome. Let's move on to the administralive packet. Heft'man: Other commission member? Franks: Oh, any other commission member presentations? O'Shea: I have one actually. Franks: Oh olay. O'Shea: I have an issue of safety on one of the trails. On the north tunnel going under Highway 5, has it been brought up as you're going down the trail and you have to take that hard left. Hoffman: Which one? Galpin? Lake Ann or. O'Shea: It's Bluff Creek, but you're on the north side of Highway 5 so ~en as you're going down and you're going left underneath Highway 5 there's that sharp left and then if you don't make that left, in front of you is Bluff Ckeek the ~ but before that there's these big rocks that you know are really want, even if it isn't slippery, but ttm~'s a mud build-up there too that Fm afraid some of the younger kids are just going to, somebody's not going to make that curve and they're going to end up in those rocks. So a guardrail or some. thinE, if someone could look at that. Hoffman: First time I've heard of it. Dale, has anybody ever mentioned it to you? Gregory: Never heard anything like that. Hoffman: We'll take a look at it and we'll give you back a retxxt. O'Shea: Great, thanks. Hoffman: Those underpasses are, we have a love-hate relationship with those underpasses. Lots of ice build-up. They're great access but our winters have not been the best. Gregory: A lot of ice and that. The one actually under Coulter Boulevard out by the Rec Center, we had as much as 2 feet of ice over that whole trail through the wimerlime. Hoffman: There's issues where we have to close them, but we'll check into that. Park and Recreation Commission- April 22, 2003 O'Shea; Thanks. Franks: Thanks Amy. Any other presentations? ADMINI~TRA~ PAqK'F.T. Franks: Glenn, any comments from you regarding the administrative packet? Stolar: One question on the part of the cutbacks that are being potentially faced by the REACH group. Does that i ,mpact the services that we just agreed to g~ from them? And then obviously the capital improvement budget, forgot our schedule agaim We go back through this when? That we look at the 5 year plan that we just did not too long ago. Hoffman: Coming up in June-~uly. Stola~. How time flies. Because how did the decision to in~ the park dedication amount of the library park the library commons come about? Hoffman: Administratively through the city manager's office and, the negotiation or the consuuction budget on the library is a fixed amount and as that was driven down through approvals by the City Council, the City Council reco~i=~s that our budget, the park continues to be increased as a part of park dedication. And I appreciate your comment about the funding source. I made my position known as well I believe the~ a separate funding source should have been identified but there was no others that came to the forefront so p~rk dedication was the funding source that we utilized for thi~ facility. Stolan. Well in, I guess I would request that the city manager come speak to us. Fd like to ask him about it. I'd like to ask him how he will explain to people, because obviously we're going to have to take a replacement of a swing set or playground set and we're going to have w take that off our budget. Hoffman: There will be changes in the capital budget Stolar: You know I undemtand that we are a recommending and advisory cmly, but I would appreciate maybe if we could ask him to ale. ar before us so we can bett~r ~ tl~ priority issues he's facing. But I also want to know is there an oppommity for us to reduce the budgets spent on the library commons, City Center Park La'brary Commons such that we don't increase and we can fix the amount of park dedication. Is that possible? Hoffman: The project's been awarded. The project's been awarded. All change orders, or all add alternates were accepted and the contracts have been signed so, the money's spent. Stolac. Okay. What is the number that you said that we're now, it's over $600,000. Hoffman; Yeah, 6/01 believe was the contract. Stolan. And they've reduced the library contribution below 70. Park and Recreation Commission - April 22, 2003 Hoffman: Approximately 70, yes. ask the city manager. He may explanation. I'm not in charge of that number so I'll get it for you but. I'll come on down and he may send an explanation, written Stola~. Or we bring it up, if the City Council accepted our recommendation of our participating quarterly with them, maybe that would be something I'd volunteer to go to that meeting where we talk with them. Franks: I think where you're at, similar to me is, you can only raise mi., fund so many times before there's absolutely nothing left and then people are going to stand in front of us like Stone Creek and say, when do we get our Phase II or whatever and we'll say you're not. And it's going to become our problem when it hasn't been our problem so at least if we have the information to give back that' s mea~ instead of you know sitting here throwing up our hands now knowing what to tell people, that would be really hel~ Not only for us but as the first point of contact as people work their displeasure on up. Hoffman: As part of this year's capital we'll take a look at that. We're nearing that point now where the Highway 101 trail, the south connector trails, the underpass connectors and this park project has taken our park funds from about a million 9 on down to about $400,(X}0. Stola~. And I would hope during that discussion also, and I'll be bold enough to bring it up, that we talk about, do we put forward our recommendation for maintenance tim& And time's right as far as the evolution of this city and where our parks are. There aren't a lot of new parks. I mean this development we'll have some new parks but there aren't a lot of new parks to build so now we've got to figure out how to fund the maintenance. Thank you. Franks: It was my i ,repression at the joint meeting that the City Council was very interested in that maintenance aspect so I think it's something that they'd certainly be open to. I know since you've got some experience with the Eden Prairie and if you have those, that information. Stolac. Yeah I sent Todd some of it What I don't remember is when they did the referendum and all the things that were included in it. That occurred before I joined the committee there but we could talk, is Bob still there? Hoffman: You bet. Franks: And understanding of how they did their ~ ranking. Stolar:. That I sent, the prioritizafion. They had 6 different camgories. And they did mix, they did commingle some of the new with the maintenance but they had a maintenance referendum to fund and add to the improvements. Franks: Now you're wondering what you got yourseff into. Alright, anything else regarding the administrative packet? One other comment from me and Todd, is this, I noticed the comment from A1 Klingelhutz regarding the wu~ board and waterski to~t on ~ Susan and then I see mother letter here about the shoreline erosion. When is it typic~y that they'll come up and request for the permit? Jerry. Ruegemer: Typically it's been by now Rod. Franks: And are they thinking of coming back then this yea_l~ Park and Recreation Commission - April 22, 2003 Ruegemer. I have not had any contact with the INT so Fm assuming they're looking elsewhere. Franks: Okay. Hoffman: Loft Haak, our Water Resourc~ Coordinator has responded to Mr. Klingelhutz' concerns at the request of the City Council. When her repo~ is complete for the council, I'll make sure that's included in your admin packet. There are a number of issues going on at Lake Susan. Lake Susan has made tremendous advances in it's water quality in the past 6 or 7 years. The erosion issue is not simply a boat issue. It's a nann'al erosion issue. Na~sion caused by wind driven waves is just guesstimate 90 pm'cent of the erosion that occurs in the lake. It happens day and night. It's not due to boat tm~c the erosion that takes place. But preventing that by having good shoreline restoration and/or good shoreline conditions is really what we want to be working On. Franks: And that's ongoing. Hoffman: Ongoing. Franks: B' Loft is ever interested in coming down to give a brief inf~onal ~on about water resources in the city, and open hex~lf up for just some general questions about that, maybe sometime this summer when we're agenda light, I think it' d be great to have her come down. Hoffman: She's very good at that and she would a~feciate the oppommity. Franks: Alright~ Seeing that we've exhausted the admi~isUative packet is there a motion to adjourn? Spizale moved, Atkim seconded to adjourn the meeting~ All voted in favor and the motion carried. The Park and Recreation Commi~ion meeting was adjoumetL Submitted by Todd Hoffman Park and Recreation Director Prepared by Nann Opheim 31 CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMLqSION RFA~ULAR MEETING SUMMARY MINUTES APRIl. 15, 2003 Chnirmnn Saeehet eall~ the meeting to order nt 7:00 p.m. MI~MRER~ PRESENT: Uli Sacchet, Steve Lillehaug, Rich Slagle, Alison Blackowiak, Bruce Feik and Craig Claybaugh STAFF PRE~ENT: ~ Aanenson. Community Development Director; Matt Saam. Assistant City Engineer; Sharmeen Al-1aff, Senior Planner, and Angie Auseth. Planner PUBLIC PRE~ENT FQR ALL ITEMS: Debbie Lloyd Jerry & Janet Paulsen Kurt Papke 7302 Iareclo Drive 7305 Larodo Drive 1131 Homestead Iame PUBLI(~ HEARING: CON~mER A ltgQUF.~T FQR A HARD SURFACE COVERAGE VARIANCE ON PRQPERTY ZQNE~ PUD, PLANN~I) Iff-NIT DEVELOPIVl~:NT, LQC~T~;O AT 8632 Angie Auseth presented the staff report on thia item. Commir. sioners had discussions regarding timeline of tnmnit approvals and building inspecti~, the process by which the city approves building permits, and storm water runoff issues. The applicant presented their case omlining the timeline and sketches of the pmpen3,. Blackowiak moved, Feik seconded that the Planning Commtanion approve Variance g201B-6 with the following conditions: That the applicant will work with the City Forester and staff to determine best placement for additional trees and/or shrubs. m No conversions of thig space in the furore would be allowable except to revert back to green space. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanim~y with n vote of 6 to 0. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSmER A REQUF~T FOR A I.AKI~.~HORF~ ~IDE YARD, ~ ~ ~T ~F~ Rg~~l. ~l.E F~.~ ~~T~ AT ~1 ~K~ RH.~Y BO~EV~, ~M ~ ~ ~ Angle Auseth presented the staff report on this item. Commissioners had concerns regarding the legality of the non-conforming status of the lot, the footprint size and i ,mpervio~ coverage. Alison Blackowiak brought up the issue of lakescaping and Uli Sacchet questioned the setback from the lake. The applicant presented his reasons for the need of variances and the house design on the lot and answered concerns brought up by the commission and staff, len'y Paulsen Planning Commission Summary Minutes - April 15, 2003 and Debbie Lloyd spoke at the public heauing. Their concerns were related to saving the trees, the number of variances being askexi for, and reasonable use of the property. Mrs. Lloyd felt that what is currently on the lot should be considered reasonable use. The Planning Commission's most important issue was the amount of hard sm-face coverage, and not wanting to increase that amount, but recognized the fact that there was benefit from the applicant moving the house pad away from the lakeshore. Shgle moved, Chybaugh seconded that the Planning Commission table the Variance W2003-7 mid direct staff to work with the applicant to redesign the project to maintain the current percentage of lmrd mn-face coverage, All voted in favor and the motion carded mmnimously with a vote of 6 to 0. Commissioner Lillehaug asked staff to look at reducing the increase and the intensity of the 4.4 feet on the southwest side of the lot in a_dd_ifion to maintain the 34.9 percent of hard coverage. Commissioner Claybaugh's position was that by moving the house stmcmm back from the lakeshore high water mark is a positive. He was willing to entertain the side yard and other associated variances, but not willing to take those in conjunction with the intensity of the hard cover surface. Whether the applicant addresses the square footage on the house or looks at more organic materials for pads and patios, that's the applicant's call Commissioner Slagle asked staff to double check the roof overhang~ in relation to the setback. Commissioner Sacchet asked that when staff and the applicant work on the idea of the lakesh~ landscaping, they take into consideration the trees. PUBLIC I4~~~: CONSmER A RFX)UF~T FOR b'RIBD~QN OF 1.56 A(~.ES INTO 2 SINGL~ gAMn.Y LQTS wrrH ON AT 7~51 G~EAT PLA~ BQ~.~~, ~T ~ ~ ~~ ~DmQN. Public Presen~ Nnme Addri~ Charles Stinson Bart Blinstrup Nancy Manara Gladys Hanna David Krunk Tom Manarin Wyck Linder Steve & Nancy Rogers 4723 Eaa~ood Road, Minnetonka 18736 The Pines, F.,den Ptakie 7552 Great Plains Boulevard 400 Santa Fe Trail 7561 C_.ncat Plnins Boulevn_,-d 7552 Gre~t Plains Boulevard 7550 Gre~ Plains Boulevard 7520 C. aeat Plains Boulevard Sharmeen AI-Jnff presented the staff Fel)off on tMs item. Commissioner Feik asked for clarification on the abandcamaent of the road, that would be abandoned equally to the properties north and south, and for other ways to divide the property without variances. Commissioner Blackowiak asked staff to clarify the wording as it related to connection and assessment charges. Commissioners had a lengthy discussion over the dedication of fight-of-way for driveway access and vacation request Commissioner Saccbet was concerned with the preservation of trees on the site, canopy coverage, and grading. Ernie Pivec, the applicant was available to answer questions. In the public healing Charles Stinson, a developer Plar~ning Commission Summary Minutes - April 15, 2003 of an adjacent neighborhood, asked staff to consider burying utilities. He also suggested that the property could be subdivided another way which would preserve more trees. Tom Manarin talked about the cul-de-sac right-of-way, trees and drainage. Gladys Hanna was concerned about the placement of the cul-de-sac and preservation of the fire hydrant and mailboxes. Wyck lander was concerned about notification, and the fact that this was the first he had heard of this subdivision. He also agreed with comments made by previous neighbors. David Krunk talked about tree preservation. Debbie Lloyd asked about private slxee~. After the public hearing, the commission commented they were generally in favor of staff's recommc, cndation and made the following motion. Lillehaug moved, Biackowiak seconded that the Planning Commi~ion recommends approval of the preliminary plat for Subdivision ~N)3-3 for LaHaye Addition for 2 lots and a variance to allow two driveways on a single residential lot as shown on the plans dated Received March 14, 2003, subject to the following conditions: 1. Install sod in all of the pavement removal areas. If grading material will need to be i .mlx~ted or exported to construct the lots and street, the applicant and/or contractor must supply the City Engineer with a detailed haul mute for review and approval prior to site grading. The new cul-de-sac on Great Plains Boulevard shall be consmlcted to caunmt City design standard, a 45 foot radius, with B-618 curb and gutter. , A minimum 30 foot wide drainage and utility easement is required over the public sanitary sewer line on Lots 1 and 2. Remove any existing pavement within the cul-de-sac right-of-way so the existing driveways have a maximum width of 24 feet, as per City Code. , Any grading or utility work outside of the ~ limits or right-of-way will require a te~ easement. 1 A maximum slope of 3:1 is allowed without a retaining wall. Revise the grading plan to comply. 8. A private easement is required for the driveway of Lot 2 which crosses over Lot 1. 9. Revise the grading plan as follows: al Show the proposed neck radius for tbe cul-de-sac. Show the proposed grades for the private street and cul-de-sac upgrades. Add a benchmark and legend to the plan. The legend should define all of the di~t line types, easements, silt fences, etc. Move the building pad of Lot 2 out of the public easement for the sanitary sewer line. Show all existing and proposed easements on the plans. 10. Revise the utility plan as follows: a. Show the existing sanitary sewer linc in Great Plains BoulcvarcL Planning Commission Summary Minutes -April 15, 2003 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. b. Show the existing watermain in Great Plains Boulevard and Frontier Trail. Add a legend to the plan. Label the existing size and type of pipe for both the sanitary and watennains. Add a catch basin at the low point in the cul-de-sac with a storm sewer line that discharges just east of the proposed driveway for Lot 2. The water service for Lot 2 will have to be obtained from the existing main in Frontier Trail. The proposed private street upgrades should include a vehicle tmnm~und area, acceptable to the City's Fire Marshall and a copy of the private easement dedicated to the benefiting property owners. In order to save the two existing oak trees on each side of the private street, the existing street width may be maintained in this area. Lot 2 cannot use the same driveway access off of Great Plains Boulevard as the private street. The two driveway accesses shall be separated by a ~ of five feet. Detailed street construction plans and specificati~ in accadanee with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates, including approved pavement design, will be required for review and approval by the City Council at the time of final plat consideration. Since the street i .mprovements will become owned and maintained by the City, the applicant must enter into a development conm~ with the City and provide financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee consuucfion of the public i .mprovements. Permits from the regulatory agency will be required, including but not limited to Watershed District, MPC& etc. The site will be subject to one sanitary sewer and water connection charge for the new lot. The 2003 connection charges for both sanitary and water are $4,513. The property is also subject to sanitary sewer and water hook-up charges for the new lot. The 2003 tnmk utility hook-up charges are $1,440 per unit for sanitary sewer and $1,876 per unit for water. The 2003 SAC charge is $1,275 per unit. These charges are colleet~ prior to the building permit issuance. Building Official conditions: aJ bi Retaining walls over 4 feet high require a permit and must be designed by an eRgineer licensed in the State of 1Vlinne~otlg a, b. Because of the setbacks of the proposed new house, additional ~_fldress numbers will be required at the driveway entrance. Address numbers must comply with Chanhassen Fire Department Policy regarding premise identification pursuant to Policy No. 29-1992 (copy enclosed). Submit new proposed driveway dimensions to City ~n~neer ~ Chanh~sell l:rlre Marshal. This is to ensure that fire apparatus can safely negotiate the driveway to the new proposed single family dwelling. The bluff i .mpact zone should be shown on the grading plan. Planning Commission Summary h~tn~ - April 15, 2003 20. Based on the proposed developed area of 1.57 acres, the water quality fees associated with this project are estimated at $1,490 and the water quantity fees associa~d with this project are estimated at $3,686. The applicant will not be assessed for areas that are dedicated outlots. No credit will be given for temporary pond areas. At this time, the estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat recording is $5,176. 21. Approval of the subdivision is contingent upon the City Council approving the vacation of the right-of-way. 22. Environmental Resource Specialht conditions: a. Tree preservation fence shall be installed at the edge of the grading limits prior to b. Access to Lot 2 should be fi'om Great PLains Boulevard to increase tree preservation. 23. Full park and trail fees will be collected in lieu of land dedication for the newly created lot in the amount of $2,400. 24. Access to Lot 2 shall be prohibited off of Frontier Trail 25. Show the proposed house elevation for Lot I and address the runoff to the west and north. 26. Show final proposed driveway locations. 27. Work with staff and finalize the plat and include the neeessary information to include drainage and atil~ easement, eta 28. Include the tree grove on the northwest corner of Lot 1 and the 2 big trees on the south side of Lot 2 inside the tree protection fencing. 29. Lot number 2 will be custom graded and the ho~se pad moved northwest as All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0. Commissioners felt that the conditions they ~d_d_v~t, highlighted in bold, conveyed ~ concerns with the subdivision. APPROyAL OF MINI3TES: Alison Blackowiak noted the ~f~nme. s of the Planning Commission meeting dated April l, 2003 as submitted. Chairman Sacchet adjourned the Planning Commission meeting at 10:05 pan. Submitted by Kate Aan~ Community Development Director Prepared by ann Opheim CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REG~ MEETING VERBATIM MINUTES APRIL 15, 2003 Chairman Sacchet called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MEMBER~ PRESEt: Uli Sacchet, Steve Lillehaug, Rich Slagle, Alison Blackowiak, Bruce Feik and Craig Claybaugh ~TAFF PRF_~ENT: Kate Aanenson, ~ Development Director;, Matt Saam, Assistant City Engineer, Sharmeen Al-Jaff, Senior Planner, and Angie Auseth, Planner PI~LIC PRE~ENT FOR ALL ITEM~: Debbie Lloyd Jerry & ~anet Paulsen Kurt Papke 7302 Laredo Drive 7305 I_aredo Drive 1131 H~ Lane PUBLIC I~ARE~G: CONSIDER A RF~UF~T FOR A HARD ~RJRFA(~E I~QVERAC~E VARIANCE ON PRQPERTY zoNgn PUD, PLANNED UNIT DEV~OPMENT, LQC~TED AT Angle Auseth presented the staff report on this item. Sacchet: Thank you. Questions from staff. Commigsioners. Rich, want to start? Slagle: Iust a simple one. When the pool and the pool decking applications were submittrd and had the survey shown the basketball court, in your opinion, would it have been just a simple rejection of the proposed pool and pool deck or would you, would staff have, how would you have tried to work it out? Auseth: The applicant would have had to go through a variance process to get the pool because they would have been over already by a percentage. So the process would have been, would have Slagle: Okay. Sacchet: Bruce, any questions? Feik: Nothing for staff at this time? Sacchet: Alison7 Questions? Claybaugh: Iust so I'm clear. Them wasn't anything on the part of the applicant's coMuct pursuing this, this application through any of the conv. spondeace that wasn't consistent with just trying to move forward in a diligent manner and seek the proper infc~x~on? Do you feel like they went through the mechanics trying to obtain the ~ information from the city and thi~ is just an unfommate side effect? Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2003 Auseth: I believe so. Claybaugh: Okay. That's all the questions I had. Lillehaug: I have a few questions. I'd like to clarify the first time city staff received this sketch. Was it October 11~ as the applicant indicated? Was that the first time? Or was it presented with the initial inspection or permit application? To your knowledge. Auseth: That I'm not aware. Lillehaug: Maybe, typically when would it be given to the city for review? Al-Jaff: The portion that, we're talking about the pool portion. Lillehaug: Right. Alqaff: That was, typically it is submitted when a building permit is requested. Lillehaug: At the request. Al-Jaff: Correct. So basically you're applying for a building permiL That is accompanied with a survey that shows whatever they're requesting. Lillehaug: So do we know what, was the sketch of the swimming pool submitted at the time of the application for the permit? Does that make sense? AlJaff: The swimming pool, the ske.~h of the swimming pool. Lillehaug: Added to the survey that the city has on record. Was that given to the city before the swimming pool was dug? Al-la_fi: Yes. Yes it was. No, they went through the proper channels as far as submitting their application for a pool permit before they actually stamxi working on the pool. Lillehaug: Okay. So does the city send someone out there to verify this survey? Is it a requirement? Do they ever7 As far as to vezify is it accuram. And who's respousi~ty is it to verify that it indeed is accurate with what's reflected on that survey? Al-Jaff: Typically the building inspectors would take a copy of the survey with them when there is, you ask for a building permit and then inspection when you have footings dug. Lillehaug: So there are intermediam impections. Al-la_fi: Correct. Lillehaug: And it doesn't just ha~ at the very end of the pool Al-Jarl': That's correct. Lillehaug: So is it safe to say that we did have inspectors out there throughout the duration of the construction period for intermediate inspections7 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 2003 Al-Jarl': Yes but when they went out there to look at the pool, is my tmdetstanding when they discovered that there was actually a tennis court Oil the site. Lillehaug: Do you know when that was? I mean we've got a big timeframe here. Aldaff: I'm sorry, basketball court. Lillehaug: The basket~ court. I me. an we have a big timeframe here and I'd like to get it in chronological order because it is i .mportam. Sacchet: Do we know the chronology? Lillehaug: So what I specifically really am asking is when did the city staff realize that this basketball court did not meet, the basketball court and the pool, when did the city realize that this did not meet the standards? Aanenson: I'm not sure we know the exact timefran~. After they came in for the _permit, someone did physically, when it was an inspector, noted that there was additional i .mpervious surface on the site. Saam: There's a date listed in the staff ~ October 3'a when we went out there, somebody did, Jason and Dan I think went out there. Lillehaug: Okay, so pool consmu~on began July 16~ so, so city staff, I mean we, isn't ttu~re a set of. Saam: I guess, I know what you're getting at but keep in mind the building inspectors aren't there to survey the whole site and check, they're there to do the pool get out of there and get to another inspection so things can get missed there. However when we went out in October, that's when we caught it. Some other people went out for other things and so. Lillehaug: And that leads into my next question here. And this is posed to anyone here. Could you discus the requirements by the city as far as using the city recorded survey? Who's responsibility is it to ensure that all the necessary items are on the~? And when does the city check this? If they do check in. Saarm We require the survey to be done by an RLS, Licensed Surveyor and they have to sign it. An original copy. By that they're stating that everything shown on there is accurate. So I would say we don't go out there and check every survey the second we get it to make, you know looking for every little thing. Lillehaug: That would be pretty extensive to do so. Saam: Yeah. However in this case, as it points out, it probably would have been good to go out there and look at it before we approved the pool permit, but I guess our, what we fall back on is the surveyor, his license. He signed it saying this is what's out there. Lillehaug: So this is a 10 year old survey, plus ar minus. I mean who' s responsible. Planning Commission Meeting -April 15, 2003 Aanenson: Correct. Let me just clarify what he's saying. The original survey is done. Okay, people come in over time. Add that with their own dimension drawing. As Matt indicated, when the inspector goes out they check those drawings for the footings. ~ them. They're looking at that specific measurement. They're not checking whatever else is out there that may be, sometimes they will catch something or not. So if someone's doing an addition, do we allow them to draw it on there too per plan that we measmed? Yes. If they're using the original RLS, Registered Land Survey. Saam: And that's to save the applicant money. I mean obviously we don't want to make them go out and get a $1,000 survey for a 10 by 20 room addition so. Lillehaug: So who's responsibility would it be to ensure that the bosketball court is reflected on that survey? Aanenson: The applicant's. Lillehaug: Okay. Claybaugh: Follow-up question. Sacchet: Are you done St~ve? Lillehaug: I have one more question here. Sacchet: Okay, go ahead. Lillehaug: Churent and past requirements for a basketball court in the back yard, is there a cunent requirement that requires a permit? And was there in the past? I don't think there was one taken for this. Aanenson: No. Lillehaug: Isn't it considered the same as a driveway? Aanenson: If you were to pour a patio, you don't necessarily get a permit for a pou~! patio because it's not considered a suuctum when it's not above a ~ elevation. So the only requirement would be the i ,mpervious. Lillehaug: So you don't distinguish between a hasketball court and an asphalt driveway? Aanenson: Or a concrete patio, no. Lillehaug: So you don't need a permit to put your driveway in, or to widen your driveway? Aanenson: No. Saam: If you're coming off the street you do, but if you're within your ~, not in our easements, no you don't. Like Kate said, the only thing we'd be concea~ with is the hard surface coverage percentage. Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2003 Aanenson: If you wanted to do it next to your garage and you're staying within: not on the city easement, you don't have to get a permit for that. Lillehaug: Okay, that's all I have. Thanks. Sa/chex: Craig. Claybaugh: Is it fair to say that the city tries to make the process as citizen friendly as possible? I think that this falls under the no good deed goes unpunished category. Aanenson: Correct. Claybaugh: Okay. The fail safe or the drop dead measure that's supposed to catch this is that certifi~ survey. Aanenson: Correct Claybaugh: That's where you have the accountable professional person that signg off that the survey is accurate. That triggers another series of reviews from city staff. By circumventing that process in the attempt to be citizen friendly and accornm~Am the applicant, that's where it slips through the cracks, is that fair? Aanenson: I don't want to selectively say this one but we do that on all additions. I mean if it's a minor addition, right. Not just thi~ applicant but correct Claybaugh: But for this particular instance that'd be a fair analysis in your mind? Aanenson: This would be similar to other processes, correct Claybaugh: Right, but in terms of how you got to this point or at this junctme. Aanenson: Right. Claybaugh: That's all the questions I have. Sacchet: A few more questions. Just to be clear. Initially mistahmly was given a 30 percent figure as impervious limit, correct? Sacchet: And however it's currently at 37 percent. It's over the 30 as well. Auseth: Right. Sacchex: And was the basketball court built before or a/~ the pool? Do we know that? Well I can ask the applicant if you don't know. Auseth: Yes, that'd be good. Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 2003 Sacchet: And in the findings, you make a conunent that the conditions upon which this variance is based are not applicable to all properties in the PUD-R zoning district. Why are they not applicable to other properties in the PUD zoning district? Aanenson: Why is this one 25 percent? Sacchet: Well it says the conditions upon which this variance is based are not applicable to all properties in the PUD-R zoning district- I fail to see why this would not be applicable. I mean this would be applicable to other ~es in that district, wouldn't it? R's condition, or I mean finding B in the staff report. I was just curious whether I'm missing something or whether this is stated correctly. Aanenson: Correct. It is applicable. Sacchet: It is applicable, right? Aanenson: Correct. Sacchet: Okay. The not is wrong, okay. Aanenson: Correct. Sacchet: Thank you. And last question, in the writing that was given out, I don't know whether it's from staff or from the applicant. It's from the applicant. The applicant makes a case that the construction of this project has clearly resulted in i .reproved storm water runoff drainage in this neighborhood. Staff does not agree with that position on the basis of the finding that says that this will be detrimental to public weffare and injurious to land or i .mpmvements of the neighborhood based on the runoff. Auseth: It in~ the storm water runoff. Sacchet: So there's disagreem~t betw~ the applicant and staff. Auseth: Correct. Sacchet: Okay, that's all my questions. Thank yon. If the applicant or ~tative want to make, come forward. Make a presentation. State your name and address please for the record. Kent Kurth: My name is Kent Kurth, 8632 Flamingo Drive. Lynn Kurth: And Fm Lynn Kurth, same oddress. Kent Kurth: And Fd like to start by saying a lot of the questions that I've heard so far really do kind of have to do with establishing a time line when we got inf~on, when-we submitted information, etc so that's kind of where Fd like to almost start so we're all at least on the same page. And I'd like to start by saying, we've lived in that particular development now for ~ 15 years. Well l0 in this house but 15 in that development. We moved 5 years ago 2 blocks away because we liked the neighborhood. We actually had the oppammity to hand pick our neighbors so we had 5-6 different families that made the move together so we know the neighborhood and we're very comfortable and we've enjoyed living them. One of the thin~ that really were i ,rnl~rtant to us in picking that particular lot was the fact that it's a real fiat lot because Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 2003 we had some point number everything in personal family goals that we really wanted to accomplish, and I outlined that in 1. We just wanted to establish a home front where we could have recreation and our property. Know where our kids are. Make it an environment for other neighborhood kids to be in as well. And I'm partial to basketball hence a basketball court As far as getting approval for that, again it was new construction so one of the things I obviously knew is I had to get approval for that before I built the house and I wanted to do it obviously before we had sod and sprinkler or anything lilm that so I did contact the City. Was told at the time that there wasn't any type of permit needed for that type of construction. I actually went around to the city parks in the area and I liked the fixUzres that they had, and I fmmd out that Todd Hoffman was actually in charge of parks and rec at that time and he was nice enough to give me the vendor that you guys used and a phone number, and that's how I got my fixtures for it so I definitely went through the city in that respect trying to do the right things. Craig, I think that's the point that you were getting at. Fast forward ahead to 1993, or excuse me, when we purchased the home. Yeah, it was done with the new cons~on. Sacchet: You built it in the beginning. Kent Kurth: In 1993. Yeah, I mean it's heavy equipment obviously to lay a slab that big. Fast forward ahead to June of 2(X)2, when the pool permit was issued and actually the fence permit was issued at the same time. I think somebody asked the question as to when, I think maybe you made a statement when the fence permit was issued it was noted that there was a basketball court. I don't know of any evidence to that effect. I've never heard that, and I guess if in fact ~ was a basketball court I would have assumed that maybe a stop or a flag would have gone up at that point in time, so that's complete news to me. Maybe I misheard what was said here. We then obviously did our, one step back. In the pool and the fence application, I think that goes to Craig's point. They do a good job of making it as user friendly to the consumer as possible, and I appreciate that. I went in 2 weeks ago obviously and I said hey, I've got a home. I want to build a pool. What do I have to do? And again, they're very courteous. They tell you exactly what you have to do. They supply you with the survey of your ~, and they say you have to sketch in dimensions of your pool. Put where your fence is going to be, and the dimensions of your pool. Very courteous. I appreciate as a homeowner. That's what a customer wants to hear. No mention of hard pack or I guess maybe a pleth~ of other ordinances that evidently are out there that could be loop hole or...point so it's what I wanted to hear. That's what we did. Fast forward to October 4~. That's when we got the first nofificafion~ Actually it was in October 3,0 dated. I received it obviously the 4~', stating froln Jason that we had exceed~ this hard cover nde or ordinance, whatever you want to call it. What they required from me was a sketch sketching in the basketball court in that survey they had originally submitted for the pool, which I did. Interestingly enough, Jason resp/mded back to me with a phone call indicating that that sketch wasn't accurate enough, and that it was going to require a quote, a real survey, and obviously phone conversations I determined what was a real survey and it had to be a true survey. So I went through the yellow pages. Investigated what a true Sulwey costs and it's in the neighborhood of $1,500 to $2,000. Wasn't excited about that. Contacted the City again and said what's the rational? Why do I need an exact survey? Is this punitive? Where's this cominE from and I was told that we just had to get the exact true meas~ts, so in an effort to reduce my costs again I asked them to supply me with the company that did the original survey. It turns out it was Brandt Engineering. Contacted them thinking all they'd have to do was do a survey of my basketball court and pool are~ They said no, it has to be done from scratch to the tune of $1,500 to $2,1300. So at that point basically our communi~on with the city ceased. I said hey, I'm not happy with it and it sat. Until late February, again I've got a sprinkler system and sod and things obviously ~'s some work in the park that has to be done to complete it so I called the city and I said where is my case at? What's the status of my case and I learned that of course Jason's gone Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2003 from your department and talked to Bob and Bob indicated that we do not need a real survey now. That a sketch will do. I resubmitted a sketch- Accurate as I could be, and obviously they looked at it. They told me basically you're going to have to go through a variance process. I was given the variance paperwork to do it. I filled it out fight there at the time, and that's led us to be basically where we're at right now in this particular meeting. So that's kind of the sequence of events. If you guys have any question on the time line. Feilc I have a quick one. Sacchet: Go ahead Bruce. Feik: Thank you. Permits were issued in lune and full construction began in July. October 4~ is the date that you received notice that you were in violation of hard cover. How much of the pool construction had been completed at that point? Kind of where you were in the process when that notice came out. Kent Kurth: Done deal. Pool's done. Concrete's done. Feik: Everything's done? Kent Kurth: Everything's done. Feilc Winterized. Put to bed. Kent Kurth: Oh no. Oh no. We had, I mean first year. We took her into end of October, early November. Heck... Feilc Aldght, thank you. Kent Kurth: Any other questions? Sacchet: Questions from the applicant? No? I have one question Mr. Kurth. Part of the misundersumding was that staff quoted you 30 percent ' ~rmpervious originally? KentKurth: No. That had nothing to do with it. AgainE, the 30 percent, and I made a note in my stuff when you mentioned that before. 30 pewent came up on Mm~h... Sacchet: ...so that was recent. Kent Kurth: Right. And again that was verbal and I think Bob acknowledged that it was a miscommunication but to me it didn't mean anything to me, 25-30 percent. I knew I was over. Sacchet: So when you actually went through the pool permit, building pool, there was never even a discussion of impervious surfae~ Kent Kurth: None whatsoever. Sacchet: And the basketball court was build with the house originally. Kent Kurth: Correa. Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2003 Sacchet: Okay. Now one last question. We have opposite points of opinion between staff and then your statement. You're stating that this set-up is clearly i .reproving the storm water runoff. Could you explain a little bit why, where you're coming from making that statement please. Kent Kurth: Sum, sum. I'll actually, okay. The colors don't show up that well but you've got the basic sketch and again our lots are basically relatively flac In fact I'm probably one of the flatte~st, that's why I wanted it for the baskettmll court, but yet they're all crowned which means the water's designed to drain right down the property line~, down into the storm pond, which is logical. We haven't had any problem with the basketball court for the last 10 years as far as that's concerned. When we added the pool, obviously I didn't want any water building up behind the pool, or you deal with the frost heave and everything else on the concrete. So on the points here you've got a surface basin drain. You've got another surface b~sin drain ~ that eatc~ the water as it comes down the side hills. Okay? On the yellow dots here, tho~ are where my drains come down from the roof. The gutters. Tho~e are all done underground. Tied into the drain tile, which evacuates down into the storm pond. And in fact Dan Remer, who's a part of the staff, was actually contacted prior to us digging to determine exactly where he wanted that drain tile to drain. Obviously I've only got permission to leave the drain file at the end of my property. And I said I've got the big equipment out he~. It's at my cost. I'm more than happy to put it wherever you guys want it because at the bottom end of my property, way down here, it opens into a parle And the equipment for the lawnm~wers and stuff to mow and maintain that park have to have, actually travel along that corridor. So a lot of the neighbors have had to go in and retroactively and dig it under ground, put rock in or whatever so that equipment can get over. Knowing that that was going to be a problem I ~ him. Dan can~ out to the property with the park personnel. I don't know the gentleman's name, and actually ~ned specifically exactly where they wanted that to go. And it was actually ~y ~ the park property, probably 50 feel 40 feet. Again, that's fine with me. I've got the equipment coming in. We'll do it so I think with that in mind, because we're evaguat~ all the wat~ from the roof, we're evacuating the water fi'om the concrete associated with the pool, it is a better setup than it was before. Sacchet: Okay. Good answer, thank you. Thank you, do you have anything else from your end? Kent Kurth: Yeah I did. I actually wanted to address those points that were in the proposal in terms of, I wanted to address those points. The recommendations. I guess they call it the findings. Undue hardship. Again, can we live in that house? Absolutely. Do we need a basketball court or a pool? There's no question. I guess hardship has to do with the fact that it's more emotional and financial I guess to try to tear that particular ba~d~tball court out, and I guess we'll come back to thac And the finding B was satisfi~ You were satisfied with finding C. The hardship, whether or not it was created or not and again I think that's really the root of this because if I would have known that there was a hard pack variance in, we could have msae a conscience decision either to tear up the blackIop at that time, not do the pool do concrete different, something. In my mind knowing what the limit was, it would e 'hminated having to do the pool. But did we know anything at that point in time? No we didn't. Were we notified any time that the fence or the pool permit application of any type of hard cover~ No we were not. The last one obviously we addres~ was the suffac~ water runoff but that's just kind of the documentation to support that. And the lastly, again my recommendations were to basically accept the variance, or approve it I should say, and again I don't know why as a homeowner that I'm penalized when again I contacted the city. Did everything in good faith and yet I'm faced with a dilemma. Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 2003 Sacchet: Alright. Thank you very much. This is a public ~a~g so I open the hearing. If anybody wants to comment to this case, please come forward. State your name and odaress for the record. Is there anybody who would like to co~t about this variance application? Seeing nobody, I close the public hearing. It's discussion of commissioners. Do you want to start Rich? Slagle: I have one quick question Mr. Chair, to the applicant agai~ You just brought up a point, and I guess I'm just interested in your thought. What would you have done had the court been noted and you were then faced with thc decision on how to lxoceed. Kent Kurth: It was a family vote. There were 3 pools, I no pool and I was looking for any excuse not to do the pool and I think that would have been significant enough that we'd be using the community pool. That's a real honest. Clayhaugh: So you're trying to recover damages? Kent Kurth: No, but I mean in reality that's the answer. I don't think we would have gone forward with it period. Sacchet: Thank you. Well cormnents from comn~ssioners. Do you just want to make your comment since you're at it. Slagle: Sure. I think having been out on the sim, and having discussion with Mr. Kmth, I certainly think that he has followed just about everything he should have in the process obviously with the exception of dia~ the basketball court on his city supplied survey. You ]mow one can question whether or not he was aware of the need to. I tend to believe the applicant that he probably wasn't because, and logic would say there'd be no reason to omit it because someone's going to be out there at some point to see it, and it is not a small thing. It's quite large, so I would tend to say that I would grant the variance in this situation~ Sacchet: Thanks Rich. Bruce. Feilc I'm not sure as a homeowner going through this tkne~e of events that a different scenario would have been reached. Given the roles that we have implied or inmosed... Cemfinly we had city staff out there a number of times probably before October the ~'~. So I have a hard time understanding how we could not have, or how you would not have gotten to thig point based upon the history. I think there's a, just for clarification purposes, I think there's a difference in definition on, what is i .reproved stormwater nmoff. I think your view of i .reproved stormwater runoff is how quickly you can evacuate the water from the lot. The city's view is how little water has to leave the lot. So I think there's a little definition difference there and so I'm sure the city staff would have a difference of opinion based upon some goals. But again I don't ]mow how we wouldn't end up here given the sequence of events. I would approve the varianc~ Sacchet: Thanks Bruce. Alison. Blackowiak: Yep and I agree with my fellow commissioners. Going through the timeline, it makes sense that things were done as they should have been done and I feel like there's some surprise here in terms of the has~ court on both sides. That the applicant didn't ]mow that it was required to be shown, and the city didn't pick up on it earlier in the process. One thing that I would suggestion, just in terms of the city is maybe at the time that the Certificate of Survey is given back to the homeowner, ask the question. Have there been any significant changes nm_de to this survey since it was drawn because I think the survey was drawn again in good faith and at the 10 Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2003 time it was accurate, but I think that's the kind of a question that might be able to head off any potential problem like this in the funn~ because I'm sure that ~ are other courts and sheds and things like that that would affect a hard surface coverage number that people just wouldn't know about. I mean unless you're on a Planning Commission and can read all kinds of fun city codes, it's not something that you really want to be too well versed in I don't ~ I feel that the applicant did a nice job in responding to city findings, and I would recomm~d approval of the variance with the conditions that the city staff had regarding the two trees. I think they were two overstory deciduous trees, and I don't know where they're going to go but I think that would be a good kind of a compromise to get a little some~ else out of this to kind of offset the basketball court, and also I think that the idea that he had the city staff out there to deal with the drain tile issue and there were a lot of oppommities for somebody to question the baskethall court, if that was a real issue so I think the applicant did a good job and didn't do anything wrong by going forward. Sacchet: Thanks Alison. Steve. Lillehaug: I guess the moral of the story is, is everyone needs to read all the city codes. You know that's not going to ha~ so I would like to reiterate what Alison said, and I think that one key step is maybe for staff just to reinforce and question the ~pplieants when they get their survey to ensure, to put it on them to ensure that their survey is coxmet, so it doesn't fall on city staff. And I want to clarify finding E, and this would be the runoff. There's one word that's misting on this finding and it's runoff rate. The runoff rate is increased, and that's what happens here. To understand the importance of this 25 pewem maximum i ,mpervious area, you look at it, when areas are paved over reducing the amount of impervious area, the runoff rate increases. This means that the time of concentration is reduced and the water gets to the pond quick~. If everyone paved their back yards and exceeded that 25 peaxzent, our storm water ponds are going to be undersized. This would, we would have water quality, water quantity problems. And all of these are regulated by the DNR, by the MPCA, by the Army Corps. So the city tm to maimin these standards so the one key thing is it's runoff rate. It' s not the nmoff. So this is an i ,mportant standard set by our community to, for the governed regulations so I just want to clarify that. And likewise I agree with fellow commissioners. Due to the timeline I agree with the hardship. Sacchet: Thanks Steve. Craig. Claybaugh~ Fd like to reiterate what Commissioner Lillehaug said and that it is an i .mpormnt issue for the reasons that he just stated very well. I pulled an example from my files. This one happens to be from St. Louis Park. It's a survey of recold that I had gone in to pull for another project and they stamp on there is for information only. May not be accmalm Not for use with permit application. They've been burned, whether in similar situations like this. This is an example where city staff is trying to acco~ a citizen request and once they deviate from standard process, it opens up the whole process to ~ miscommimicafions, l~sunderstandings. I feel that the applicant can't know what they don't know, and I don't feel that it's fair to hold them responsible for something that they don't have am?le opportunity to understand. I think, let's see here. I think that the requirement of the city in the futme makes the determination that they are willing to rebut the standards with requests to requiting surveys or any other similar process where you deviate from the standards, that they need to go to great lengths to make sure the applicant underslands their new responsibilities. So if they forego requiring a ~ed survey, you should be beating the responsibility for that, that you need to be amply notified of what your new responsibilities are if you want to take advantage of that. So whether it's surveys or any other element that the city relaxes on, I think they need to look at that in a little greater detail. I think additionally that certainly under these circum~ would be a good application 11 Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2003 for as-built surveys. So af~ all the w~k is done thag whether you hire a surveyor or you go out and do it yourself, that you go out and detail and as-built survey. Marking it up and basically signing it and dating it, thereby cexfif34ng it so it's an updated record. I do support it. I recommend the approval. I recommend the condition. I would add the condition that if it is passed that in the future that the space in question be only for the basketball court That ff a subsequent owner purchases it, that it wasn't, doesn't evolve into something else, that it could only revert back to green space so that's the extent of my comments. Sacchet: Thanks Craig. I don't have too much to add. Based on hearing the chronology of the events I believe that it is a reasonable request and the hardship would actually be to have to tear it out. If you turn it that way. I do believe the applicant acted in good faith, and therefore I support the passing of that variance with the condition as stated so. Kent Kurth: ...conditions? Feilc Before we vote can I say? Sacchet: Yeah. Hang on. Feilc Alison mentioned something about the trees. Blackowiak: That's a condition. Feilc Right, and I definitely saw a large eyebrow raised over hem that the applicant would like to I think comment briefly I'm thinking regarding that issue. Sacchet: Okay, go ahead. Thanks Bruce. Kent Kurth: And I'm more than happy to put in trees. Again I think the issue you raised is where do you put them in. If you look at my property surrounded by my neighbors, the blue dots represent trees in my neighbor's yard. And I've got 25 trees in the back yards on the le~ and the right of me. 12 of which are within 10 feet of my ~ line. 11 of which are within 5 feet of my property line. And I' m more than happy to put trees in but if I'm encapsulated by trees, what would you like me to do? Compete with the neighbor or put one in front of the paxk, which disrupts my view of the lovely park. I didn't realize again that there was any code. I think the part of that recornmend,tion had to deal with me to get up to a 25 percent canopy cover. Is that something that's in existence? Sacchet: Can we maybe ask staff to clarify, I guess it was the city forester elemm~ Aanenson: He's correct... Sacchet: So what are we toting to accomp~ with the additional 2 trees? If you could give us a little bit of an idea. Aanenson: Mitigate the i ,mpact of the additional runoff and that requJrexneat. Rate of runoff. That's why we're looking at the south end of the lot, just as he's indicated, and that's where it sounds like his concern is the view that he's losing. Kent Kurth: And if I may add, we'd be more than happy to put in shrubbery, low ground coverage to help stop that surface water flow. But whatever you think is best but I mean thexe's 12 Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2003 still landscaping that we intend to do that hasn't been done yet because we put the brakes on in October but I think we'll probably address that so we'd be more than happy to work with Dan or any other staff out to see that the city's satisfied on any type of shrubb~ and stuff like that to help reduce any water in that runoff. Sacchet: I think we understand your position on that, thank you for n_d_ding that. Any sd_d_itional comments from commissioners at this point? I'm looking to get a motion then. Anybody want to do a motion please. Blackowiak: I'll make a motion that the Planning Commission approve Variance g2003-6 with the following condition. That the applicant will work with the City Forester and staff to determine best placement for additional trees and/or shrubs. Sacchet: Okay. Is there a second? Feilc Second. Claybaugh: Friendly amendment? Sacchet: Amendments, yes. Claybaugh: I'd just like to add the verbiage that no conversions of thi.~ space in the future would be allowable except to revert back to green space. Sacchet: Is that acceptable? Blackowialc Acc~ted. Blackowink moved, Feik seconded that the Planning Commi~ion approve Variance with the following conditions: That the applicant will work with the City Forester and staff m determine best placement for additional trees and/or shrubs. . No conversions of this space in the future would be allowable except to revert back to green space. All voted in favor and the motion carried ummtmously with a vote of 6 to 0. Angie Auseth presented the staff Fepo~ on this item. Sacchet: Thank you. Questions fxom staff. You want to start Steve? 13 Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2003 Lillehaug: I can star~ I'm looking at the variances here and I don't see why we are approving variances or needing to approve variances for existing lot sizes. I don't think we need really to include variances for substandard conditions that really wouldn't be reflected in anything they did on their lot. Would staff agree with that, or is there a reason that we're doing this7 Auseth: After talking to the city attorney, he suggested that we do that. With those variances to make the lot legal. Lillehaug: To make it legal? A1-Jaff: When you demolish a structure you lose your non-conformity status. So we're just going through the process of. Lillehaug: Okay. Okay, I might not agree with that but~ Speaking of non-conformances. It's not the intent of us to reduce all the non-conformances on this lot. So would you agree that the intent of the ordinances when we're speaking of non-conformances specifi~y on the west side, is not to, right now it's limited to the garage being non-conforming to 4 ½ feet. Now would you agree that increasing the distance, I iman the whole leagth of the house, isn't that the opposite of what the intent of increasing their non-conformance is because you are increasing the intellsity. If you increase the length of the non-conformance, in my mind, in my intexpretafion you're ~ the intensity of that non-conformance. Would that be, would staff agree with that or would you not agree with that? Sacchet: Kate, do you want to address that? Aanenson: Yeah. It's complex, but as indicated before, if you have an existing lot of record and you take down the ~ the goal is to try to meet all the setbacks. Obviously this lot doesn't, it makes it difficult to try to accon~lish that. So what you do then is try to in a good faith effort, what's reasonable to try to get it to as close as you can. That's what's before you tonight. Their request to try to make the most reasonable application of the rules and still get what they want. A desirable house on the lot. So what your job is to say, is that reasonab~ or not. If your justification is, that wasn't where it was before. That seems to make some sense. Then that's a rational basis. Does that make sense? Lillehaug: Sure. Aanenson: Okay. Lillehaug: And then I have one more questiom This will be easier. On sheet, Fve got to find it here. We listed the variances for this ~ and it's not jumping out at me but I recall 7 percent variance on the, yeah 7 percent hard cover. Hard ma'face coverage variance that was granted back in 1992. So that would relate to 32 percent, correct? Lillehaug: And then in your table on page 6 it says the existing is 36.5 pemenc So from 1992 until the date they increased an additional 4.5 percent? Is that a comx~ interpretation I guess? Aanenson: Page what? I'm sorry. Sacchet: Page 6. 14 Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2003 Lillehaug: On page 5 it indicates it's a 7 percent hard suff~ covexage. There was a variance granted so that would put it to 32 percent irnpe, rvious area. And now on page 6 in the chart, for that property it says the existing hard surface coverage is 36.5 percent. Should have that not been 32 percent? Or the variances granted in some other i~vements were done and ~dditional impervious area was created. It's, we're talking 4 ½ percent difference here. Is it significant? Sacchet: Well actually on the table in the attachment it says 34.9 percent so we have anottex number once more so I guess the math is a little fuzzy here. Lillehaug: Do we know which, is this existing, regardless of what the variance is, is the existing 36.5 percent? That would be, I think that would be relevant if we can definitely determine which number is the existing hard surface coverage. So there's a table in there. Sacchet: It's about halfway through the ,~chmeots. It's a landscape format table. Auseth: That table, staff and the applicant went through and came up with these numbers so numbers are the correct numbers. Sacchet; So the ones in the attachment? Auseth: In the a~sebment. And I apologize. Lillehaug: So it should be 34.91 perc~t is the existing hard surface coverage? Auseth: Correct. Lillehaug: Okay, thank you. Sacchet: Thanks Steve. Craig, how about you? Claybaugh: Let's see here. I'll start on page number 3. It looks like paragraph number 5 and 6. Let's see here. The site is zoned RSF. A single family home with a 2 car garage can legally be constructed on the site. This is under the heading of permitted use. Second paragraph under that heading, the standards for a single family residential district requires a ~ of 960 square feet of living area for one story rambler, 1,050 square feet for a living area for a split level and a minimum of 600 square feet for a first floor living area for 2 story design~ The regulation also states a 2 car garage must be provided with a single family structure. Given that standard under permitted use with the 2 story stmcUu~ that they're proposing, what would be the anticipated square footage? Not what they're proposing but what would you identify as the square footage relevant to the reasonable use? Aanenson: What's the average that we get for the city? Claybaugh: Well if you were to look at that and turn it around and say, rather than what the applicant is showing and what they're applying for, if you came in and said where does that threshold start? Are you understanding the question Kate? Under permitted use they're setting minimum standards. Aanenson: Yeah I understand that question. 15 Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2003 Claybaugh: Okay. I'm asking where's the threshold where those ~ standards are met for a 2 story home and the 2 car garage. Aanenson: That is the threshold. Your question is what do we typically get7 Claybaugh: For them, what I'm trying to get to is for ~ to have reasonable use of that particular lot, given these requirements under the permitted use, how big a home could they expect? Where would that square footage for the home start at? I'm looking on the table on the back, and they've got a footprint of 1,200 square feet on the 2 story footlnSnt What they're identifying under the standards is a minimum of 600 square feet, okay for the first floor. Aane~on: Correct. Claybaugh: The regulation also stated 2 car garage so I was just looking for you to confirm what they're looking for, is that a 20 by 207 Is that 400 square feet or was that 1,000 square feet? Aanenson: Well yeah because they're asking for 1,200. That's correct Claybaugh: Okay. So what I'm trying to get at is for them, where the threshold starts for the interpretation of reasonable use starts there. Is that correct? If I came to you, I could come on that lot and I could propose a house that's 1,000 square feet or 5,000 square feet One would be over the top, the other one might be under sized. What r'm asking is, at the definition where reasonable use is met, okay. Am I interpreting that correctly that that starts around 1,000 square feet? Aanemon: Right. I guess I would turn it around and say staff's opinion is, based on thig application and what's in the neighborhood, we believe in thi~ situation, we reco~ approval that this was reasonable use. Claybaugh: Okay, do you think it's anything above and beyond what could be conaidea~l reasonable use? Aanenson: I'll stand by the ~on we have in the staff ~ based on thig neighborhood and that's how we do our reviews, based on what's standard for this area. Claybaugh: Alright, understood. Aanenson: Each variance would be to them- Claybaugh: All I'm trying to get at is typically on a variance we try to, or I try to ascertain if it's a little over the top or if it's fight in where you feel it should be. Aanenson: Well...neighborhood standard and that's why Angle put those other variances that are in ttz~. It is a lakeshore lot...little bit bigger so again that's the standard that we used. Claybaugh: Second question I had was looking on the survey, and on the table that was ineh~ in our packet, it identified 1,200 square feet on the walkway to the lake. And that was not identified what material was being there. I'm assuming that's going into the hard surface calculation, is that correct? Auseth: Correct 16 Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2003 Claybaugh: Okay. What material is that? Auseth: That's still to be determined. Clayhaug~h: Okay. Aanenson: So we just counted it as i .m!e~ous so it's into the calculatio~ Whe~ it's pavement or. Claybaugh: Okay. I was trying to limit the hard surface coverage, would it be reasonable to try and request or require that something be put in for a walkway that's chipped or whatever. Is it impervious with respect to the hard smface coverage? Okay. And the patio, the 266 square feet, I saw the terrace identified on my survey. I'm assuming that's just over the first floor. But it's identified as patio on the table. Is there a separate patio that's 266 square feet above and beyond the house footprint? Auseth: That's just dealing with that termc~ area. Claybaugh: Okay, now when I look at, what I was wonderin~ when I look at the sketch that's included in the packet, this terrace area to me looks like it's a walkout area above the first floor. And it's identified as a term~ in one area and a patio in the offer. If it was in fact that second floor terrace, I wouldn't think it would be in the hard surface calculations. Am I con'ect? Pardon? What I'm asking, do they have a separate patio at grade that's taking up s_dditional hard surface? Aanenson: (Yes.) Ciaybaugh: Okay. Isn't it reasonable to take a look at that in an effort to try and limit the hard surface coverage? Aanenson: Sure. Claybaugh: Okay. Did they identify what material they were using them for the patio? Auseth: No. Claybaugh: Okay. That's all the questions I have fight now. Sacchet: Thank you Craig. Alison, do you want to jump in? Blackowiak: I don't have any questions right now. Saccbet: Okay. Bruce. Feile Yes I have a question regarding what mitigation efforts were applied during the application process to try to limit the amount of variances necessary for this to go forward. Auseth: Staff worked with the applicant to reduce the hard cover surface. We lessened the terrace area, which is the ground level area, to try, so that wasn't as large and bring back the shoreland setback. 