1i Approval of MinutesCHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
SUMMARY MINUTES
JUNE 9, 2003
Mayor Furlong called the meeting to order at 7:20 p.m. The meeting was opened with the
Pledge to the Flag.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Furlong, Councilman Labatt, Councilman Ayotte,
Councilman Lundquist, and Councilman Peterson
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Justin Miller, Roger Knutson, Kate Aanenson, Bob
Generous, Todd Hoffman, Teresa Burgess, Matt Saam, and Bruce DeJong
PUBLIC PRESENT FOR ALL ITEMS:
Jerry & Janet Paulsen
Debbie Lloyd
Judy Christensen
Uli Sacchet
Jim Bohn
Alex Shaine
Melissa Gilman
7305 Laredo Drive
7302 Laredo Drive
7100 Utica Lane
Planning Commission
EDA
Lakeshore Weekly News
Chanhassen Villager
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: RECOGNITION OF BOKOO BIKES FOR TRAIL MAP
PARTNERSHIP.
Ed Vigil from Bokoo Bikes was presented with a framed edition of the Chanhassen Parks and
Recreation Guide for the City of Chanhassen, which Bokoo Bikes contributed $5,000.
CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Peterson moved, Councilman Lundquist seconded to
approve the following consent agenda items pursuant to the city manager's
recommendations:
bo
Approval of Preliminary and Final plat to Replat Two Lots into Three Single Family Lots
with Variances, 185 Pleasant View Road and 6430 Pleasant View Lane, Schroeder
Addition, Larry & Doug Schroeder and Linda Peterson.
Co
Approval of Minutes:
-Verbatim City Council Minutes dated May 12, 2003
-City Council Executive Session Minutes dated May 27, 2003
-City Council Work Session Minutes dated May 27, 2003
-Verbatim City Council Minutes dated May 27, 2003
Receive Commission Minutes:
- Verbatim Planning Commission Minutes dated May 20, 2003
d.
Approval of Stipulation of Settlement and Order for Judgment, Tax Increment Financing
District 2-1.
All voted in favor and the motion carded unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
City Council Summary Minutes - June 9, 2003
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS.
Judy Christensen introduced herself as a Chanhassen resident on the District 112 referendum task
force and stated that she was going to be interested in heating the position of the City Council as
it relates to the referendum and siting a middle school or high school in the City of Chanhassen.
REQUEST FOR INTERIM USE PERMIT TO BRING IN FILL IN EXCESS OF 1,000
CUBIC YARDS, 6421 HAZELTINE BOULEVARD, MINNETONKA SCHOOL
DISTRICT 276.
Public Present:
Name Address
Mike Remington
Mike Condon
Inspec, Inc.
Minnetonka Schools
Matt Saam presented the staff report on this item, highlighting the new drive aisle for buses and
cars, new parking arrangement, and the addition on a drainage pond on the site. Councilman
Ayotte asked for clarification on mosquito control in the pond. Mike Condon, the Building and
Grounds Supervisor for Minnetonka Schools stated that the school district currently works with
Minnesota Mosquito Control on all their sites in Minnetonka and would be happy to allow them
to land on their property in Chanhassen for mosquito control. Councilman Lundquist felt this was
a good opportunity to add a condition of approval that the Minnetonka School District lead a
reasonable effort to resolve the drainage and trash issues brought forth by the Mancino' s, aided
by Chanhassen city staff as necessary. Councilman Peterson agreed with the additional
conditions being proposed. Councilman Labatt stated his opposition to last minute additions.
Mike Remington, the Senior Project Engineer with Inspec expressed concern with the limited
hours for hauling operations from 8:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. and asked that the council reconsider
that item. Uli Sacchet, Chairman of the Planning Commission, affirmed that the Planning
Commission had pretty strong consensus about the safety and traffic issues involved with trucks
hauling during rush hour. After discussion and amendments to the motion, the following motion
was made and voted on.
Councilman Ayotte moved, Councilman Peterson seconded to approve Interim Use Permit
g03-02 with the following conditions:
The applicant shall provide the City with a cash escrow or letter of credit in the amount of
$8,400 to guarantee erosion control measures and site restoration and compliance with the
interim use permit. The applicant must also pay the City an administration fee of $296
prior to the City signing the permit.
.
Storm sewer sizing calculations will have to be provided for a 10 year, 24 hour storm
event.
3. The applicant must provide a proposed haul route for review and approval.
,
If excess material will be hauled to another site in Chanhassen, a separate grading permit
will be required for the other property.
City Council Summary Minutes - June 9, 2003
o
.
o
.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
All disturbed areas as a result of construction are required to be reseeded and mulched
within two weeks of site grading.
A rock construction entrance must be installed at the beginning of the driveway
construction.
Add a four foot high chain link fence to the west side of the proposed bituminous path
along the entire length of the pond.
The applicant shall obtain and comply with all permit requirements of the Watershed
District and MnDot, if applicable.
The applicant shall supply the City with a mylar as-built survey prepared by a
professional engineer upon completion of excavation to verify the grading plan has been
performed in compliance with the proposed plan.
A stockpile must be provided for the topsoil which will be re-spread on the site as soon as
the excavation is completed. Top soiling and disk mulch seeding shall be implemented
immediately following the completion of excavated areas.
Noise levels stemming from the operation are not to exceed MPCA and EPA regulations.
If the city determines that there is a problem warranting such tests shall be paid for by the
applicant.
Hours of operation and hauling operations are limited to 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday
through Friday, 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Saturdays, and prohibited on Sundays and national
holidays. If the City Engineer determines that traffic conflicts result due to rush hour
traffic flows, the hours of operation will be appropriately restricted.