17 Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2003 Feik: From the existing7 Auseth: Yes. Feilc Right. What is most typical on the lake side setback in that neighborhood, particularly for those narrower lots which are adjacent to the, is that south and west? Yeah, south and we. sC Asnenson: Shoreland setback7 Feilc Yes. Aanenson: Did you want us to average those quickly? They're listed. Feik: No, is that in the report? I missed it. Aanenson: Last column. Feik: Last column in which table? A1-Jaff: Page 5. Feik: Oh, I'm sorry. The label's on the front page. I didn't bring it back. Okay, thank you. That's it. Sacchet: Okay. Rich, no questions7 Slagle: No questions. Sacchet: Alison? Blaekowiak: Yeah I do have one questiom Regarding the shoreland. Has them been any thought into like lakescaping or something to mitigate in~ hard surface coverage? Auseth: Not, we haven't discussed that. Blackowiak: Okay. That's it, thank you. Sacchet: That's it? Real quick a few questions. Saving trees on the, is that the south aide? They should all be savable based on staffs? Auseth: The applicant will ad~_dress that. Sacchet: The applicant will? I'll ask that of the agplicant. In this case the finding was that, even though they're increasing the i ,mpervious sm'face it should not be detrimealal...could you maybe point out why this one ia not detrimental and the grevious one staff thought would be detrimental? In terms of the nmoff rate. Aanenson: Well existing condition. Sacchet: Existing condition, okay. 18 Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2003 Aanenson: You know they're moving the house further back from the lakeshore giving us, what we were talking about before, the rate~ Giving it more time to percolate before it gets to the lake. Let me just address Alison's question too on lakescapes. I think that's an i .mportant question. Sacchet: Okay, go ahead. Aanenson: We had made that a condition before. I think the applieaut did go back and have the council release them from that condition. I think if you want to add that as a condition we'll work with, in the past, that hasn't always been supported but cerm~y that's another way to reduce what's happening as the rate and volume are going towards the lake to try to reduce thac So that's always a mitigation application mo. Sacchet: Good answer. And in condition number 3 it says there will be no grading within 37.5 feet of the ordinary water, high water level elevation. 37.5, because it's half of 75 or where does it come from? Aanenson: That's the current setback of the house to? Sacchet: That's the current, because according to the drawing it's not. It's actually the house is closer according to the drawing, but it may be it's me. asur~ differently. According to the drawing it's plus/minus 28. Auseth: That was determined by the Water Resoume Coordinator. Sacchet: Okay, so that's measm'ing it diff~y basically. Okay, that answers that question pretty well. That's all my questions. Thank you for your presentations. If the applicant would want to come forward, mske a presentation. State your name and address please for the recc~ Tom Surer: Tom Surer, 9221 Lalm Riley Boulevard. How do you like my oppoRunit~ lot? Let me try to address some of the questions that you've raised because we've gon~ through this time and time again. In fact when we first bought the home 4 years ago our intention was not to do anything other than to treat it as a lake home. Small lake home, and situations change where we want to make it our permanent residence. Our other home is up for sale in Eden Prairie and so when we looked at the challenges that the previous owner had with looking at trying to move the home and do some renovations to it, we determined the ouly way that we reasonably could come up with a house that we gould live ill, as well as try to minimize the vatiattges was to work with a reputable architect in the Twin Cities by the name of SALA Architects, and Dale Mulfinger is the gentleman we're working with. What we set out to do was try to get a high density interior home with the smallest amount of exterior footprint And if you're tin, liar with a building technique called a not so big house which Sara Susank has written about. Sara and Dale are parmers and we're applying a lot of their techniques and issues in the design of the home. So just from a general baclq~und. The one question was, I think Craig you asked the question about the 34 percent or 36 percent and how my hard cover numbers varied from what Angie and I eventually came up with~ ~Fme were rough calculations. They were layered on top of the registered surveyor's document and the reason he didn't come up with some of the numbers is the lot was snow covered at the time and wasn't able to get the patio areas. From the original variance on the 7 percent on the garage to where it is today, the previous, two previous homeowners I believe put in a patio walkway from the garage to the house. The woman who had it originally was an elderly woman and it was for safety reasons. She had to come down quite a ~ght of stairs, then across the yard and that's where the additional yard cover came in, which you'd think is 19 Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2003 reasonable. I think one of the other questions that came up was total square footage of the house on the lot. I'm not exactly sure what the question there was. We tried to minimize again the square footage of the lowest level, which is the walkout which is going to be a couple of bedrooms and a family room type area and, not a mud room but a laundry. The main level, which is really dictating a large percentage of the footprint is the living room, the dining room and the kitchen and that dictates that the floorplan has to be so big. And then everything else is scaled off of that. Third story is tucked under the roof so that we can effectively try to keep the scale of the home proportional with it so it doesn't look like a bunch of shoe boxes stacked up on top of each other, which we have in the neighborhood a little bit of. And so again we tried to scale it. One of the questions was on the walkout and was theme going to be a walkout and a deck. Let me try to clarify that. This here is the drawing of the middle level. As you can tell the garage, thi~ deck area here is over a lower level floor, roof already. The deck that was in that drawing that you have which is the lake view, that deck has been removed. It was the architect's original thought to put a deck. We did not want decks on the home. We wanted all the space to be on the ground level, so we then go to this sketch. This was the original sketch of the ground level. This walkway, the surface we're looking at is, we're looking at using potentially like a flag stone. A very loosely fit together flag stone with grass and moss inbetween it, which is what we've done in our currant home, and it was a compromise. We didn't want to go to a solid hard cover concrete or paver stones. We intend to work with a landscape architect to come up with the correct type of materials to tie in. This was the original architect's sketch of what the terrace could look like. It has been, with discussions with Angle and the rest of the staff, we've scaled it back so it doesn't protrude any further out than the front edge of the house to.the lake. So that's where it is today well and that will be done with a landscape architect I think Alison you ~ thg question about lakescaping. We intend to work with somebody to try to in~ as much of that into it. Our current home has extensive landscaping to it, and we intend to employ a very high quality landscape architect and arborist in this project to salvage the trees and as mnch of the lot, nay. n-al terrain as we can. Let's see here. Setbacks of other. I think one of the questions that was raised was what are some of the other homes on the lake near us set back. We go to the east, the Baker's. They're set back at least to the 75 foot mark. If we go to the west it's a new home. They actually acquired both lots, 9223 and 9225 and con~n~c~ a single home on both of those. They're back of the 75 foot mark. Then when you go the next two down, the Yetzen's and the Pothoff's, as well as I think the Olson's which is one fin'th~ down, they're all within 30 feet of the lake. And in fact if you're ever in those back yards you'll look, I mean they appear right on the water. Part of our reason for bringing the house back was convenience of a garage and a house connected. Second issue was we wanted to i ,reprove the sight lines for our neighbors, ff you look at the sketch that I think Angie had in thg report, our sight lines dramatically i ,reprove the neighbor's, if you will, with us moving the house back. Their sight lines i ,m!u'ove considerably. In fact the Hamilton's who just moved into the west of us from their living room will now be able to not look at the side of our blue barn, but can aco_ rally look all the way to the east end of the lake, and be able to look you know without obstruction of the home. So from our perspective we were trying to i ,reprove the sight lines for the neighbom. We were trying to hnpmve it from a safety perspective, if you have to come down those stairs in the winter. The icing on that gets to be treacherous. We have elderly parents who do have extended stays with us. That makes it very inconvenient for them to use that. The one question about the 4 foot settmck on the west side. We've tried to minimize thg varianoe ~ as rough as we could. That one we looked at very hard, but it made it very difficult to get a usable middle floor with trying to get a kitchen and a dining room side by side, which is all we really could do, and have the third story be sizable enough to be able to get the rooms under the roof to allow us to have it be meaningful and useful up there. Again this is the, that would be the view looking at it from the, our east neighbors. This is not accurate. This stairway is not in there. The architect took a Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2003 liberty with a hot mb, which we're not doing. There's no deck out here~ And this actually, through further discussions with staff, as well as our neighbors to the east which are the Baker's, they currently have a runoff problem which actually, because of the slope runs through our back yard and parks itself in our neighbors to the west back yard which leaves them a soft, wet spot. And with the home going in and some landscape terracing that we're going to have to do up in this area, this actually will not be a walk bridge. It will be, our intent would be to have that solid surface and do a retaining wall, and that would allow us to divert the water so it doesn't go at our home but go down the yard. Today, because of the neighbors to the east, the Baker's have a very large number of oak trees and having a lot of shade, the grass won't grow. Nothing will grow in there. We've worked on a plan with them and got their approval In fact Denny would have been here tonight but he got an opportunity to go hunting and so he said he'd write a letter, but I said I don't know that we'll need that yet. And our intent is to lan~ that with some natural wooded products that will retain the water and collect that so it just doesn't run right into the lake. So we have met with 5 of our neighbors. The Hastings, which are 2 to the east. The Baker's, immediately to the east. The Hamilton's which are immediately to the west. The Yetzen's and the Pothoff' s, and all 5 of them are in agreement with what we're trying to do and are in support and we intend to work with both the Hamilton's and the Baker's on landscaping strategies that are complimentary to what they want and what we need in the process. Sacchet: Thank you. Any questions from the applicant? Questions from the applicant? Claybaugh: Yeah. With respect to the walkway to the lake and the terrace material. Were going to be the same material? I know you commented about the terrace or patio Tom Suter. We're not sure if the terrace is going to be the same. Ideally what we'd like to have is have that be a loosely fit flag stone material so we can get grass and moss, whatever we can get to grow in there so it just isn't a solid surfac~ That's not what we're interested in. We're looking for something with a little bit more of a nattmd feel to it. And as I think the staff report indicated we'll be happy to submit our landscaping plans once we get to that point for, you know their input and recommendations as well. Claybaugh: Okay. I know it's a stretch but in that could you inquire with your landscape designer what the absorption rate is for how that...comes together. Tom Surer: Absolutely, if that's what we need to do, I mean that's not a big issue for us to do Claybaugh: Okay. My biggest concern is the runoff. Tom Suten Oh absolutely and we've, I mean for us right now we're collecting water from both sides because we're not capped the way the lots are created there like the previous group had, so we have to deal with the water runoff issue and the drainage, otherwise I'm going to have a wet lower level. Claybaugh: Okay. And I understand what your family's needs are and that's how you go into designing the footprint, style home and the space that you need. It sounds lilm you've given it a lot of consideration and had that in the forefront in designing the home. My concern is at the end of the day the lot is only 6465 square feec Tom Suter:. Right. 21 Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2003 Claybaugh: Granted that the ~'s up and down the line may be comparable in size in square footage, but they range in lot size, the nearest one to your's is 8121 and they go up to 42,000 square feet. You said you've met with all your neighbors. Tom Suten Yeah we have. Claybaugh: And have solid supportive conversations. Tom Suten Yeah...with any of them. In fact we had them over, we walked through the plans with them. In fact some of them gave some suggestions like you know if we could do this with the roof line so it presents them a little bit beuer look and stuff, that' s fine~ Claybaugh: That's all the questions I have. Sacchet: Any more questions? lust one quick quesfiom Those trees on your south side, or you might call it ease Tom Suten You mean the west side? The ones that are noted in the report? Sacchet: Yes. Tom Suten There's about 7 of them on the, it'd be the west side of the lot. It's between the Hamilton's and our home. Sacchet: Yeah, it's kind of south actually the way I rememtnx it. Sort of. Maybe I was disoriented. Tom Suten Let me point out. Where they are today is right in thig area. Sacchet: Yes, on that side. Right. Tom Suten Because of where their home is in relationship to those trees, several of the trees have had to actually to work their way Wtally into our yard because they're searching for light, as well as they're being encroached on by the other trees. In fact I met with Jim this afternoon. We talked about it. They, along with us, we're going to contract with an arborist and a tree maintenance service to work with us to try to see what we can do to salvage those trees. At minimum we see possibly 2 having to come out because they don't want them rubbing against theft stucco. They've got an issue pending with one of them already, is what he highlighted to me, but the rest, our intent is try to salvage those, not lose them, and we'll work with an arborist on that. Sacchet: Okay. Yeah, that was my observation too. Them were two trees that would have to be trimmed quite significantly but I don't hope they need to be cut all the way but certainly trimmed. Tom Suter:. We're going to find out. Yeah. I mean and also just to clarify on thig side there's a poplar that is 50-75 feet tall or more. There's one large branch on that that's overhanging, and right now it's an issue. If it were to break off, and every year branches of that poplar are breaking off. I've talked to Denny about it. While there's no home in that area and nothing to worry about, we're going to take that branch out, which won't have a rr~tedal i .mpact on the tree, but it will prevent the issue of it breaking off when the home is there. Even without our additions to the Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2003 current home, if it c. an~ off, it's going to take out pm of my garage as it is today so we're going to eliminate that in this process wh~ they can get a bucket up in the~. Sac. chex: Sounds good. Thank you very much. Lillehaug: Can I ask one? Sacchex: Yeah. Steve. Lillehaug: With the hard surface coverage, your option indicates a 41.65 percent That would be your proposal. Tom Suter:. Yep. Lillehaug: After you're done landscape, finishing the patio, would you anticipate that being hu'ger than 41.65 percent? Tom Sutec. No. That is, Angie and I spent, along with Bob and I think with Laura, we spent an af~moon working through these numbers trying to get it all figm~ out because it is a very complex set of numbers to get the hard cover calculated. And we believe that that is the finished number, ff not a bigger number than we're going to need. So I mean the intent there is not to go beyond that number, and it will really come down to what we end up with from the landscape's peeve. If we can convert thi.% and have it not be a safety issue. Lillehaug: To convert what? Tom Sutec. This walkway. Lillehaug: Okay. Tom Suter. ff we can convert that to something else we'H do it but I'd like to hold off tm making any commitments to that until we work through it with the landscape architect But if we can shrink it, we clearly understand the nmoff issue. We live in a marsh today and we undeaztsnd that issue and don't want to create that any worst than it is. Sacchet: Thank you very much. One more? Lillehaug: Yeah. So when you're saying, I mean you're including, can you put that back up on the screen there please. The area to the south. The large area there. You're including that in your calculations are you saying? Tom Suter. Yeah. That's in your, that's in the calculations. LiHehaug: So you're saying that's an i ,mpervious area that whole area right them. Tom Suter: Well it becomes difficult, I mean you cam take it to the definition that it's stone. It's impervious. If you, part of our thinking is if, even though it may be stone, if they're loosely and very loosely laid in so they make more like a distant walk path, you now can get into a bunch of calculus kind of calculations. Determine how much of it is i~ous and how much of it isn't. So it may be half, thi~ may be haffi~ous as a tightly knit paver or a concrete slab. Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 2003 Lillehaug: So you're not including that area in your i .mpervious calculations? Tom Surer: it is included. Sacchet: Currently it's included. Tom Surer:. Excuse me, not irr~. rvious. Sacchet: Yeah, and what I hear you say is that you're willing tO, in your answer to Craig that you're willing to comider, how would you call that, a partially pervious. Tom Suter. Yeah, if that's an ohy way to describe it. Claybaugh: Modified irnpe, ~ surface. And you're forwgrding with a worst case scenario too. Tom Suter: We're submitting worst case scenario. Part of what drove us to thig, and part of the reason we don't have all the answers on the landscaping portion of it and so forth is, the architecture fees are not inexpensive to work through and if thi~ was going to be a road block for Chart, then I wasn't going to spend the rest of the money doing the architecture wore And now, if we're granted the variance then we're going to go through the rest of the expense of finishing the architecture, both inside and outside. Sacchet: Exceflent. Is that it? Thank you very much. This is a public hearing so if anybody wants to come forward and make comments, this is your time. I open the hearing at this point. Please come forward. State your name and od_dress for the record. Jerry Paulsen: Good evening. Jerry Paulsen, 7305 Laredo Drive. Sacchet: Crood evening Jerry. Jerry Paulsen: Page 3 of the staff mpc~ Site characteristics, second paragraph. There is the row of trees along the western, I think that' s the southwestei~. The property line in close proximity to the proposed struc~. As part of the proposed plan the trees are to be saved. 4.4feet. Thelxees are to be saved. Good luck. Other than that these are multiple variances and I think you should take them very seriously, especially on lakeshore or shomland district properties. The fact that their neighbors confirm this, they're in the same boat. They have unde~fized property and they're sympathetic to the applicant I think in that ~ because they've seen variances go by on their property and maybe they're going to apply for variances in the fuage also so that's understandable I think. Thank you. Sacchet: Thank you. Slagle: Actually I have a question~ Sacchet: Go ahead Rich. Slagle: What are your thoughts on, just curious, to the i ,mpmvement ff you will of the wetland setback? Jerry Paulsen: Well certainly it's an i ,mprovement. It's supposed to be 75 feet. They're supposed to have 90 feet lakeshore which they don't have, and a lot of properties don't. They're Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2003 supposed to have 90 feet at the ordinary high water line, and at the front building setback line which neither of that is true. This property or a couple other pmIx~es along here. They are backing off from the high water line so that's an i .mprovement, but they're increasing i .mpervious surface I think is maybe not a good trade-off. Slagle: Okay, thank you. Sacchet: Thank you. Anybody else want to comment on this? Please come forward. Debbie Lloyd: Hello. Debbie Lloyd, 7302 IaueAo Drive. I don't know all the legal aspects of this but, and I didn't have an oppommity to look at the retxgt in advance. It looks to me lilm a real can of worms. I mean there's so many variances and I know the city has had a propensity lately to approve variances, but I think you as a Planning Commission need to be steadfast about what is the purpose of a variance. And really in this case what is reasonable use of this property? Reasonable use is what they cun-enfly have. I have friends who had to rebuild a home on Lak~ Minnetonka. They could not increase their i ,mpervious surface, They had to stay with the exact footprint of the home they had. To increase the i ,mpervious surface in this case to change the setbacks, all that, why7 I say reasonable use is an 838 whatever square foot home built on the footprint it has. Granted I don't like being, the home being that close to the lake with the 75 foot setbacks is the standard of the State but, and that brings another issue. If we scratch everything that's been on this lot and basically say go ahead and build this new home, the State has to be advised I would think that this home is being built within :55 feet of the lakeshore. Because the standard is 75 feet. It's not, there's code related to non-conforming use. You cannot increase the non-oonf~ty of an existing slrucutm. Read the code. Read the preface to that statement and I think you really have an answer unless the~'s something legal I don't know, which I'm sum there's been a lot of debate about, but I'd say they have reasonable use. Thank you. And I'tnjust concerned about the lake. Thank you. Sacchet: Yeah, go ahead. Anybody else want to come forward. Yeah let's hear first. Does anybody else want to comment on this? Otherwhe I'll close the hearing. Close the heating. Nobody else come forward. I'd like to ask staff to comment about the Debbie Lloyd's concern, whether there is a State involvement since this is closer than the 75 foot from the shc~line. That's what I understand her, one of her main points was. Aanenson: Sure. The report was sent to the State but they're moving it ~ back from the shoreline. R's a non-conforming lot. Sacchet: And we're weighing the se~a~k. Aanenson: Right, so we'll stand by our report. Sacchet: Yeah, but is there a State element that needs to be brought into this? Not for us, but for the applicant. Aanenson: No. Sacchet: No. Not that we know of. Aanenson: The Slate was, they were given a referral. They have every right m comment but it's our jurisdiction. Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 2003 Sacchet: Alright. Slagle: Have they commented? Aanenson: Not to date. Sacchet: So we're to commissioners comments. Anybody feel like starting with this one. Lillehaug: I can begin I guess he~. I agree with some of the state--ts that were just made. I don't support increasing the hard surface coverage for a trade-off of moving the house back away from the lakeshore. I just don't agree with that. Which is fight, right is wwng I just simply don't agree with it. I think the existing hard surface coverage should be main~ I think that non-conformance should not be increased. One of the other non-conf~ would be, the earlier one I mentioned. The south or west lot line. I agree that this is ~g that non- conformance. I don't agree with that. It may be better in the City's interest to move the house back but I don't think it's in the best interest of the adjacem property owner. Maybe the pwtmrty owner today agrees with it but in the future a new one may not so I think intensifying this non- conformance, and that's how I would inte~r~t it, is not a good ~'ade-off. So therefo~ I do not support those two variances. Reasonable use, fight now the existing house area is a little under 850 square feet and I think that that includes a garage. Does staff concur with that? Or that does not include the garage? So does the l~.00 feet, does that inclnde the garage then? Auseth: No. Lillehaug: Okay. So is 1,200 feet a reasonable use or is something lesser than that a reasonable use? I would think the existing square footage is reasonable use. So likewise by increaising the square footage of that house directly increases the hard surface coverage and directly increas~ the intensity of the non-conformance so I guess at this point I do not support those items. The lot was, under finding D it indicated that the lot was platted in 1951 prior to the ordinance so the hardship is not self-created. I disagree with that. Once again the existing non-conformances can be maintained by increasing them. Increasing the ~ that is serf ~ I think that would be all. One other comment I want to make. It is comparing non-lakeshore property to probably a majority of property in ~son. I think they really should be held to the same staudanis. Yes it's good to increase the water quality of the lake, but by increasing the runoff I don't think that's what, I don't think that goal's being met. So that ends my comments, thanks. Sacchet: Thanks Steve. Do you want to go nexI Craig? Claybaugh: Yeah. I do believe a hardship does exist but I don't believe it exists to the extent stated on page 3 in the paragraph that I had spoke to earlier under permitted uses. I don't necessarily agree with staff's position that that particular square footage is justified for a lot that's 6,400 and some odd square fee~ I understand that the surrounding tn'opea~ies may be comparable in size, but like I said at the end of the day that has substantially less square footage on that lot. With respect to the hard cover surface, I believe that, with respect to the walkway to the lake and footage. To address some of the comments during the public hearing. A comment was made regarding Lake Minnetonka. I've seen countless properties around Lake Minnetonka where a homeowner will go in, tear down a series of walls to maintain and grandfather in a variance. And they'll put the pwperty back wgether piecemeal, and it looks like it's been done just like that. I'm certainly not in favor of that. I'm not against granting the variances to the extent of the setbacks. You get the property in place. Move the pwperty back but I would not support the Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2003 proliferation or the in~ in hard cover square footage and I sincerely believe that the applicant has control to address that in another way with some of the square footages that I see in the chart attached so, that's the extent of my comments. Sacchet: Thanks Craig. Blackowiak: Sure, I'll go next. I just want to start off by saying that I do hate non-conforming lots. I just never liked them. They always just give us fits because we have a lot. Legally the applicant is able to build on a non-conforming lot and we've got to make...and I think that's our job here tonight. There's some definite positives about this phm. I love the design of the house. It looks nice. I think it would definitely be a big improv~ I think pulling the home back from the lake is a huge i ,ml~'ove~t. I mean there are some really good things happening. The fact that the side, the setbacks on the side are comparable is good. ~ I agree with fellow commissioners that the hard surface coverage is an issue, and that's why I have a question regarding lakeseaping and if there's some type of way that we eau mitigate that because that's a big jump. I mean when you're talking about having existing water problems and runoff problems, drainage problems, that kind of scares me and I think as a homeowner you're probably a little concerned about that as well. I certainly would be because if you increase that impervious, you've just increased the potential for problems on your property and your neighbors, and I certainly am sure you don't want to do that either. At this point I still am up in the air about the hard surface variance. What I would like to say, whoever makes the motion, I'd like to have something in there about landscaping and lakeseaping plans submitted to staff for input, should the applicant continue to go forward with this because I think that's just going to be such a huge part of it and we need to address that issue regardless of the final size of the house. But I know that before it hasn't been neces~y followed through with on the council level and I guess that's their choice but we can always suggest. So I would hope that we could add that condition on should it go forward. Those are my comments. Sacchet: Bruce. Feik.. First off let me say I think it' s a bea~ project. I'd love to live there. I do have to agree with much of what Steve mentioned earlier. I'm very troubled with the amotmt of setbacks in particular. I'm very troubled with the amount or the intensity of the smactum and the hard cover. I'm wondering quite frankly if we use the reasonable use clause and reasonable use seems to move over time to include bigger and better stuff. It now includes 2 car garages and lots of othe~ things, and not every lot is going to conform with, call it the nxxiem day use of reasonable use. It's a small lot. It's unfortunate but it is. I guess I could support this potentially if ~ was no hard cover outside the foundation of the suucua~ Without that, I'm really troubled. I' m not sure I could support the variances. Sat:chex: Thank you. Rich. Slagle: Just a couple thoughts. FLrst, on a personal note Tom, your neighbors the Hamilton's are just excellent people. You will enjoy them tremendously. But back to this. You know I think what I would throw out for consideration is this to my fellow commissioners. The times that we have had people in front of us requesting variances that could be as simple as a deck. It could be as simple as a four season porch, what have you and if menx~ serves me right we have on occasion declined those with respect to just a couple feet. And that was just one varianc~ and now we have a series of variances, some of which are perhaps I agree with ' ,nnlmave~ over the current situation but gmply put is thi~, I would like to see us table this. I would like to see us table it and ask the applicant, along with staff and staff would be a mom robust involvement by Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 2003 Jill in this lot. The City Forester, but I would ask the applicant to work with staff on perhaps a smaller plan. And I say that because of the hard surface coverage. I think there is a way, perhaps it's not the dream home but it might be the semi dream home. Ceaainly an i ,mprovement over what's there today, but I think that if someone came to me and said hey, here is the presentatiom It's smaller in scale, but it's still a highly build, you know quality house, I think I would tend to support it so my thoughts are that we table it and just ask him to come back. Sacchet: Thank you. My comments, well first of all I think it's very i~ the comment that was made by the resident about what's the p~ of a variance. The purpose of a variance is to allow something that would be a hardship, that does not apply to other properti~. But that all goes out the window with a non-conforming lot. As Alison pointed out, that's a real issue in cases like this. It's hard to hold something to rules that were not in place when it was created. You can have a little more than a tent them if you would go by all the roles. Them is a lot of mitigating issues. We're looking at, when I first saw the 7 variances I thought my god, there's no way. But then I started looking at what the variances are and the way they're presented, it's really that the side yard setbacks are basically maintained as they were given for the garage. Now given applying them for the whole house, which is going to be 2-3 times the length in addition to what the garage, it's definitely an intensification. The most i~t one is the ~ore setback, which is greatly i ,reproved, and right now there's a dead space between the garage and the house which is absolutely useless. Not just is it useless, in fact ugly and I think an issue with drainage and environment. So taking that house back is worth an awful lot. But does it weigh up the hard surface coverage intensification and the intensification of the side yards? That's a bit tricky one to pin down, and I really don't agree with staff's comment on top of page 7 that if the lot were a conforming lot with the standard 20,000 square foot lot area, the ~ hard ~ coverage would only occupy 17 percent of the lot, well below the minimu~ Now if we start looking at it that way we're very, you're toast Because everybody, Fm sorry, my lot would be 20,000 then I could have whatever. I think you get my point there. Aanenson: Let me just clarify that That's a standard lakeshore lot That was the only purpose of that... Sacchet: Right, but we can't make reference to something that is not existence. I mean we're wading into way deep water with that type of thinking. I do li~ the applicant's willingness to consider partial impervious for the walkway, for the patio. The walkway to the lake. I think that should definitely be a condition to do some landscaping. Lakesho~ landscaping I should say I think is a very reasonable way to balance this, and what Fm not sure is ff we do have this patio and walkway partially pervious, how close we would get. What limits is tmrvious that we wouldn't intensify it basically. Look~g at the table we've come down about 300-400 square feet. Patio and the walkway, yealx Blackowiak: You'd only come down 262 and then haft, Fd say half of that at best. Sacchet: Yeah, if you calculate half, that'd be pretty generous. So it would be not really a huge Blackowiak: Well, as I look at il: We're like 440 feet difference roughly in your hard surface, between existing and proposed. So I mean that's what I was running calculations in my head as well trying to figure out where you know, can you make some of this up and you know if you give the walkway 50 percent, that's only going to get you 131. Sacchet: Well anyway. Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 2003 Blackowiak: For what it's worth. Claybaugh: I was thinking they'd have to go with an organic mu'face. Either trade off the square footage on the house to allow for a semi-pervious stn'face or go with an organic surface that has, that allows 100 percent rate absorption. That's a trade* off that I feel that the applicant has some control over. They can either go back and try and redesign it and maintain that element of flagstone and such, or explore organic option and keep the footprint that he has, in my mind. Sacchet: Yeah I could support that. That'd be a balanc, c point. Alright, are we ready for a motion? Does anybody want to dare make a motion please. Rich? Slagle: I'll make my motion. That we, that the Planning Commission table the currant application and ask that staff work with the applicant to reduce the amount of hard stwface coverage. I'm not sure how to word it, whether that translates into square footage of house. Claybaugh: What I was thinking was maintaining the existing hard cover surface or less. How the applicant achieves that, whether he reduces the footprint design or goes to organic materials in lieu of an i~ous surface for walkways and such, that puts the control back in the applicant's the existing hard surface coverage. Slagle: So point of clarification, the square footage current would he the garage plus the ~ house? Claybaugh: As it's stated in the repon, it said 25 percent hard surface coverage here. They're increasing it 16.65 percent to 41.65. Blackowiak: No Craig, they're not cmrenfly at 25. They're currently at 34.91. Sacchet: At 35. Blackowiak: It's on the table at the very back. Clayhaugh: Okay, I'm looking at a different table again~ Sacchet: 35 current and they're asking to go closer to 42. Blackowiak: 25 is. Claybaugh: Point of clarification with stuff then. In the reco~on on page 8, it identifies a 16.65 percent variance from the 25 percent, okay I understand. Sorry. Blackowiak: It's a math thing. Claybaugh: I guess that ends up being the question is if the fellow commi~ioners feel that the existing hard coverage, if we don't proliferate or intensify the hard cover surface, is that a reasonable position to direct them to go forward with. Give them a platform to work from. Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2003 Slagle: What I would throw out is, I think that the applicant's willingness to move th~ ~ back has value and is worth whatever. Claybaugh: And there's 6 other variances that that sddresses. Slagl¢: Exactly. Claybaugh: The hard cover is of the greatest concern to me personally. Slagle: And same to me. So I'm just saying I think with the current number, asking them to bring it back. Connecting to tim garage, which I agr~ makes sense, it saves whea~ it is today. I mean that's my thinking. Saccbet: So were you making a motion to table7 Slagle: Yes. Sacchet: I-Ie made a motion to table. Anybody want to se~ad that? Slagle: I suppose I don't have to define how I want it. Blackowiak: No, but I think it's only fair to the applicant that we give som~ direction so I think that's important. Saccbet: Yeah, we can comment mom about Claybaugh: I'll second the mo'dom Slagle moved, Claybaugh seeonfled that the Planning Comminnion table the Variance ff2003-7 and direct staff to work with the applicant to redesign the project to maintain the current percentage of hard surface coverage. All voted In favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0. Sacchet: Do we want to give mom comments? Lillehang: I would like to yeal~ Slagle: Absolutely. Saccbet~ Well do you want to start since you wex~ the one making the motion? Slagle: No, go ahead Steve. Lillehaug: I would like to just add also to try to reduce the increase and the imsmsity of that 4, was it 4.4 feet on the southwest side of the lot. I think that's some~ in ~_ddition to ~ 34.9 tmrcent of hard coverage. I think that is something that should also be addressed. I'm not in support how that currgntly sits by increasing that inte~ity ~ on tim southwest cornex. Thanks. Claybaugh: My currant position would be that by moving the house s~ back from the lake. shore high water mark is a great positive. I'm willing to gntextain the side yard and othex associated variance, s, but I'm not willing to talin thoso in conjunction with the intonsity of tho Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2003 hard cover surface so what my intention in tabling this is, is to make it clear to you that you are in control of that. Whether you address the square footage on the house or you look at more cuganic materials for pads and patios, that's in your court. Blackowiak: I have nothing additional to adcL Sacchet: Bruce, anything? Feik: Nothing to add. Slagle: I'll just add one thing for staff that double check on the roof, the overhangs. On that setback. I don't know if it was sort of hard to understand from the sketch where those fell Sacchet: And we work on, when staff and applicant work on their idea of the landscaping, the lakeshore landscaping, that also maybe have some consideration of those trees that are currently very close. When I was out there, 2 of them would have to be cut pretty severely but I don't know with the height of the house what extent that is realistic. Maybe have some consideration for that also. Excellent, thank you. PUBLIC HEARINC~: CONSIDER A REQUEST FQR ~DI'y-I~0N F~.Y ~ ~ V~~ ON ~O~~ ~~ ~. ~GI.~ F~.Y g~E~L ~ VA~QN 0F A ~R~0N QF ~A AT 755~ Q~T P~$ ~.~~ ~T P~ ~ ~~ ~DmQN. Public Present: Name_ Address Charles Stinson Bart Blinstrup Nancy Manara Oladys Hanna David Krunk Tom Manarin Wyck Linder Steve & Nancy Rogers 4723 Bastwood Road, Mirmetonka 18736 The Pines, Eden Prairie 7552 Great Plains Boulevard 400 Santa Fe Trail 7561 Gre,~ Plains Boulevard 7552 Great Plains Boulevard 7550 Gre~ Plains Boulevard 7520 Great Plains Boulevard Sharmeen Al-Jeff pFesented the shift Fei)off on this lte~ Sacchet: Questions from staff?. Bruce. Feilc I've just got 2 of them- In the abandonment of the road, the area to the south, that would be abandoned equally to the properties north and south? Al4aff: That's correct. Feilc As it relates to the additional drive that would cross Lot 1, which would serve Lot 2, could that not be accom~ without a vm'iance by moving some lot lines? So a variance wouldn't 31 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 2003 A14aff: What you can do is, one of the things that we looked at was to actually create a flag lot. Feik: I know it'd be a flag lot. A14aff: But then you still need a variance for that. But yes, that's definitely an opfiom Feik: So it's either a flag lot or it's a cross easement? A14aff: Correct. Feik: Those are our only two reasonable options? A14aff: (Yes) Feik: Okay, thank you. Sacchet: Any other questions? Slagle: I just had a quick one. On page 2 S~ you note in bold the vacation of the right- of-way requires City Council action only. And then you say approval of the subdivision will be contingent upon the approval of the vacation. Al4aff: That's correct. Slagle: So we would not act upon the vacation. Al4aff: No. Slagle: But we have to in order to vote. Maybe I'm missing this but we're to act upon the subdivision, we need to know that the vacation's been approved or will we do it sort of hypothetically? Al4aff: It's continent upon. Slagle: Okay. Al4aff: So if the council denies the vacafio~ the subdivision is moot. Slagle: Okay. And then one, just a more of a eeo question. On closing the driveway entrance on the existing house, is that due to tr~fl:ic? Al4aff: Are we talking about this one? Slagle: Yes. Al4aff: The applicant, while working with the applicant we realized that we've got a non- conforming situation here and we talked to them regarding closing off this driveway and they were willing to do this. Them is more but it was one of the agreements that we reached. Slagle: Okay. Fair enougl~ 32 Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2003 Blackowiak: I just have one quick question. In the staff report I was unclear on top of page 5 about the connection charges. And then there's one sentence that just doesn't reatd right to me and I can't for the life of me make he~ds ~r tails of it It says the site will be subject, thi~ is the second sentence. The site will be subject to one sanitary sewer and water cxmnecfion charge. However, for the benefit of the lateral mains to the new lot. What's missing? Saam: Yeah, that maybe could have been worded better but you go back to the first sentence and read it in the context of that. Acxording to the finance depaxtment of ~, there are no asscssmcnts duc for thc existing lot. Then thc site will be subject to connection charges however. Blackowiak: The new site. Saam: So we probably should have said, however the site will still be, you know there's no assessments however the site will be subject to connection charges. That was the point we were trying to say. Do you follow that? Blaekowiak: I think so. So the new, okay. Are we talking the new site? Sam-m Yes, the new lot that's being created. Blackowiak: The new lot will be subject to one sanita~ and one water connection ehaxge. And then what's that last little phrase? However for the benefit, what does that mean? Saam: It's just saying why they're being charged these connection charges. Basically... Blackowiak: Okay. You know what. Saam: ...being assessed for the sewer and water. Blackowiak: If there was a comma after water cxmnection charges comma, however. Yeah, okay. I know, I know but with a comma it makes so much mm~ sense. I just didn't u~le~amd. Saam: Maybe I'll camect that before it goes to council Blackowiak: I'm sure they'd be thankful. Claybaugh: We'd really appreciate it Blackowiak: They'd never know. Okay. Sacche~: Any other questions? Blackowiak: No, that was it. I just wanted to elm'ify thaC Saccbet: Steve, do you have something? Lilletumg: Sharmeen, on the bottom of page 2~ It says the applicant will not be assessed for areas that are dedicated ouflots. Do we have any dedicat~ outlots? A14aff: Bottom ofpage 2. 