The applicant shall be responsible for any and all road damage sustained from the truck
hauling and construction activities. In addition, if any dirt or debris is tracked onto
Highway 41, the applicant will be required to sweep the road as necessary.
Use the City's standard outlet control structure for the pond outlet, as per City Detail Plate
4/3109. Also, add the other following Detail Plates to the plans: 5300 & 5301.
Show the NWL and HWL of the proposed pond.
Show the proposed grading for the new bituminous path for the entire distance to Melody
Hill Road.
Revise the drive aisle widths of the eastern parking lot to be 26 feet in width, as per city
code.
Building Official conditions:
bo
The plans must be signed by a professional engineer licensed in the State of
Minnesota.
Provide plans and details of the accessible parking space signage for review.
A plumbing permit must be obtained before beginning work on the site utilities.
City Council Summary Minutes - June 9, 2003
19.
The applicant shall verify the hawthorns planted on the south side of the parking lot have
adequate growing space and protection if planted within the sidewalk.
20. The applicant shall make the minimum inside width of all landscape islands 10 feet.
21. An on-site water truck is required for daily dust control.
22.
Minnetonka School District 276 introduce a mosquito control plan that would be
acceptable to both the school and what the city staff recommends, based on what's an
acceptable norm.
23.
The Minnetonka School District lead a reasonable effort to resolve the drainage and trash
issues brought forth by the Mancino' s, aided by Chanhassen city staff as necessary.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
REQUEST FOR LAKESHORE AND SIDE YARD SETBACKS, LOT AREA WIDTH
AND HARD SURFACE COVERAGE VARIANCES, 9221 LAKE RILEY BOULEVARD,
TOM AND SUE SUTER.
Public Present:
Name Address
Jim Hamilton
Tom and Sue Suter
9225 Lake Riley Boulevard
9221 Lake Riley Boulevard
Kate Aanenson presented the staff report and highlighted the changes that had been made to the
plan since the Planning Commission meeting. Tom Suter went over a handout he prepared
providing a summary of the variance approval process they went through and highlighting the
chain of events and the actions taken in order to meet the recommendations and the suggestions
of the Planning Commission as well as staff. In an effort to educate the neighbors and anybody
else who is interested, the Suter's plan to hold seminars or use their home and lakescaping as a
model for demonstrations. There was discussion around the flexibility of design elements on the
west side and what was legally acceptable. The following wording was decided to be added to
the conditions, to allow encroachments on the west wall of the residence of non-foundation items
such as dormers, bay windows, wing walls of up to one foot or 12 inches beyond the eaves.
Councilman Labatt moved, Councilman Peterson seconded that the City Council approve
Variance g2003-7 for a 13,535 square foot variance from the 20,000 square foot minimum
lot size; 55 foot variance from the minimum 90 foot lot width requirement; a 38 foot
variance from the 90 foot lake shore width; a 6'8" foot variance from the 10 foot west side
yard setback, for the first 11.5 feet of the house only then reducing the setback to 5 feet for
the eaves; a 4-5 foot variance from the 10 foot east side yard setback; and an 18 foot
variance from the 75 foot shoreland setback for the reconstruction of a single family home
on an existing 6,465 square foot lot based upon the findings in the staff report and based
upon the following conditions:
A building permit must be applied for within one year of approval of the variance or the
variance shall become null and void.
City Council Summary Minutes - June 9, 2003
,
The submitted survey shall be signed by a licensed surveyor, engineer, or landscape
architect and shall include: a north arrow; show a 12 inch or greater trees on the site and
along the neighboring property lines; and the existing shed to the east.
No grading within 37.5 feet of the Ordinary High Water elevation. Type In silt fence
must be provided during demolition and during construction on the lake side. Type I silt
fence shall be installed along the side property lines. Silt fence shall be removed when
the construction is complete and the site has been revegetated.
.
As part of the building permit submittal, a grading, drainage and erosion control plan
must be prepared for city review and approval.
o
The applicant shall use all reasonable means to protect and save the trees along the
western property line. Tree protection fencing shall be installed prior to site grading. A
landscape plan must be prepared for city review.
6. Develop and install a landscape and lakescape plan.
.
Encroachments on the west side of the residence of non-foundation items, i.e. dormers,
bay windows, wing walls, of up to 12 inches beyond the eaves will be acceptable.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
REQUEST FOR INTERIM USE PERMIT TO BRING IN FILL IN EXCESS OF 1,000
CUBIC YARDS, 1916 CRESTVIEW CIRCLE, BRIAN CARNEY.
Matt Saam presented the staff report on this item, highlighting what action has occurred since the
Planning Commission meeting. There were three main issues or concerns that were raised at
Planning Commission. Those were the location of the access point or driveway to the site.
Whether it came off of Crestview or Galpin. The second would be sight distance. Existing sight
distance on Galpin Boulevard. And lastly the safety of the proposed driveway. Councilman
Peterson expressed concern over the size of the culvert and it's ability to handle a 100 year rain
event. Mayor Furlong has concern over the amount of woods and wetlands being filled.
Councilman Labatt asked if the applicant had submitted a haul route, or if it was included in the
conditions. He suggested adding a condition relating to dust control and clean-up of the streets
of all dirt and debris as a result of the hauling. Brian Carney, the applicant, explained about the
size and flow of the creek.