33 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 2003 Lillehaug: Page 3, sorry. The applicant will not be assessed for any areas that are dedicated outlots. Simply my question is, is there any dedicated outlots? Al-Jarl: No there are none. Lillehaug: So then that, I had a problem with the plat here. We have a, who's dedicating this property for the cul-de-sac? Alqaff: Thc applicant is in ownership of, or has worked on this piece and will be able to give us the right-of-way. Lillehaug: Okay. Saam: Commissioner Lillehaug, that might not, if I could just clarify. That might not be actually in the plat. It might be a separate document, like a right-of-way. Gram a right-of-way. Lillehaug: So that's what I was getting at. Is that, that can be combined into this plat? Saam: No, not unless he has fee ownership or they sign off on the plat, whoever owns that existing house. Lillehaug: Okay. So this plat that we're looking at is only Lots 1 and Lot 2? Saam: However with that though we're getting that right-of-way and c~ the cul-de-sac so that's the nexus. That's why we think it's a key issue. We're getting something out of this we feel. Lillehaug: Okay. So getting from Lot 2 and Lot 1 to that dedicated right-of-way, there still needs to be a cross easement in there which probably exists now to maintain it? Is that correct? Saam: Are you speaking to the driveway now for Lot 2? Lillehaug: Yep. You've got to get from Lot 1 to that dedicated right-of-way for that cul-de-sac. How do we get ~? Through the existing? Saam: The right-of-way's only going to be vacated, the way I tmdcrstand it, along the south. The south property line ofthe current parcel. Sotothe west ofthatLot 1, that westlotline onLot 1, to the west of that, that's still going to remain right-of-way. Do you follow that? Lillehaug: So you're not dedicating it all the way out? Saam: No. The dedicated right-of-way will be from that existing house. Along the northern portion of the cul-de-sac bubble. Maybe if I come up to the microphone. Feik: So both lots will access via the private drive? Technically. Saam: No, that's anottgr issue. We're reco~ that this driveway for this lot and the private driveway, the existing private drive, those two be separated. Because there's a code requirement that says only 4 homes can access off a private drive. And there's currently 1, 2, 3 Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2003 and this one has potential for development. So we're saying to leave this. To get, to not say they can't develop. To not pigeon hole them we're going to separate these two driveways down here so this one will be independent of the private drive. Lillehaug: So if you could, from the south, from the southwest comer of Lot 1. If you go up about 30 feet, fight there, and then that line directly to the west. Is that city right-of-way? A1-Jaff: No. Lillehaug: R's not? Saam: Yeah, this is all right-of-way right he~. Al4aff: This portion? Lillehaug: Yep. So that is city fight-of-way. That portion is. So ~'s going to be a privam street, privam driveway on th~ city right-of-way. Samm Yes, just ~ your's is, mine is. I mean that's tbe way we're looking at this. Let's go back to this cul-de-sac l~m whe~ we're going to get this detlicat~ right-of-way. This is a privat~ driveway. It's within th~ city right-of-way whom it ~ with tl~ strut, Do you follow that? We're going to do tbe s~rne thing over he~. Lillehaug: It just ne~ls to be cleaner on this plat ~ Samm Yearly, I think we know what nexis to be done but ye, ah, I agra. It's got to be cleared up on the drawing, and we'll work with th~m on that. Feilc I'm missing something. Can I be. at this to death for you? Lillehang: Sum. ~ beating it. Feilc The right-of-way is ti~ dashetl ~ which ~ tl~ cul-de-sac, com~? S~sm.' Yes. Feilc How do you g~t from th~ southwest com~ of Lot 1 to tbe dash~ lin~? Samm To this? l~ilc Yeah, do you span that? Saam: This line right Imm? That's fight-of-way also. Feilc That's fight-of-way too, okay. Clayhaugh: That's the portion that you're not vacating correct? Saam: C. orr~t. That's going to remain right-of-way. What I was under tl~ assumption we worn vacating, and maybe S~ will have to correct me., was just this are, within th~ ~ that's being platmd into a lot. Basically the north half of ti~ 60 foot right-of-way. 35 Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2003 Lillehaug: But it's to maintain as...easement though~ Saam: Yes, because we have a sewer main that we're going to require that we get a drainage and utility. Feilc Why not vacate to the south as well? Saam: You want to address that? A14aff: If we get signatures from the, we haven't advertised the vacation as it appears before the City Council. If we get the signatures of the ~ owners to the south we can definitely do that. There's still plenty of time. Lillehaug: Okay. Sacchet: Alright, any other questions here? Lillehaug: I think that's all I have for staff, yeal~ Sacchet: Craig. Claybaugh: I think the few issues with this plat have been sufficiently beam~ On page 6 1 just wanted to come back to something you said in your opening commen~. In the second paragraph it says as condition of the subdivision the applicant is requesting that the city vacate the north half of the fight-of-way and deed the land back to the applicant. As part of your opening comments I think you indicated that we in fact did not hold the deed. It was just, is that a contradiction or did I misunderstand you? AIJaff: I think you misunder, you said. Claybaugh: When you said we're going to vacate the road. Al4aff: Correct. Claybaugh: Okay. I think at that ~ you commented that we didn't waive the right-of-way but then have the deed. AIJaff: No. No, I said we did not need it. Sorry about that Claybaugh: There you go. Thanks. Sacchet: That's it? Claybaugh: Yep. Sacchet: Okay, I still have a few questions. As we are on the driveway thing, before we get away from that The private street, and I can't find in the staff repoxt but I seem to recall somewhere it said that the private sueet getting into the cul-de-sac should be 5 feet away from where the driveway comes in or something like that Is that, do I remember that correctly? Now how would that work because fight now they kind of merge in the drawing. 36 Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2003 Al-$aff.' Well they would need to separate them. Sacchet: Okay, so they would still, the private road would still be going through those 2 oak trees, then in the cul-de-sac and the other driveway would have to be sufficiently away from it? Al4aff: Yeah, this portion would not change. It's this area right here. Sacchet: That would have to be separated into two. A14aff: That would have to be separated. Sacchet: And them is enough room to do that? Okay. Now my big thing, those of you that know me should not be surprised, the trees. Trees. I have definite tree questions. I appreciate the comment here that the applicant's trying to preserve them but then I look at there's obviously some trees being cut, correct? Al4aff: Corr~t. Sacchet: And then I look at the table on page 6 and we have a baseline canopy of 65 percent, 1.01 acre and we have the proposed tree preservation of 65 percent in 1.01 acres, so them doesn't seem to be anything cut. What ~? A14aff: One of the things that we asked the applicant to do is to show us the 60 by 60 house pad. And they repeatedly said that's not what they're going to build. They really want to build homes that would preserve the trees. We explained to them that the. Sacchet: AIl of them. Al4aff: If you look at, Nann could you please zoom into this. I'll just read it. It says house psds are to be adjusted to miss major trees by 15 feet. Sacchet: Okay. Al4aff: And that's how they base their canopy coverage. Sacchet: So then my question is, why would tree preservation fence and silt fence not be on the outside of those trees ff you're trying to ~eserve7 They are the two big trees on the sore/east corner you might say. That 44 inch white oak and the other oak up them. And then also the trees in, on Lot 1 on the northwest corner are not pmteaed. So in other words we could possibly, I'll ask that of the applicant. Whether they're willing to put fence around it, but based on what he's saying, that would be the logical thing to do, and I would solve a lot of my tree concerns. I have one technical question, real quick. Lot 1, the 60 by 60 pad. On the north and on the east of it are some weird lines, I cannot figure out what they ~e. on the north it's straight at just a lilfle m~gle. Short little lines, and on the east it has those curved lines with elevation numbers that don't compute the way I see them Am I mi~sing A14aff: Which sheet is this on? Sacchet: It's on the one that is entitled grading. The grading plan_ That's why I'm concerned about those lines because the black lines are supposed to be grading lines and those lines are fat Can you address that Matt please? 37 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 2003 Saam: Sure. They've got some work to do there. I believe they're contour lines. Fve red line a little something in here so I believe they're contour tines. They're not showing elevations but they're drawing incorre~y. At least some of them are~ Sacchet: They don't make sense. Sacchet: Alright, so okay. So we agree on that. That's all my questions. Thank you. With that, would the applicant want to come forward and make a ~tation7 State your name and addre~ for the rexord please. Ernie Pivec: Ernie Pivec from 5060 Meadville, Greenwood, 1VFmnesota. I don't think there's a hard cover issue here or anything like that. What you've been working at with the other two applicants. My bride of 56 years had a spinal fusion 2 years ago 'this coming May, so I've become a caregiver, doing the cooking, shopping and so for& So I hired my nephew to work with Sharmeen and they I think did a diligent job trying to make this a nice lot division aa possible. So I couldn't be in on all of this so I can't answer many of the questi~ so you might approach me because I wasn't there. I was shopping or cooking. So Sharmeen worked with my nephew who I paid to do this, and this is where we are. Slagle: And your nephew is who? Ernie Pivec: Paxlon? Slagle: Your nephew is who? Ernie Pivec: Tracy Weathers. We named the plat to honor his wife who's my wife's niece, to honor her father who died of bladder cancer. And his name was I. aHaye. Sacchet: Unless you have more to add, does anybody have questions from the applicant? Gladys Hanna: Can I ask? Sacchet: We'H have the public hearing following this so if you could just hold it for a moment, I appreciate that. Any questions from cormnissioners for the applicant? Lillehaug: I have one. With the vacation of. Sacchet: You'll get your tttrn. Lillehaug: With the vacation of the right-of-way and dedicating it to yourself, Fm fumbling through my pages here, but it increases the lot area of Lot number 1 to 31,400 square feet The minimum lot area is 15,000 square feet. Do you have any inteaZ/ons on splitting this lot since it's possible you could in the future? Ernie Pivec: No. We'd keep it the same aa it is. I am the fee owner on this. I'm the fee owner on the existing house and there's a contract for deed on it against...vacation of that parcel. Aanenson: Can I just add to that too? When this subdivision, Sharmeen's worked on this subdivision for quite a few months and we've worked really well with the property owners here. 38 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 2003 It originally came in with 4 to 5 lots when it originally came in. We've worked hard to get it to 2 to try to preserve and due to the diligence of the applicant here, we've got it down to 2 and we believe respective of the propeay. Again becatme he knows the property and that was the complication Sharmeen indicated. Part of the right-of-way, and I'm not sure Matt clarified that. Part of that bubble goes outside of the fight-of-way but because he was the deed owner and he's the developer, he's going to recxmcile that cul-de-sac beeamse he owns the protxmy and fixing that driveway so we're solving a couple problems that are down there in that area. Again trying to maintain how many homes on a private street, so that's where we felt the variance on that, instead of coming off of Frontier, making the grade change, the dopes, the tree loss, we got it down to 2 homes so we felt comfortable giving that variance. I just wanted to make that clear. Slagle: Question Kate. So you're saying that the lot that's stated...th~ Ernie is the owner? Aanenson: This is the right-of-way line. I think that was some of the confusiom The right-of- way line actually they're talking about his driveway is right here, so the cul-de-sac bubble ccmaes outside of that fight-of-way. Lillehaug: How about on the south end, where's the right-of-way7 Aanenson: Yeah, conecc This is all fight-of-way to the south. It's just the north is the problem and since he has the contract for deed, he can reconcile and get that bubble put in, correcc Lillehaug: That whole area going to the south? Aanenson: Yes, is right-of-way. Lillehaug: Is right-of-way? I mean continuing on out? Aanenson: Yes. Lillehaug: Is city right-of-way? Aanenson: Correct. Lillehaug: Okay. Aanenson: So that's because you've got...it goes beyond the right-of-way and I think th~ wasn't quite clear when Matt was stating that. Lillehaug: That'd be it, thanks. Ernie Pivec: And I think Steve's question about dividing th~ This is a unique parcel because it has access or an oufiot on Lotus Lake. It's a nice, quiet neighbodmod and that would really be a nice location for 2 real nice houses. Sacchet: Any other questions for Mr. Pivec? Slagle: Yes. Emie you were, I think if I can ask, you've been with your duties helping your wife. Is it your passion, is it your goal, and are you behind the idea of saving as many trees as we can? Emie Pivec: Oh ~y. ~y. 39 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 2003 Slagle: Okay, great. And I just want to share with you that sometime what we nm into is, we see proposals in front of us with a desire, stated desire to do that, and then unfommately reality says when the piece is developed, it's not quite what we had seen or hoped for so I'm just glad to hear from you that you're committed to that Ernie Pivec: Well I was, someone proposed to me on this Lot 1 to approach the fire chief and see if they would consider burning it down, and I said no because look at that oak tree. It's right next to the house. You can't do that and ruin that lxee. A tree that size is priceless you know. Sacchet: Any other questions? I have a quick question~ In the interest of preserving those trees, the way on the grading plan the tree preservation fence is drawn, it does not incl, ld_e the 2 real big trees on your southeast side. Actually the biggest one there, that 44 inch oak, white oak and then the next biggest one. Do you know which ones I'm talking about Sharmeen? The southeast, the south area. The big oak and then just slightly west from it is another big oak. Little smaller. And those 2 are not inside the, if you look where the protection fence goes, it goes on the outside of those. Is there any reason why you could not include that in the protected area? And ask it to be custom graded. I inean I guess we have to add that into the pictme. AI-Jaff: We can definitely do that part of. One of the reasons why it is outside the fenced, the tree fenced area is because we asked for a 60 by 60 house paid and then a 15 foot around that area to ensure that it meets the ordinance requirement. That's what the ordinance. Slagle: Could the house move further no~h a bit? Sacchet: A little bit isn't it? AI-Jaff: A little. There is buildable area. Yes it could. Sacchet: And this pad doesn't mean it has to cut the trees. Right, fight. If you make it custom graded, would that address that concern in some sense? Okay. Now the same question for those trees on the northwest comer of Lot 1. There's that whole bunch of trees there. Pretty close to the existing house that are also not included in the ~on fencing. Do you know which ones I'm talking about Sharmeen? Sacchet: Yep. Ernie Pivec: That's the ones I was concerned about burning down the house. Sacchet: Right. So would it be possible to put them inside the ~on fencing as well? Okay, that's my questions I believe. Thank you very much. This is a public hearing so I'll open the public hearing. If you want to come forward. Maim your comments. State your name and address please for the record. Charles Stinson: Yes, my name is Charles Stin~ I live at 4733 Eastwood Road in Minnetonka. I'm here on two different reasons. One is, if I may. Do you have the small site plan? Sacchet: So do you want to show us where you are? Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2003 Charles Stinson: Yes. Well I live in Minnetonk~ I own the ~ directly north and also I'm the architectIland planner and kind of co-developer and tonight the speaker for this neighborhood of Frontier, the 9 lots just directly east of here. So one question I have directly, we on our property, there happens to be an overhead line that's not on the easement and just going across our property connecting to the house just to the north and the existing house that is being demolished. We're wondering while they're doing thig if they could put those utilities underground. We're preparing to start cons~on on this house and we've tried to contact, we're not sure who to contact to get those utilities moved ~ there is an overhead for them~ So maybe you could help us with that or we could do a follow-up on that but I hat~ened to talk to the developer Ernie and he thought maybe they could go underground up here. The other reason I'm here in response to the neighborhoo~ The Frontier neighborhood has been like a 10 year labor of love. We spent, we started 10 years ago with the Delancey's who, Ted when his young boy drove the bus for his mother's...and when they hired, got me involved to do the land planning, they had seen a Parade house I did and it saves all the txees and he said the developer was looking at us thinking of putting in 28 lots so we got involved and workexl closely with the city and proposed that we have 9 lots so 9 acres, 9 lots. And the idea is to keep the houses sxnall. Keep as many trees as we can, and try to preserve the, and respect the natural qualities of the neighborhood. So tonight I'm here on a couple reasons and one is concern about the, you know ail the beautiful vegetation on the eastern side of the site, I'm concerned that the other houses coming across here, for all the other houses this is their front yard. Here and the other houses going here. In this case this will be like a back yard or a side yard, so it's going to be much closer to Frontier Trail than the existing houses that are there now and the beautiful trees and obviously this is the bluff line over here which is unbuildable. But all these beautiful Ixees are going to be gone. And my question, if there are going to be 2 lots here, could the property line be turned the other way going east and west so thig, so the first house could be built in the same location as the existing one, and another house be built here, thus saving all the trees and reducing the runoff. Right now 2 of the houses, the second one under conslxu~on right across the street from here, are actually below the level of the street and them is no curb so any extra runoff coming down that long driveway, etc will go onto Frontier Trail and we'd like engineering to look at it to make sure it won't come down one of those driveways and to those homes. The other thing is just trying to save the trees and be sensitive. And I guess the last thing that I can think of is th~ these houses, being in land planning and I know presentations, etc. These houses are drawn at 3,600 square feet pad. The 60 by 60. Could them be something that res~cts it to actualiy to be that square footage and not this being a schematic that the house is quite a bit bigger? Because there are variances and all the other houses along here, including our neighboxhood, are one sumff walkouts and more of the low profile, not to compete with the trees, that pexhaps thi~ could be, because they are walkout sites, that maybe they could be considered to be a one story walkout and not a two story walkout because Frontier Trail they could be you know, really appear to be 3 ½ stories tall if they had a steep roof. And I think that' s about iL Thallk you. Sacchet: Thank you. Claybaugh: I had a question sir. Sacchet: He has a question. Mr. Stin~xm? Claybaugh: I had a question for you. You made two points. One was ~cally with Lot number 2. Obviously you're interested in maximizing the preservation of trees. And then the next comment you advocated going from a two story footprint, which is smaller, to a rambler footprint. 