Councilman Labatt moved, Councilman Peterson seconded that the City Council approve
Interim Use Permit #03-1, subject to the following conditions:
The applicant shall provide the City with a cash escrow or letter of credit in the amount of
$5,000 to guarantee erosion control measures and site restoration and compliance with the
Interim Use Permit.
2. Culvert sizing calculations will have to be provided for a 100 year, 24 hour storm event.
3. The applicant must provide a proposed haul route for review and approval.
.
If fill is coming from another site in Chanhassen, a separate grading permit will be
required for the other property.
City Council Summary Minutes - June 9, 2003
.
o
.
o
.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
All disturbed areas as a result of construction are required to be reseeded and mulched
within two weeks of site grading.
The applicant shall pay the City an administration fee of $208 prior to the City signing the
permit.
An erosion control blanket must be installed on the south side of the driveway slope.
Add the benchmark to the plan that was used for the site survey.
Comply with the Carver County conditions of approval letter dated April 11, 2002 for a
driveway access permit to the site.
The applicant shall obtain and comply with all permit requirements of the Watershed
District.
The applicant shall supply the City with a mylar as-built survey prepared by a
professional engineer upon completion of excavation to verify the grading plan has been
performed in compliance with the proposed plan.
A stockpile must be provided for the topsoil which will be re-spread on the site as soon as
the excavation is completed. Topsoiling and disc mulch seeding shall be implemented
immediately following the completion of excavated areas.
Noise levels stemming from the operation are not to exceed MnPCA and EPA
regulations. If the city determines that there is a problem warranting such tests shall be
paid by the applicant.
Hours of operation are limited to 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday and
prohibited on national holidays. If the City Engineer determines that traffic conflicts
result due to rush hour traffic flows, the hours of operation will be appropriately
restricted.
The applicant shall be responsible for any and all road damage sustained from the truck
hauling and construction activities.
The applicant shall construct and maintain a rock gravel construction access to the site.
Access to the site shall be restricted to this access point only.
Building Official conditions:
a.
do
The retaining walls must be designed by a professional engineer.
Soil and compaction testing is required on the proposed building site if any fill
will be placed there, the results must be submitted to the Inspections Division
before building permits will be issued.
If city sewer service is not available to the property, two (2) acceptable on-site
sewage treatment sites must be located by a licensed professional and the
information must be submitted to the Inspections Division. The sites must be
marked and protected to prevent damage from the grading activity.
The address for the property shall be 6591 Galpin Boulevard.
City Council Summary Minutes -June 9, 2003
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
The applicant shall plant a minimum of five trees and shrubs and 20 shrubs on the slopes
of the proposed drive to help minimize mn-off and improve erosion control. The tree
species shall be deciduous and a minimum 1 inch diameter for the trees. Shrubs shall be
at least 2 feet high when planted. Proposed planting sites and species selection shall be
approved by the city prior to planting.
Grading will be revised near the garage and house pad to minimize the slope.
The driveway will be revised to have a maximum 2 percent for the first 15 feet directly
adjacent to Galpin.
Submit fill material types and borrow sources to the city for approval.
Add a turn around to the driveway.
Submit an as-built survey to the city upon completion.
The applicant will work with staff on the installation of a barrier along the north and south
side of the driveway.
25. The driveway shall line up with the driveway on the opposite side of Galpin Boulevard.
26.
If any dirt or debris is tracked onto Lake Lucy or any residential streets, including Galpin
Boulevard, the applicant will be required to sweep the road as necessary.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
REQUEST FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT FROM
OFFICE-INDUSTRIAL TO RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY; REQUEST FOR
CONCEPT PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL FOR A 427 UNIT
TOWNHOME PROJECT ON 94.8 ACRES, LOCATED SOUTH OF THE TWIN CITIES
AND WESTERN RAILROAD, EAST OF LYMAN BOULEVARD AND WEST OF BLUFF
CREEK; TOLLEFSON DEVELOPMENT AND CHARLES MATTSON.
Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item and stated that staff was recommending
denial of the land use map amendment and denial of the concept PUD. Jason Osberg from
Tollefson Development presented the developer's case for the land use amendment and the
request for the townhome development on the property as opposed to office industrial
development. Councilman Ayotte and Mayor Furlong asked staff to clarify issues brought up by
the applicant, such as tax implications and grading. Charles Mattson, the owner of the property
talked about his desire to see his property developed, and he did not believe it would be
developed industrial in the near future. Carl Tollefson disputed the information brought up by
staff on the cost of services versus revenue for residential and industrial land, saying that the
report was too old and not relevant in today's market of townhomes. During council discussion,
Councilman Labatt stated he did not want to change from the comprehensive plan guiding
because that's what the residents in Stone Creek and Valley Ridge thought they were buying next
to when they bought their properties. Councilman Ayotte felt the development was premature
and preferred to wait a little bit longer to see the impacts of Highway 212. Councilman
Lundquist was in favor of the proposal. He though it made a good transition and liked the
City Council Summary Minutes - June 9, 2003
financial implications. Councilman Peterson and Mayor Furlong both felt the development was
premature and wanted to wait to see the results of the 2005 MUSA area study.
Councilman Labatt moved, Councilman Ayotte seconded to deny the Lane Use Map
Amendment 92003-2 from Office/Industrial to Residential-Medium Density based on the
following findings:
The proposed land use amendment has been considered in relation to the specific policies and
provisions of the comprehensive plan and has been found to be inconsistent with the official City
Comprehensive Plan. City land use goals and policies require that the city maintain an
appropriate balance of land uses, preserve a tax base mix and create new employment
opportunities. The city needs to preserve industrial land for development since only 8.3 percent
of the land is guided for office/industrial uses. The proposed land use amendment represents a
reduction of 7.6 percent of the industrial acreage in the community. This 7.6 of industrial land
use equals an estimated 16 percent of future industrial development and future industrial tax base.