41 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 2003 Charles Stinson: Well, yeah. I mean the idea is not, with the footprint they have they could still be building, just going through the numbers real quickly. At 3,600 square feet they could be building a 3 car garage and have 2,736 square feet on the main level, which down below, because of pm-cast they could have basically over a 5,000 square foot house. So if they kept thig footprint they could still have a 3 car garage and 5,000 square feet without going to three level Sacchet: So you're saying walkout with one story instead of two walkout. Charles Stinson: Yeah, because I think it's more in keeping wiih the scale of the hill as opposed to being a huge object. Any questions about the piece west or could I get a response why the lots weren't turned the other way and moved up here as opposed to having them just... Sacchet: Could you address that Kate please. Aanenson: Sure. Again Sharrmen spent several months on this. It came in with 4 lots. Legally they have a right to the additional lots if they came off Frontier Trail. We worked really hard. Sacchet: 4. Aanenson: Correct, 4 lots. Well no, if they would come off Frontier Trail, which we believe is not the best way. They have a fight to come off of Frontier Trail. Legally it could be subdivided into more lots. Again, looking at the grading we believe, we are creating a buffer on that side. We believe this is the best application of the ~, again looking at all the, and there were numerous iterations that we looked at. Trying to work with the land form and. Sacchet: Since you're on point of clarifying, since you're at it Kate. It's my understanding that the way currently the building would be on Lot 2, it wouldn't really get into trees. Actually it's a question for you Sharmee~ When I went out ~ I mean it is an opening in the trees and with the thing that I discussed just before with the applicant, we would actually most likely not have to cut trees at all. Aanenson: That's the goal. That's the goal. Sacchet: That's the goal, okay. Charles Stinson: How about the fact that, I mean where the house print is going now there's about 20 feet of grande change as opposed to, just question, why wasn't it just moved up farther7 Aanenson: It could move up farther. I mean they meet the setbacks. That's for approval to show they can get a a0 by a0 within that, outside the conservation ama. Vfnat we're saying is more than likely it won't be a 60 by 60. If people come in with, whoever buys it has a dedre to do what they want to do. Charles Stinson: Okay. Sacchet: Thank you very much. I know there's somebody else who wants to make a comment. Go ahead please. State your nan~ Tom Manarin: Tom Manarin, 7552 Cvre~ Plains Boulevard. I've worked with Sharmeen and Tracy on this deal too but I apologize. I was out of town. I just got back in so I didn't get a chance to nm by a few things with her. It might help to. 42 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 2003 Lillehaug: Could you point out where you live quickly? If possible. I know you're right in the neighborhood. Slagle: You're the potential development, fight? Tom Manarin: No I'm not. I'm the owner of, I'm the potential yeah. Exactly. Just to help, maybe it will help clarify what this is because this is an issue that I have, is why we're ending up with this approximately 90 feet of no man's laud in here. I baskally, Wyck and I own the private road going back in here. I was not accepting to give any land away. That is why, there was plotted in another building plot here that I would not go along with losing my right to some day maybe subdivide my lot. Therefore the vacation is ending right at our ~, which is creating this no man's land again. And yes, I know that it's right-of-way but from this point, this point and this point to this point, as far as I'm concerned it's back into no man's lancL I don't understand why it wasn't, you know there could he various reasons but instead of laking this property over here, dedicating this over, moving mailboxes. Them are some trees over here that may be in jeopardy. There is a catch basin down in here. Tha-e is a catch basin down in here which I'm not sure where this 3 to 1 slope, if it's going to get filled over, that water would eventually come in my back yard. The catch basin's aren't on this thing. They're...years and years ago that... Why this would come down this way... Sharmeen I know why we're doing this to create a point for the safety vehicles and that to come inw. We already have a roadway here. All Emie would be losing is the same amount of space here as he is over here on this property. It elimina~ your variance. It eliminates, which I don't undemand why you go from an easement in Lot 1 to granting an easement to get to Lot 2. That doesn't make any sense to me. Why we would want to do that but if it's all different ~ves on what's going on. The~ are those questions and then going back to the trees and that, this 22 inch. There is a question that I have. According to this tope, they're raising the grade right next to that oak by 4 or 5 feet. I can't quite make out what this contour line is out here. But it ends up being a 4 to 5 foot fill around an oak. It will never survive. So if you extend this out, you're not going to lose that oak. That oak is on your property anyways. It doesn't make any cliff--ce if you extend that road out. That oak is going to get lost either way. It just is. It won't withstand 4 to 5 feet of fill. Sacchet: Just to clarify. You're talking about the one, that's actually marked as a linden Tom Manarin: No, no. On the private drive, there's 2 oaks... Aanenson: What he wants to do is move that cul-de-sac over. Okay, now let's go back to where we have right-of-way. Let's go back to this map. Can you zoom in on this real quick,. Our right- of-way includes this wider area, which Steve asked before, which is this area. So ff we stayed within the right-of-way, because the developer also has this lot. We can keep the cul-de-sac but within the right-of-way. By pushing it over here, you still have a private drive serving these properties. Ail you've done is taken out more trees. You're still servicing the same thing. This private drive isn't going to move so those trees on ei~ side would still stay there. Can you zoom in on that please. These two trees are still saved. The coly driveway that we're swin~ng down, and this is the right-of-way that's not being vacated. It's not really no man's land. It's still serving the right-of-way. Tom Manafin: Right, okay. Who's going to talin care of it? Aanenson: The same way it's happening now. We're taking the easement over that. 43 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 2003 Tom Manarin: Okay. Aanenson: So I'm not sure. Tom Manarin: I guess I' m in agreement with Kate but I'in not because plow trucks, I mean the plow micks come right to the end of this right now. I mean this is where. Aanenson: Right, and there's no drainage right now. Just asphalt. Tom Manarin: The snow all ends up fight here anyway. I mean the city trucks and that come, the city maintains all that as far as you've been sweeping up to that point and everything else. But now you're saying from there to there it goes into. Aanenson: Our position is we're using existing right-of-way. We're minimizing the tree loss. That's our position. Sacchet: And just to clarify, I mean that stretch that we may call no man's land is really like the no man's land of every house. This driveway when it goes across the easement before it hits the property owner's land, right? Aanenson: Absolutely. Sacchet: So itjust... Aanenson: We don't understand what we're gaining by pushing the cul-de-sac over. It's not improving anybody's driveway access. Slagle: Let me just ask, what would we be gaining in your opinion? Tom Manarin: In my opinion you would be gaining the fact that you don't have any variance to grant You have the potential of eliminating an easement to this house by coming off of the cul- de-sac. Aanenson: We still have a variance. We still have a driveway variance. Tom Manarin: The cul-de-sac comes down in, you can put the cul-de-sac down in here to touch this property. You don't have a variance. Lillehaug: Would we have to get additional right-of-way from David and Leslie Kronk? Aanenson: Correct. Tom Manarin: No you wouldn't. Aanenson: Well if you push it all on his ~ there's a tr~_fl _e-off. Tom Manarin: ...but it does show. This yellow line is what you own now. What Fm saying is you can come in here and do the same thing as what you're doing out here. This is the same cul- de-sac that you have here? Aanenson: So we're increasing the length of the street Taldn~ out trees. Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 2003 Tom Manarin: No, you aren't taking out any trees. There's no trees taken out. Aanenson: But you will when you put the house pads in though because now you've taken out where you were going to put the houses where there's no trees. Tom Manarin: The house pad moves. The house pads haven't moved. The distance, the right- of-way distance is the same. Saam: The oak on the side of the private street would come out though. Tom Manarin: It' s going to be coming out ~ to the grading plan anyways. It's going to be lost because you've got 4 to 5 feet of fill going around it. The only tree that you are losing is this scrubby old basswood, which will probably fall over this summer anyway. Sacchet: Yeah, that doesn't look very goocL But that one comes out either way. Tom Manarin: No it doesn't. Right now that basswo~ would not come out. Aanenson: Did you check the grades on that cul-de-sac because we don't believe. Tom Manarin: On which one? Aanenson: To extend the cul-de-sac, did you check to see if that meets our. Tom Manarin: Alright, I did not check the grades. Aanenson: Okay, we did and we believe that that didn't work with that length~ It does ~ a lot of extra fill too. AI-Jaff:. That' s one of the reasons why that road was abandoned in the first place. Because of the way it drops. Tom Manarin: A grade of 8 patent. AI-Jaff: 7. Tom Manarin: the back of this cul-de-sac, no I did not. Aanenson: That's why the street was never built. Sacchet: Interesting thought. Definitely creative. Tom Manarin: You're going from a 70 to a 90. could be adjusted. That's from... Claybaugh: So the road could be built? Tom Manafin: adjust that.. 7? Okay. Well like I said, I did not check the grade from the manhole covers on You've got 10 feet of...over 100 feet so that Yeah. And all F m saying is that's pwposed grading, and obviously we could Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2003 Gladys Hanna: The fire hydrant is right, isn't he right by the cul-de-sac will be by the fire hydrant right there. Is that right? Anybody look at the fire hydrant? Tom Manarin: Anything else? Slagle: Thank you. Sacchet: I think we got your idea. Do you have a question about this? Clayhaugh: Yeah, if you could just, from your perspective. An individual perspective, what is it that you're trying to accomplish or preserve. Tom Manarin: Well I think the only thing that I'm trying to accomplish and ~e is what is out there now? I guess I don't see what creating another cul-de-sac is going to do when we already have something there that works. I have concerns for in the future, and that would be something that I should have asked for too is some sort of commitment back from the city or something that that property would never be deemed as the fourth driveway coming out to landlock our ~ in the back. That no man's land just seems really messy to me. Quite honestly. If you look at the plot, you have a lot of that going already and I don't know why you want to create more of thah Claybaugh: If I understand you, it's potentially counter productive to what your potential future plans may be somewhere down the line7 Is that? Tom Manarin: I would say that would be a way of explaining it, yeah. Claybaugh: Okay, that's one. Certainly one of the elements. Slagle: That's what I was trying to get at too earlier. Undemanding wbem you're coming from on this. Tom Manarin: You know I'm just trying to make it fit in there to make it look better. I mean I just don't understand where that 90 feet, it's just going to look, if you've got a curb and and everything, and then you've got 90 feet of whaL Aanenson: Driveway. Tom Manarin: But, you've got 2 driveways because you said they have to be 5 feet apart so that's where. Sacchet: Yeah, I think we understand your concerto Just to clarify, the way I reme~ the staff retx~ pointing out the situation of the private road in the context of your property. Your property, are you envisioning could be split into more tlmu 2 lots7 Tom Manarin: There's that possibility. Sacchet: And that's your concern then u!tirrmtely because if we have this private road and we have the maximum of 4 access, and we've already used up 3, now I understand. Staff m~d~. an effort to take one of those ~ off so they that the~ would be an additional possibility to have access should you choose to subdivide at some point. But your concern, as I see, seems to be that if you limit it to not be able to subdivide inw more than 2, is that part of your concern? Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2003 Sacchet: He cannot do more than 2? Tom Manarin: No. AI-Jaff:. No. Sacchet: Okay. AIJaff'. And even the 2 is doubtful. Sacchei: Even that is not sure, okay. So in other words it wouldn't be a limiting factor for this case? Al-laff: With everything that we did when we looked at the layout of LaHaye Addition was to protect his rights... Tom Manarin: Yeah, there's no doubt about that Sacchex: So you would not be limited. Is that your understanding? Tom Manarin: Understanding what? Sacchet: You would not be limited by this set-up, is that your undgtstanding? Tom Manarin: No, it is not limited at this point in time. Sacchet: Okay, thank you very much. Appreciate your c'mafivity. Tom Manafim Like I say, and them again S~ L the other questions ttmm too is, in your staff report it says that there's going to be another cul-de-sac made up, the way I'm understanding it, is up in front of our house then? A turn around area. Sacchet: No I don't think there's. Al-laffi No. Aanenson: It's a private streea Tom Manarin: Okay. I thought I read that, that the~ was going to be a 30 foot turn around. Sacchet: Something about a turn around. Tom Manarin: Yeah, that's what I read. AMaff: We talked to the fire marshal regarding the turn around, and the existing driveways will work just fine for a turn around purposes. Sacchet: So we would be alfight then. Okay. Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2003 Tom Manarin: Okay. And then on the grading issues, is that, should we worry about that later or do you want to take that up now? The issue that I have, that I'm concerned with and we touched on it before. This line here is at 892. The driveway, the proposed driveway is coming out this way. The garage floor has been proposed at 893. I can't handie any more water coming this way because it all comes right down through there. Every year it all washes out anyways. We n_~ee~l_ to touch base on that becau~ you know one of the proposals was that this was all coming out anyways. We were going to be able to lower it at that time. My concern is if this house is going at 893 and this water is coming this way, which is going to dump down in here, can you lower this or do something different so that I don't you know take on any more water than I alreauty am_ Aanenson: What's the existing house at, do you know? Tom Manarin: I know it's lower than the street here in the private drive. I would say by at least 2 ½ feet. The garage over here at this end is, the water, some of it tips and dumps back out into the water. Some of it tips... Sacchet: Alright, I don't know where we got into this detail at this point but it's definitely an aspect that needs to be ~ddressed so I appmciam you bring it up, thank you. Tom Manarin: Okay. Sacchet: Now, who else wants to make a comtmmt? I know there was, it's your turn right? Alright. Why don't you come up. State your name and address for the record please, and please speak in the microphone so we can all hear. Gladys Hanna: My name is Gladys Hanna and I live at 400 Santa Fe Trail. rd just like to know where my house, help me. I'tn right on the comer where the hydrant is. On this chart. I want to know where I am....it must be right them. Tom Manarin: You are, here's your driveway right here. There's the hydrant. Gladys Hanna: Right here is the fire hydranL Tom Manarin: That's your house right there. Gladys Hanna: Right here. Okay. Now, okay so now that the cul-de-sac is going to be where? Right here? Right by my driveway. How many feet is this? Saam: Be about 30 feet Sacchet: 30. Gladys Hanna: ...This is my driveway. Al4aff: Looks about 35. Gladys Hanna: I'd say about 8 feet Aanenson: I scale off aborn 32_ We can verify that for her. Gladys Hanna: From the cul-de-sm:? Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2003 Aanenson: From your driveway. Gladys Hanna: If this is where my house is? AI4atT: This is her driveway. This is the house. Sacchet: Sharmeen, show her where the street starts. You're looking at the easement line. Al4aff: Okay. This is where the pavement is right hem. The propose~ pavement. What you see in dark blue is the existing road. This is the house that was remodeled. Gladys Hanna: Okay. Al4aff: And this is you, and here is the driveway...about 30 feet where the new pavement is going to be. So really nothing is going to change by your house. Coladys Hanna: Okay. So the hydrant is where now? Al4aff: Right here. That's the hydrant. ~31adys Hanna: That will be in it or? A14aff: It will be in the right-of-way, but no pavement is going to affect the hydrant. Gladys Hanna: Okay. Sacchet: See there is a fight-of-way beyond the street because snow plowing and all this space to pile up the snow. (31adys Hanna: Right. Yeah, you've got to have that. Okay. Sacehet: Absolutely. Slagle: But we won't plow over the fire hydrant. ~31adys Hanna: Oh, and where will the mailboxes be? Claybaugh: Whe~ would you like them? Gladys Hanna: Well I'll tell you. I don't know, they're going to have to move them. Aanenson: Generally the Post Office checks on that. We'll check with the Post OfFtce. ~31adys Hanna: I don't want to...get my mail though. Sacchet: Oh you will have a mailbox. Aanenson: I don't think your' s may not move but that' s a post office... ~31adys Hanna: Wnem will be more people added to it. 49 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 2003 Aanenson: Just one additional. One additional house. One for you, one replaced and one more. We can check on that. Gladys Hanna: I'd like to know where... AI-Jaff: We'll let you know. Gladys Hanna: Thank you. Sacchet: Alright. Any other comments? Please come forward. State your name and s_dare, ss for the record please. Wyck Linden Hi. My name is Wyck Linder. I live at 7550 C_vre~ Plains Boulevard. My family and I've lived there for about 18 years. And I just had a couple of comments. I guess one of my biggest disappointments is that nobody has ever contacted me, called me, sent me a letter or anything about this, and as a property owner with property on, adjaemndes to two sides of this development I wasn't expecting a fruit basket but you know I was hoping somebody would contact me. Sacchet: How close do you live from this? Claybaugh: lust to the north. Sacchet: Sust to the north. Your name is acnmlly on the mailing list. You did not rec~ve any mailings? Wyck I_finder. No. And I tried to call I got a number off of that board over them and I tried to call but I could never get through to anybody so. I live right hem. So never heard a word ~ it and so I was kind of disappointed by that. Sacchet: Your address is 7550 Crreat Plains Boulevard? Wyck Linder: Yeah. Sacehet: That's the address that apparently this was sent to. Wyck Linder: Was it on the mailing list? Aanenson: Yes. Wyek Linden Okay. Sacehet: Did you receive notice for this meeting? Wyck Linden Yes, I got this. Sacchet: Oh, that's probably the only thing them Gladys Hanna: That's all I had. Wyek Linder: Was that all you had? 50 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 2003 Sacchet: That's all that went out. Wyck Linder: Okay. I've worked with, okay. I worked with otlgr planning commissions and I thought there might be a neighborhood meeting or something to seemingly answer out a lot of these questions before they got this far but. Sacehet: At times we do that, but it looks like in this case there was no such meeting. Wyck Linder: Okay. Well Fll quit whining about that so you know. Slagle: This is the first we're seeing it too. Wyck Linder. Okay. Not trying to stop any development or anything. That isn't certainly the intention, but then the other comment was that I think that Mr. Manarin and Mr. Stinson and others have some pretty good questions that would require some pretty detailed crisp answers, and you'll probably hear more questions come up regarding elevations, and access. Property lines. Adjacencies. That type of thing. That would require a good crisp answers so I just hope you'll agree with me and make sure that those answers are gotten. Thank you. Sacchet: Thank you very much. Anybody else want to make comments? Please come forward. David Krunk: Next neighbor. I'm David Krnnk; 7561 Cheat Plains. My family is right here, just to the south of the property. I just have a couple ~ts. Fzrst I want it on the record that I know they're talking about vacating this property in the middle and. Sacchet: Just a portion of it David Knmk: ...was just looidng for my half back So, no big conee~ but I'm mowing it so I figure I earned it. And I see that the way the cul-de-sac they're proposing does gmtt~ these trees right here. The 3 very large trees right on this circle and I want to make sure those aren't lost because those are huge. And I do appreei~ that you guys are addressing the trees bec__~_use basically when you drive into this neighborh~ and one of thc reasons why we bought this property, when you're driving in there it looks like you're driving into a park. It's all wooded. All of this back here is wooded. Mr. Stin~ has done a ~ job back hem keeping that, and so I just want to make sure that we don't lose that whole look, so any trees that are lost, it would be nice if they're replaced. Sacchet: May I just clarify with staff. Those trees he's pointing out next to the cad-de-sac, just south of the cul-de-sac, they would not be i .mpacted7 Aanenson: Yep, they're outside. That's the right-of-way line, not the pavement line you're looking at so actually the pavement circle's in even fmther. Sa~chet: Okay. David Kmnk: This is the pavement? Aanenson: Yep, you've got it. 51 Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2003 David Krunk: Gtxxt. Now they say that they're not taking out any big trees down here. There's a lot of scrub. There's some dead trees and low bushes, and basically this whole area looks like forest. Okay, there may not be any legitimate large trees on that square, but it is all woods. Back woods. It's bushes. Sacchet: Actually there is a canopy line, that wavy line, that actually shows where the canopy cover is. David Krunk: So that is, so you know, but just stating that there are no big trees coming out is a little bit of a misnomer because that is going to really change the look of that parle And ~n the only other concern I had was, this is going to change my curb lines quite a bit. I assume that's all paid for by the developer and stuff? And the mailboxes, that kind of stuff. We don't, cost the ~ owners that are affected by thi.~ don't have costs related to thi.