The proposed land use amendment will be incompatible with the present and future land uses of
the area. Industrial development exists and is planned to the south and west of this property. The
noise from the substation located in the southern part of the site is incompatible with residential
development. Noises, traffic and smells from the industrial development conflict with any
residential development in this location.
All voted in favor, except Councilman Lundquist who opposed, and the motion carried with
a vote of 4 to 1.
Councilman Labatt moved, Councilman Ayotte seconded that the City Council denies the
concept Planned Unit Development 92003-1 for a townhouse development based upon the
following findings:
Development must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed development is
inconsistent with the comprehensive plan designation of the property for office/industrial uses.
The proposed development does not conform to all performance standards contained in the
Zoning Ordinance for office and industrial development. The development of the site for
residential townhouses does not preserve the bluff area as required by the bluff protection
ordinance, nor adequately preserve the Bluff Creek Corridor.
All voted in favor, except Councilman Lundquist who opposed, and the motion carried with
a vote of 4 to 1.
APPROVAL OF KEY FINANCIAL STRATEGIES, JIM PROSSER, EHLERS AND
ASOCIATES.
Jim Prosser from Ehlers and Associates presented the Key Financial Strategies plan that he and
staff and the council have been working on over the past 9 plus months for f'mal approval by the
City Council.
Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman Peterson seconded that the City Council
approve the final report of the Key Financial Strategies as presented. All voted in favor and
the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
City Council Summary Minutes- June 9, 2003
CONSENT AGENDA: APPROVAL OF ON-SALE BEER LICENSE, FOURTH OF JULY
CELEBRATION (JULY 3RD AND 4Ta), CHANHASSEN ROTARY CLUB.
Councilman Peterson was questioning whether or not this application for a beer license, why it
couldn't also include wine. Todd Gerhardt informed him that to sell wine they would have to
amend the ordinance. The beer license pertains to the sale of 3.2 malt beverages only.
Councilman Peterson moved, Councilman Lundquist seconded to approve the On-Sale Beer
License for the 4th of July Celebration (July 3 & 4), Chanhassen Rotary Club. AH voted in
favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR A SALE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION EQUIPMENT
CERTIFICATES.
Bruce DeJong stated this item was to request that the City Council reduce the amount of the bond
sale by $100,000 that's included in the original issue because of a legislative decision that
prohibits the City from using this money to fund the remodeling of the senior center space. Mr.
DeJong was requesting that the City Council set the date for adoption of the bond sale to July 13,
2003, their first meeting in July. Mayor Furlong asked if the city staff had identified alternative
sources of funding for the remodeling.
Resolution g2003-53: Councilman Peterson moved, Councilman Labatt to approve the
resolution to modify the general obligation bonds for equipment certifcafion. All voted in
favor and the motion carded unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
FUTURE PUBLIC SCHOOL CAMPUSES IN CHANHASSEN.
City Council considered approval of a resolution for siting a middle school or high school for
District 112 in Chanhassen and directed staff to execute the resolution and send it down to the
school district for their consideration. Councilman Peterson made suggestions to the wording of
the resolution for the City Council to consider. Bev Stofferahn, the Superintendent of District
112, expressed what a wonderful partnership they have with both Chanhassen Elementary and
Bluff Creek and of a similar situation can be done on a future site in Chanhassen, it makes very
good use of land and gives the taxpayers a better return on their dollar.
Resolution g2003-54: Councilman Peterson moved, Councilman Labatt seconded to
approve a resolution of support for siting a District 112 middle school or high school/park
campus in the City of Chanhassen as amended by Councilman Peterson. All voted in favor
and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS. None.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS. None.
CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION. None.
Councilman Ayotte moved, Councilman Lundquist seconded to adjourn the meeting. All
voted in favor and the motion carded. The City Council meeting was adjourned at 9:20
pem.
Submitted by Todd Gerhardt
City Council Summary Minutes- June 9, 2003
City Manager
Preoared by Nann Opheim
10
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
JUNE 9, 2O03
Mayor Furlong called the meeting to order at 7:20 p.m. The meeting was opened with the
Pledge to the Flag.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Furlong, Councilman Labatt, Councilman Ayotte,
Councilman Lundquist, and Councilman Peterson
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Justin Miller, Roger Knutson, Kate Aanenson, Bob
Generous, Todd Hoffman, Teresa Burgess, Matt Saam, and Bruce DeJong
PUBLIC PRESENT FOR ALL ITEMS:
Jerry & Janet Paulsen
Debbie Lloyd
Judy Christensen
Uli Sacchet
Jim Bohn
Alex Shaine
Melissa Gilman
7305 Laredo Drive
7302 Laredo Drive
7100 Utica Lane
Planning Commission
EDA
Lakeshore Weekly News
Chanhassen Villager
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: RECOGNITION OF BOKO0 BIKES FOR TRAIL MAP
PARTNERSHIP.
Mayor Furlong: If I could have, I think Mr. Vigil is here this evening. If he could join us down
in front, Mr. Hoffman. Good evening. Thank you. Mr. Vigil, you're the owner of Bokoo Bikes?
Ed Vigil: Yes.
Mayor Furlong: And as part of our, with the City of Chanhassen park and rec, your company
contributed approximately half the cost of us putting this together. It was one of the largest, if not
the largest corporate contribution that the city has received, and on behalf of the city and the
residents, thank you for your contributed not only day to day with your business and services you
provide our residents, but also here working in a collaborative effort with our park and rec
department. As a way of saying thank you, Mr. Hoffman, Director of Parks and Rec, we've
provided a framed copy of the map. This is a map that was sent out to all the residents of the city
showing the various trails and parks within our city so thank you very much.
Ed Vigil: Thank you. Well I'd just like to thank for the opportunity to be part of this project,
which it was a lot of fun for us because we were able to contribute with the trails and everything
that we do and be part of the community as well, so thank you for giving us the opportunity.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you.
CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Peterson moved, Councilman Lundquist seconded to
approve the following consent agenda items pursuant to the city manager's
recommendations:
City Council Meeting- June 9, 2003
b.
C.
Approval of Preliminary and Final plat to Replat Two Lots into Three Single Family Lots
with Variances, 185 Pleasant View Road and 6430 Pleasant View Lane, Schroeder
Addition, Larry & Doug Schroeder and Linda Peterson.
Approval of Minutes:
-Verbatim City Council Minutes dated May 12, 2003
-City Council Executive Session Minutes dated May 27, 2003
-City Council Work Session Minutes dated May 27, 2003
-Verbatim City Council Minutes dated May 27, 2003
Receive Commission Minutes:
- Verbatim Planning Commission Minutes dated May 20, 2003
do
Approval of Stipulation of Settlement and Order for Judgment, Tax Increment Financing
District 2-1.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
Mayor Furlong: There' s also, from an agenda item, there' s request from the Director of Finance
to include a resolution regarding general obligation equipment certificates. This is actually a
modified resolution from something passed prior. If there's no objection we'll include that as
item 8 on the agenda.
Councilman Labatt: And number 7 is the school board?
Mayor Furlong: Number 7 is the consent agenda item l(a).
Councilman Labatt: Okay, then are we going to add the resolution on the school board that we
discussed at our work session under new business also?
Mayor Furlong: Without objection we'll add that as number 9.
Councilman Labatt: Yeah.
Mayor Furlong: Are there any other items off the consent agenda or adjustments to the published
agenda?
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS:
Judy Christensen: I'm Judy Christensen. I live at 7100 Utica Lane in Chanhassen. Tonight I am
coming before the board to let you know that I have just gone ahead and been given an
opportunity to be one of the citizens that's going to work on the referendum coming up this fall
for the School District 112. I'd like to have a chance to learn a little bit more as to what your
position is on Chanhassen supporting a site located in the school district, and also located in the
city of Chanhassen. The rumblings that I'm hearing from a lot of different people from the
elementary schools, all the way out to the middle schools and the high schools is that they would
love to have something here so I'm very anxious to hear what your discussion is going to be
about tonight. The other thing that I wanted to mention is that based on your decision this
evening and future decisions, I would like to have an opportunity to relay information out to the
public. Get that grapevine working for you so that we can get as much support as we can out
there.
City Council Meeting - June 9, 2003
Mayor Furlong: Very good, thank you. Are there any other visitor presentations this evening?
REQUEST FOR INTERIM USE PERMIT TO BRING IN FILL IN EXCESS OF 1,000
CUBIC YARDS, 6421 HAZELTINE BOULEVARD, MINNETONKA SCHOOL
DISTRICT 276.
Public Present:
Name Address
Mike Remington
Mike Condon
Inspec, Inc.
Minnetonka Schools
Matt Saam: Thank you Mayor Furlong, Council members. As you stated, this is an interim use
permit request or an IUP. The request is for the Minnetonka Junior High School site in town.
The site, zoom in maybe a little. Thank you. The site, if you already don't know, is located on
the east side of Highway 41, just south of Highway 7 and Chaska Road in Chanhassen. The
Interim Use Permit request deals with site improvements to the existing parking area on the junior
high site. Also deals with the installation of a pond on the site, and a trail to take students from
the school north to Melody Hill Road. The plans as I have them here include removal of the
existing bituminous pavement in the driveway and parking lot areas. They're also going to be
realigning the bus pick-up and drop-off areas to separate them from the car parking in this area.
Right now they' re experiencing congestion in the times of pick-up and drop off with buses and
cars interacting so to avoid that they're going to separate those with curbing and a revised parking
lot layout. The permit request is fairly straight forward. One of the things I would like to
highlight is the inclusion of this proposed pond. Staff sees that as a big plus with this project.
Right now on the site there really isn't any storm water treatment per se. The runoff just flows
over land down the existing swale here and into the MnDot ditch along Highway 41. With the
proposed improvements storm water from all of this impervious area will be collected in these
catch basins, routed into the pond for treatment and then discharged into the swale so like I said,
we see this as a big plus. We're going from a site where we really don't have any storm water
treatment, to one with storm water treatment. Another thing I'd like to mention is staff is
recommending the installation of a 4 foot high chain link fence along the proposed bituminous
trail. There is an elevation difference of approximately 15 feet from the trail down to the water
level of the pond, going down at a 3 to 1 slope. So to avoid accident situations with children
falling into the pond, we are recommending the installation of a 4 foot high chain link fence. The
only other thing I'd like to comment on is to update you on the revised alignment. Previously the
school had submitted a plan that showed 45 degree angle parking for the buses in this area,
adjacent to a two way drive aisle. Currently that isn't allowed by city code and would have
required a variance. After speaking with the school district, they have submitted a revised plan
which I believe was included with your packet, which now shows a one way drive aisle adjacent
to the 45 degree angle bus parking, which just goes around the perimeter of the car parking areas.