~. I assume. Aanenson: No, that's the intent. David Knmk: Okay. Sacchet: Thanks Kate. Slag]e: So intent would be a yes? Aanenson: Yes. Right, and then we have a pre-construction meeting. We meet with the ~ owners... Again here's the specific concerns, those mailboxes. During ~on issues, those kind of things. David Krunk: That's all I had. Sacchet: Thank you very much. Anybody else want to come forward? Make any commmts? Please, this is your turn. Debbie Lloyd: Debbie Lloyd 7302 Laredo Drive. Just a question about private streets. What steps does the City take to eosure that private streets are built to the specifications of code? Sacchet: Do you want to address that briefly? Aanenson: No, Matt can do that. Saam: Yeah, we inspect those now. That's a new thing we've added to our repertoire of inspection because of problems in the past so. past those two oak trees. Saam: Yes. We're going to... Aanenson: There's no private street. Lillehaug: We don't have a private street 52 Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2003 Aanenson: We're cul-de-sacing the public fight-of-way and there will be a driveway. Existing private street is in place. Sacchex: We don't change anything about the existing private street? Aanenson: There's one home that comes off iL It will continue to come off it. That's not being altered. Debbie Lloyd: But you ~a~_ressed the private street in your staff report about it meeting specifications of code, and the fire m~-shal turnaround and stuff. Aauenson: This is the existing one. This is not, them is a driveway that conw, s off it now. Bm that's not going to change. This exisfiug driveway so it's not going to be...additional access and this will be a regular driveway. So it's not a private street... Debbie Lloyd: Because it mentioned a private street in the planning...in the first paragraph... Thank you. Sacchex: Thank you. Clayhaugh: Point of clarification. Sacchex: Point of clarLficatiom Claybaugh: Just in general terms. Going back to the private driveway. I know it doesn't apply in this one but it was my undemanding last time we've been through this that we were going to require that the developer engage an independent testing company that would certify the installation that was done per standards so that was to circumvent... Saam: Yep. Sacchex: Anybody else want to address the Planning Commission? Please come forward. Charles Stinson: Charles Stinson again. The reason I'm coming up again, I had a chance to look at the topo and this is the first ~ I had the chance to look at it and this is what I do every day is try to blend houses into sil~s, etc. So I guess what I would wish that could happen is that perhaps look at the possibility. I think the site is fine for development but it seems so much more natmal to make that division this way and work with the existing grade, saving all the trees and build the other house fight here because you have a natural one story walkout on that site. If you go hem you have 2 stories of grade change that you have to make and thtxe's no way in the world that you could save all those trees. I mean 15 feet is fine if you have a fiat lot, but making a sueex in the, if there's 20 feet of grade change you can do a half of it with a house. The other half has to be done by retaining walls, landscaping, etc. And it just seems to natmal to put it up hem and then you can leave everything at the bottom, so those are my comments. Sac, chex: Thank you very much. Appreciate your expertise with that. Anybody else want to comment to this pmtx~al? If not, I will close the public hearing and bring it back to commissioners. Comments. Want to start? 53 Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2003 Slagle: I can start. I think all and all I would support the findings. I would support staff's position on this. I do think there's some inl~'esting questions that have been raised, but I think I have heard answers from staff that satisfy the questi~ I might have. With the exception of this last conunent, and I don't need to hear an answer but I guess I just wonder out loud what that would be like if that came in using thai kind of a dividing line between the lots. So for fight now I am leaning towards approval but there might be some more things brought up. Sacchet: Thanks Rich. Bruce, you want to go next? Feilc I'm leaning towards approval as well. I think it would have been easier if the lot would have come in flipped the other direction~ Matt, could you tell me in the reco~ons specifically where we're talking about splitting that, those driveways with the 5 foot separation? I've been through this a couple of tinm. Is it in the report? Are you waiting to have it on the revised plan? Is it in the conditions? Saam: Yeah, there's a condition that speaks to that too. Feik: Should I come back to that? Saam: Well I've got it here. Feik: Okay, good. Saam: In the report it's under, well at the bottom of page 5 going into page 6. Feik: I found that. Saan~ Okay. Feilc I'm wondering where that is in the conditions for approval though. It's not specified I don't believe. It is? AI-Jaff: Actually if you look at condition 14. Feik: Thank you. Alright, thank yon- Gen~y I support the application. I certainly would prefer to have 2 lots split this direction than 4 lots and some of the other things that could happen in the development that the ~ owner would have the fight to do. And could certainly do a much more intensive development I think it's generally consistent with what's going on in the neighborhood. Whether it's a one story, two story on that Lot 2 is certainly going to be up to whoever moves in or whoever decides to build on that and I don't see whexe we cam put any Sacchet: Alison. Blackowiak: Thank you. Yeah I agree with what's been said so far. I certainly prefer tWO lots to the potential for more than two. And the fact that so many of the trees am proposed to be saved is really a plus for me. I'm trying to envision the houses in slightly different positions bec__ause I know that we have to prescribe the 60 by 60 pad but I'm hoping that the~ will be a little movement and especially on Lot 2. I'd like to see that pushed a lot farther to the west, but that's again it's personal preference and I have on control over that but I'll just say my piece and we'll see what happens. I think it's a gorgeous area and I just hope that the con. actors and the ~ Planning Commission Meeting -April 15, 2003 movers and everybody can really just do a great job because it's an arent that's really worthy of some nice homes and some real care taken to pul~g those homes in. Sacchet: Thank you. Craig. Claybaugh: I support staff's position in their findings. I believe that development certainly could be more intensive. Would like to address, or just make light of the custom grading oppommities I'll say and see that they're followed through on or ~_ddmssed. With being in developmmt, Charles I'm sure you're also familiar with zero i .mpact statements, and that is basically zero hnpact on anything that you're doing. We do it consistently with corps engineers but from that point all the way through what an applicant comes in with, once you satisfy the different codes and ordinance, and he stays within that buil~ envelope and comes forward with a reasonable application, he has a certain amount of latitude in them. It isn't necessarily a question for us to decide if it can be done slightly better or not, and I'm not saying that the thin~ that you're proposing wouldn't improve it, but that isn't necessarily, once it hits a certain threshold that isn't for us to decide. So that being said I can support it as it's set fortlx One thing that was brought up was just the coordination for the underground utilities. I don't know if there's. Aanenson: This is a private drive so I'm not sure how much, you know because we don't have... Claybaugh: Is there anything that. Aanenson: We can certainly check with. Clayhaugh: Is there anything the City can do to just help try and coordinate it and maybe facilitate the meeting... Aanenson: They're the underlying ~ ownem that would have to consent... Claybaugh: So there's no city involvement. Aanenson: We could. Claybaugh: That's all I'm asking. Aanenson: Right, but you need underlying consent, Claybaugh: Right, I understand it's not a city decision or unilateral decision~ Just what you can do to help facilitate it. That's all the co~ I have. Sacchet: Steve. Lillehaug: I would like to get a little specific here. I would like to, from the package that goes to City Council I'd like to remove alternate 2 from the packet. We did not discuss thar I don't think it should proceed and go to the council. On the grading and erosion control plan for alternate l, when you refer to possible in quite a few locations. Get rid of the word possible. This is a final, final plat here. Existing house on number 1, I think we n__e~_ to show a proposed floor elevation, not the existing. Show the proposed elevation~ ~ possible watermai~ Show the location as proposed. A~ staff indicated, the plat needs to be cleared of, we need to show the items that need to be on the plat on the plat and address that clear with the drainage utility easements. I'm not sure if we want to show the proposed right-of-way for the cul-de-sac in 55 Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2003 this plat. It's not part of it. And the house on pad number 2, I think that can b~ a walkout and I think grading can be accomplished. And then specifically, I'm in support of this. I would like on the condition number 20, does that area include the vacated property? I would assume it does I guess. When we're calcuhfiag the fees. Aancnson: I can double check on thaL Lillehaug: Yeah, we should double check that. Fd like to, because I think it should be bec__au,se I could use some extra property to put a garage om But anyway, I think we need to include a standard in there .... added in there, either 7 or 9 ton, whatever standard for the city. That'd be it, thank you. Sacchet: Alright, I don't have too much to ~da. excet~ in texms of conditions I would want to be very specific that Lot number 2 should be custom graded. That the building pad on Lot number 2 should be moved north and west as much as possible to get it away from those trees. I would like to include those 2 big trees that are currently on the south of that building pad number 2. I would like to have the fence, the tree protection fence on the other side of those trees, so those trees are on the protected side. The same, I'd like to extend the tree protection fence in the northwest corner of Lot 1 to include those, that grove of treea in that cca'ner. I appreciate Mx. Stin~m's suggestions. I think they're very well taken. I don't know whether it would make sense to have a statement that the applicant would work with staff to consider the possibility of splitting the lot the other way. What the merits of that would be before it goes to cotmcil. I don't think that's a reason to hold it up at thin point. And the same with the tmderground utility. I think that would be a great imprevement for the city to put these utilities undergro~ if that would be possible if the applicant could work with staff to consider that possa~ty before it goes to council. That's all my comments. With that, I'd be happy to take a motiom Feilc Well I have a question. Sacchex: Go ahead. Feik: If you want staff to really look at splitting this lot the other direction, I think you're smsting over. I think you're starting over on this whole thing. I think that's, I hate to say I think that's an ~onable request. Sacchex: It'dbetoomuch~ It' d be too much to request from staff. Okay. Aanenson: We did evaluate that. Sacchet: Yeah, the reasonable thing would be to table it if you want to go that mute. Feiic It would be. Sacchex: We'll acc~t it as it is. Feik: Because it's going to be very difficult. Saccbet: Yeah, I think you're fight about that Bruce. Apprecia~ that you're bringing that up. I don't think it's a reason to hold it up as I rated. So with that I'd like to have a motion. Feilc Steve had the most comments. 56 Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2003 Blackowiak: That meatus it's your's. Lillehaug: I make a motion the Planning Commiasion recommends approval of the Preliminary Plat for Subdivision g03-3 for LaHaye Addition for 2 lots and a varianc~ to allow 2 driveways on a single residential lot as shown on the plans received March 14, 2003 subject to the following conditions, 1 through 24. And I would like to add to number 3 to include a 45 foot radius as staff has indicated. To number 15 I would like to include having an approved pavement design. And then I would like to adtl several other conditions. Number 25. To remove the word possible where, let me back up here. I've got to be more ~ here. I'mnot sure how to address my nit picky items here. Any help? Sacchex: Well you don't like the word possible. You want the driveway to be where it's shown. Lillehaug: Right. I mean they just need to finalize thia. I mean to me it's looking like it's possible, possible. Feilc Yeah, that you could put the garage on the other side in which case the driveway's going to be 40 feet shorter. Odds are the garage is going to go on the south side anyway because you're not. Aanenson: Right, it works real well. Feilc Okay so. Lillehaug: Okay. Condition nnmher 25. Show the proposed house elevation for Lot 1. Condition number 26. Show final proposed driveway locations. How do you like that? Sacchet: Sure. Lillehaug: Number 27. Work with staff and finalize the plat and inchide the necessary information to include drainage and utility easement, etc. Blackowiak: I'll second that. Sacchex: I can make friendly amendments, can I? Friendly amendme~ Condition number 28. Include the tree grove on the northwe~ corner of Lot 1 and the 2 big trees on the south side of Lot 2 inside the tree protection fencing. LiHehaug: Yes. Sacchet: Number 29. Lot number 2 will be custom graded and ihe house pad moved northwest as possible. Sacchet: As required. Yeah, at least with that tree fencing. That would be somewhat correlated. And number 30. Applicant shall wm'k with staff to consider moving utilities underground. We say which ones we mean. That's a sticky one. 57 Planning Commission Meeting -April 1:5, 2003 Blackowiak: That's a separate issue. Claybaugh: Yeah. Sacchet: Yeah, that's not on this property so we can't make it a condition. Aanenson: That was my point. We will certainly make a contact but Sacchet: Yeah, we can't put it in as a condition because it's unrelated to this particular ~ specifically. Alright, that's my. Lillehaug: So 1 through 29 as stated. 1%ik.. Additional amendment? Sacchet: Aldghc Feilc Adding to your number 26. I think that's the one where you stated the elevation of the house on Lot 1. That the plan should address any runoff to the west of that lot. Aanenson: That's actually 25. Lot elevation. You want the drainage. Feilc Yeah, 25. The resident brought up a concern regarding slope and grs_de. Sacchet: That's to the north, isn't it? Feik: To the west. Blackowiak: North and west. Sacchet: Northwest, alrigh~ Okay. Is that it? Lillehaug moved~ Biackowiak seconded that the Planning Commission reco~ approval of the preliminary plat for Subdivision #03-3 for LaHaye Addition for 2 lots ami a variance to allow two driveways on a single re~lenfld lot as shown on the plans dated Received March 14, 2003, subject to the followin~ conditions: 1. Install sod in all of the pa~ removal areas. the applicant and/or contractor must supply the City Engineer with a detailed haul route for review and approval Ixior to site grading. 3. The new cul-de-sac on C_nmt Plains Boulevard shall be consmlcted to cmrent City design standard, a 4.~ foot radias, with B-618 curb and gutter. 4. A ~ 30 foot wide drainage and utility easement is required over the public sanitary sewer line on Lots I and 2. 5. Remove any existing pavement within the cul-de-sac fight-of-way so the existing driveways have a maximum width of 24 feet, as per City Code. 58 Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2003 1 1 gl Any grading or utility work outside of the property limits or right-of-way will require a te~ easement. A maximum slope of 3:1 is allowed without a retaining wall Revise the grading plan to comply. A private easement is required for the driveway of Lot 2 which crosses over Lot 1. 9. Revise the grading plan as follows: 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. de Show the proposed neck radius for the cul-de-sac. Show the proposed grades for the private street and cul-de-sac upgrades. Add a benchmark and legend to the plan. The legend should define all of the different line types, easements, silt fences, etc. Move the building pad of Lot 2 out of the public easement for the sanitary sewer line. Show all existing and proposed easements on the plans. Revise the utility plan as follows: a. Show the existing sanitary sewer line in Great Plains Boulevard. Show the existing watermain in Gre~ Plains Boulevard and Frontier Trail Add a legend to the plan. Label the existing size and type of pipe for both the sanitary and watermains. Add a catch basin at the low point in the cul-de-sac with a storm sewer line that discharges just east of the proposed driveway for Lot Z The water service for Lot 2 will have to be obtained from the existing main in Frontier Trail. The proposed private street upgrades should include a vehicle turnaround area, acceptable to the City's Fire MamhalL and a copy of the private easement dedical~ to the benefiting ~ owners. In order to save the two existing oak trees on each side of the private street, the existing street width may be maintained in thig area. Lot 2 cannot use the same driveway access off of Gre~ Plains Boulevard as the private street. The two driveway accesses shall be separated by a ~ of five feet. Detailed street construction plans and specifications in accc~ance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates, incl~ approved pavement design, will be required for review and spproval by the City Council at the time of final plat consideration. Since the street i~vements will become owned and ~ by financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee construction of the public i .m!~'ove~ts. Permits from the regulatory agency will be required, including but not limited to Watershed District, MPC_~ etc. The site will be subject to one sanitary sewer and water connection charge for the new lot. The 2003 connection charges for both sanitary and water are $4,513. The ~ is also 59 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 2003 17. 18. 19. 0. 21. 4. subject to sanitary sewer and water hook-up charges for the new lot. The 2003 trunk utility hook-up charges are $1,440 per unit for sanitary sewer and $1,876 per unit for water. The 2003 SAC charge is $1,275 per unit. These charges are collected prior to the building permit issuance. Building Official conditions: b, Final grading plans and soil reports must be submitted to the Inspections Division before building permits will be issued. Each lot must be provided with separate sewer and water services. Retaining walls over 4 feet high require a permit and must be designed by an engineer licensed in the State of MinnegotlL a. b. Because of the setback~ of the proposed new house, additional address numbers will be required at the driveway entrance. Address numbers must comply with Chanhassen Fire Depamneat Policy regarding premise identification pursuant to Policy No. 29-1992 (copy enclosed). Submit new proposed driveway dimensions to City Engineer and Chanhassen F'n~ Marshal. This is to ensure that fire apparatus can safely negotiate the driveway to the new proposed single family dwelling. The bluff impact zone should be shown on the grading plan. Based on the proposed developed area of 1.57 acr~, the water quality fees associated with this project are estimated at $1,490 and the water quantity fees associated with this project are estimated at $3,686. The applicant will not be assessed for areas that are dedicated outlots. No credit will be given for temporary pond areas. At thi~ time, the estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat recording is $5,176. Approval of the subdivision is con~ upon the City Council approving the vacation of the fight-of-way. Environmental Resource ~ conditions: b. Tree preservation fence shall be installed at the edge of the grading limits prior to any construction. Access to Lot 2 should be from Gre~ Plains Boulevard to increase tree Full park and trail fees will be collected in lien of land dedication for the newly created lot in the amount of $2400. Access to Lot 2 shall be prohibited off of Frontier Trail Show the proposed house elevation for Lot 1 and address the runoff to the west and north. Show final proposed driveway locations. Planning Commission Meeting -April 15, 2003 27. Work with staff and finalize the plat and include the necessary information to include drainage and utility easement, etc. 8o Include the tree grove on the northwest corner of Lot 1 and the 2 big trees on the south side of Lot 2 inside the tree protection fencing. 29. Lot nmnber 2 will be custom graded and the house pad moved northwest as required. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0. Sacchet: Any comments any want to highlight for council before we forget whexu we wem~ with this? Do the conditions sufficiently reflect our concerns? Blackowiak: I think so. I'm just maybe note that for the audience member. Sacchet: Yes, for those of you here, thi~ will go to City Council on the 12~ of May, and the City Council will make the final decision. This is merely a recommendation that we reco~ to the City Council for action at this point so thank you aH very mnch for coming for this. APPRQVAL QF MINUTF_~: Alison Blackowiak noted the Minmes of the Planning Commission meeting dated April 1, 2003 as subn:fittexJ. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS. Slagle: Oh one more thing. Sacchet: Rich. Slagle: For the cornmigsion, on the very first applicant with respect to the sport court cx basketball court. How we do not require a permit for that. $imil~ to what staff said, analogous to patio. My question, and maybe I should have said it earlier to staff is busy, when it comes to lighting. You know Sport Courts have lights. Sacchet: There is no lighting in thi~. Slagle: Not in this one but my question is, is them a permit required for lighting? I would think so. Blackowiak: Nobody's listening to us so we'll just have to ask later. Chairman Sacchet adjourn the Planning _Commimdon meeting at 10:0~ p.m. Submitted by Kate Aanenson Community Development Director 61