Still keeps the bus traffic and the car traffic separate from each other. The last thing, at the
Planning Commission meeting some neighbors brought up an existing erosion or drainage
problem at the south property line of the school, not shown on this plan. Just to let you know,
staff is going to be meeting with the school and the neighbors tomorrow to address that situation.
With that we are recommending approval of this. If you have any questions, I'd be happy to take
them.
Mayor Furlong: Councilman Ayotte.
City Council Meeting - June 9, 2003
Councilman Ayotte: With regard to the mosquito control, it mentions in the packet that the
school would be willing to respond to that issue, one. Two, mosquito activity, the problems with
mosquitoes, West Nile Virus and so forth has been brought up. Not too long ago we re-instituted
mosquito control in the city of Chanhassen, am I correct?
Todd Gerhardt: That's correct.
Councilman Ayotte: And with the introduction, why is the school involved with that control
rather than the other agency that we had?
Matt Saam: Yeah, that's a good point. I'll just briefly speak on mosquito control but to answer
your question, it's a private pond. The pond that's shown here. If it was a public pond, with
public easements to give us access, I guess we would. The responsibility would fall on us to
spray for the mosquitoes but since it's a private on site pond within the school district's private
property, the city doesn't get involved in that.
Councilman Ayotte: I do not suspect that the mosquitoes know that it's a private piece of
property, nor that mosquitoes may go from private to public, so what sort of ability do we have to
make sure that if there is a concern, since it's private, that we can assure our citizens contiguous
to the area, that there will not be a mosquito problem.
Matt Saam: What we can do within our right-of-way and jurisdiction is to continue to control the
mosquitoes using whatever means we have right now to do that. Spraying, that sort of thing. As
far as to guarantee the citizens that nothing's going to happen, I think that might be a question we
pose to the school district. At the Planning Commission meeting they said that they would be
willing to address it if there was a problem, but they said there's a fine balance between spraying
too little and spraying too much, depending on who you are. If they spray too much they might
offend some parents or children who would be affected by the spraying.
Councilman Ayotte: I guess my only concern, the reason why I bring it up and I don't want to
over state it or hold this up for that point but it seems to me we ought to talk to the point of a
mechanism to be able to say that if it does get to a problem that we view as being a concern, even
though it's a private pond, I think we owe it to the residents of that area to have some ability to
influence that's my only point. I don't know what parameters or.
Todd Gerhardt: And that condition allows you to do that because it's school property, Minnesota
Mosquito Control cannot go in and spray. We have allowed them to go onto our public properties
to spray and put the briquettes out, so school property, the Mosquito Control Agency does not
have the authority to go on there. This condition allows us to make them go in and spray those
mosquitoes if we see that there is a problem for that.
Mayor Furlong: Other questions for staff.
Councilman Lundquist: Todd, what condition was that? I don't see it in the 1 through 21.
Todd Gerhardt: Was it, Matt I assume that was a condition of approval.
Matt Saam: There's no such condition which specifically states anything dealing with mosquito
spraying. There are conditions which state they have to abide by MPCA and EPA regulations.
That sort of thing but I guess it's difficulty to quantify, but we could sure state, include a
City Council Meeting - June 9, 2003
condition which says they have to do X amount of spraying. To me that's hard to quantify
though. How do we do that? Poll of public opinion if residents are calling in? I'm not sure how
we say you have to do this much spraying.
Councilman Ayotte: How does the agency that is involved with mosquito control gauge whether
or not an area needs to be sprayed, or do they do it on a scheduled basis?
Matt Saam: I don't know the exact mode of operation. I would assume they do it on a scheduled
basis, similar to the city and how the school district does it. The school district currently sprays,
so let's make sure everybody understands that point. It's not like they never spray.
Councilman Ayotte: But it's going to be a new pond and new costs and so forth. I was
wondering if we could put a condition that they would have a schedule that'd be comparable to X
agency so that we could have a template for it and that way at least it's called out and we satisfy
that resident's concern, and other residents that don't know about the problem that so when it
does occur we have something to reference. That's my only point.
Matt Saam: And that'd be a great condition to put in there.
Mayor Furlong: I guess a follow up question. You said they currently are spraying so they have,
they do have a program of scheduled spraying on school property.
Matt Saam: Yes. That's what they stated at the Planning Commission meeting, yes.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. So I guess the question would be do we want to do something different
than what they're doing or do we know if what they're doing is acceptable?
Matt Saam: I guess we could review that. I think that's what Councilman Ayotte was getting.
Maybe they submit what their schedule is. We compare that to the accepted norm and go from
there.
Councilman Ayotte: Correct.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Other questions for staff?. Okay. Thank you. Is a representative of
Minnetonka School District here this evening? Would you like to address the council?
Mike Condon: Sure. My name is Mike Condon. I'm the Building and Grounds Supervisor for
Minnetonka Schools. I'm happy to be here. What I'd like to say quickly about the mosquito
control is we work hand in hand with the Minnesota Mosquito Control. We actually, they land on
most of our sites. West is outside of the Minnetonka area and in Chan. We would more than
willingly work again with them, and even allowing them to land again in our area to be able to
keep that property treated, just like we do with the rest of our sites. Any other questions?
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Are there any other questions for the, no. Okay, thank you.
Mike Condon: Thank you.
Mayor Furlong: With that I'll bring it to the council for discussion. Councilman Lundquist.
Councilman Lundquist: Another thing, condition that I would like to add along with the
mosquitoes that Councilman Ayotte was referring to, is we have these opportunities when we
City Council Meeting - June 9, 2003
have issues that people come in for permits that allows us sometimes to mitigate other
circumstances that exist, and I think we have one here with the neighbors to the south, the
Mancino's that have concerns and voiced them at the Planning Commission. Although they're
not attached directly to the project necessarily, this is an opportunity I believe for us to put a little
bit of teeth into some resolution of their issues and I would like to add as a condition of approval
that the Minnetonka School District lead a reasonable effort to resolve the drainage and trash
issues brought forth by the Mancino' s, added by Chanhassen city staff as necessary. And I know
that Matt, you've taken lead on that already to meet tomorrow I think you said with the
Mancino's and the school, and I commend you for that. But I would like to, in addition to that,
put the onus back on the school district to lead that effort as well. I don't want it to be a carte
blanche for the Mancino's to get you know hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of work done
or anything like that but I think we need to do a little bit better job than just saying something
there without a little bit of teeth there. I'm concerned that the issue might not be addressed
adequately.
Mayor Furlong: Other items of discussion.
Councilman Peterson: I agree with both conditions that are being added. Other than that I think
it' s reasonable.
Mayor Furlong: Other discussion?
Councilman Labatt: Well you know how I am on last minute add on's so I won't say any more
about that. I disagree with it.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. For my comments, generally I think while we have a couple items here
that we're talking about this evening, generally I think I was pleased with the Planning
Commission and their process that they took in terms of addressing many of the issues and raising
issues that are available for the council to consider this evening so I think from that standpoint it
went well. With that I think the overall request for the permit is fair and reasonable. It's going to
be a good improvement for safety standpoint and grounds and maintenance for the schools so I
think overall it' s something that we should support. With that, is there a motion?
Matt Saam: Mr. Mayor?
Mayor Furlong: Yes.
Matt Saam: If I could just add one reminder note dealing with the mosquitoes. These IUP's
remain in effect, this one says one year, so anything you add with the mosquito control, really we
only have jurisdiction for the one year, unless they would come in to extend the permit. So I just
wanted to make you all aware of that.
Councilman Labatt: So that'd be the same for all the conditions? Even the new ones we just
added.
Matt Saam: Yes, all the conditions. Most of the other ones though only relate to the site
improvements which will be done this summer, but the mosquito one could go on.
Councilman Ayotte: Could I ask one other question?
Mayor Furlong: Absolutely.
City Council Meeting -June 9, 2003
Councilman Ayotte: In order to get this moving along, because we don't want to tie it up too
much, could we just state that the conditions that we would add would be as a result of the staff
recommendations worked out in the case of your meeting tomorrow, and the case of what the city
manager had indicated what would be an acceptable schedule.
Matt Saam: That'd be fine.
Councilman Ayotte: Do it that way so that we don't word smith it to death, is that doable?
Mayor Furlong: Sure. We don't have an official motion yet. Somebody needs to word
something.
Councilman Ayotte: I'm ready.
Mayor Furlong: Alright, Councilman Ayotte.
Councilman Ayotte: I recommend that we approve staffs recommendation with an additional
point. Point 22. That 276 introduce a mosquito control plan that would be acceptable to both the
school and what the city staff recommends, based on what's an acceptable norm.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Is there a second? Okay, is there a second to the motion?
Councilman Peterson: Well why don't we do a friendly amendment first?
Councilman Lundquist: Friendly amendment for condition number 23. That the Minnetonka
School District lead a reasonable effort to resolve the drainage and trash issues brought forth by
the Mancino' s, aided by Chanhassen city staff as necessary. Accept that amendment?
Councilman Ayotte: I accept that amendment.
Mayor Furlong: Alright. Is there a second to the motion?
Councilman Peterson: Second.
Mayor Furlong: Alright, it's been made and seconded. Is there any discussion? Sir.
Mike Remington: Good evening. I'm Mike Remington with Inspec. I'm the Senior Project
Engineer working for Minnetonka Schools on this design. I just wanted to raise one potential
request for a change to the conditions after reviewing them. We fully support them. The one we
are asking, appealing for a modification is item number 12. Limiting the contractor to tTucking
material in and out of the site between the hours of 8:30 and 3:30. While it's understandable why
that would be desired, our concern is number one to get the project done on time so that the
project's done before school opens up in August. And secondly, a potential increase in cost from
the contractor back to the school district related to the narrowing of those working hours as far as
trucking down to a 7 hour timeframe. Their haul site is, they would exit the site, go north on 41
to Highway 7 and then go 3,4 of a mile west and it's right along Highway 7 there. In my
experience they're going to try to avoid the rush hour traffic anyhow. I just wanted to take this
opportunity to try to appeal and see if that condition can be changed.
Councilman Ayotte: To what timeframe?
City Council Meeting - June 9, 2003
Mike Remington: I think even just the standard working hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. would
be preferred.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Is there any discussion?
Councilman Ayotte: I'd kind of like to know how staff feels about that.
Matt Saam: This condition highlighted in bold restricting the hours from 8:30 to 3:30 was added
as a result of the Planning Commission. Originally staff didn't have any limitations on the hours
of operation. However, if you note we do have in there, or as approved by the City Engineer, so
if we do see a problem out there, we can limit the hours at that time. That's typically how we
handle these things. I mean Highway 41 and Highway 7 are both highways in nature. They're
not going through residential areas. So I don't see limiting the hours as a big issue, but again if it
would become a problem we could certainly do that.
Councilman Ayotte: Mayor, we have a planning commissioner here, can we?
Mayor Furlong: We think alike. Mr. Sacchet, do you have any comment or, with regard to the
sense of the Planning Commission?
Uli Sacchet: My name is Uli Sacchet. I'm with the Planning Commission. We felt very strongly
that for safety reason, that it should not be allowed the hauling during the rush hour because it's,
I'm not the expert. One of the people, Steve on the Planning Commission calculated this is like
500 trucks, so really a large number of trucking' s and therefore that it should be put onto the time
when it's not a safety issue and not a traffic issue. That's basically where we were coming from.
And we had pretty strong consensus amongst us about that. Thank you.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Is there other discussion?
Councilman Ayotte: Well is off hours is a concern for safety purposes, is coming way early in
the morning an okay thing, or way late at night?
Councilman Lundquist: That would require a variance from our normal operating times.
Councilman Ayotte: That's my point. So I don't want to drive the costs up. We don't want 276
to be coming up with another referendum too.
Councilman Labatt: Well I think Mr. Remington brings up a point. If we condense his hours,
we're just going to maybe prolong the project. They want to get this done before school's out~ I
don't know, I can't imagine our rush hour here at 3:30 is that busy. 4:00 to 4:30 rush hour in
downtown Minneapolis is when the traffic picks up but out here, I don't think it hits us til 5:00 so
if we want to extend it a little bit, that's fine but I would be in favor of looking at our normal
hours of hauling in order to get the hauling done quicker. Rather than prolong it.
Mayor Furlong: Excuse me, what are the normal hours?
Matt Saam: Monday through Friday, 7:00 to 6:00 and then 9:00 to 5:00 on Saturday's. No
haulings on Sunday's or holidays.
City Council Meeting- June 9, 2003
Mayor Furlong: So to would be the same as, all hours of operating would be the hauling hours
then.
Matt Saam: Correct, yep.
Councilman Lundquist: Excuse me Mayor, the way I read this now, the hauling operations would
be allowed from 8:30 to 3:30 Monday through Friday, or as approved by the City Engineer and/or
MnDot. Does the way this condition is worded now allow, I read that as it allows the City
Engineer to expand that if required as well as restrict it.
Mayor Furlong: So if there are issues of safety, or traffic, leave it to the discretion of the City
Engineer?
Councilman Ayotte: Why don't we do it the other way and say, normal hours, what did you say
8:00 to 6:00 Matt?
Matt Saam: 7:00 to 6:00.
Councilman Ayotte: And in fact we discover that there is issue, that then we restrict. Go the
other way. So that would still meet the Planning Commission's intent. It would require staff to
monitor it.
Mayor Furlong: Okay.
Councilman Lundquist: That would have to be offered as an amendment.
Mayor Furlong: To the motion, that's fine. Is there an amendment to the motion then with regard
to item 127 Hauling hours.
Councilman Labatt: I would move that we amend item 12 to read, hauling operations will be
allowed from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 Monday through Friday, or as approved by the City Engineer.
And leave it at that. Take MnDot out. Is that okay to take MnDot out?
Matt Saam: Yeah, the only reason MnDot's in there, Highway 41 and 7 are both state highways
so they have jurisdiction over those. So they could limit the hours of hauling operations also if
they see a problem. That's why we have them in there. So I'd recommend leaving them in.
Councilman Labatt: And MnDot then.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Is there a second to that amendment.
Councilman Ayotte: I'll second that.
Mayor Furlong: Been made and seconded. Any discussion on the amendment? If there's none
we'll vote on the amendment to change item 12 to read, hauling hours will be allowed from 7:00
a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, or as approved by the City Engineer and/or MnDot.
We'll call the question on that.
Matt Saam: Mr. Mayor, one other note. Do we want to allow any on Saturdays? Right now we
do but your motion didn't say Saturday.
City Council Meeting -June 9, 2003
Councilman Labatt: I just changed the bold, and I left the top three sentences as they were. And
I just changed the bold. Is that okay?
Matt Saam: I guess I would just add 9:00 to 5:00 Saturdays.
Mayor Furlong: Might I make a suggestion. It's been made and seconded. Let's do an
amendment to the amendment. Perhaps if I can offer a suggestion. Since those are the hours of
operation noted at the beginning, hauling operations will be allowed from, during hours of
operation. Or as approved by the City Manager. If I could offer that amendment to your
amendment.
Councilman Labatt: Sure, I'll take it.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Is there a second to the amendment to the amendment? Without getting
bogged down here. Is there any discussion? I'll second that. Is there any discussion?
Councilman Labatt moved, Mayor Furlong seconded to approve the amendment to the
amendment that the hauling operations will be consistent with the hours of operation, or as
approved by the City Manager. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously
with a vote of 5 to 0.
Mayor Furlong: Is there any further discussion on the amendment? I can't ask for seconds so
quickly. If there's none I' 11 vote on the amendment.
Councilman Labatt moved, Councilman Ayotte seconded to approve the amendment to
condition 12 to read as follows: Hours of operation are limited to 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
Monday through Friday, 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Saturdays, and prohibited on Sundays and
national holidays. Hauling operations will be consistent with the hours of operation, or as
approved by the City Manager. All voted in favor, except Councilman Lundquist who
opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of 4 to 1.
Mayor Furlong: The motion prevails. Now the original motion in from of us with items 22 and
23 having been added. Is there any further discussion7 In the original motion? If there's none
we'll call the question.
Councilman Ayotte moved, Councilman Peterson seconded to approve Interim Use Permit
g03-02 with the following conditions:
The applicant shall provide the City with a cash escrow or letter of credit in the amount of
$8,400 to guarantee erosion control measures and site restoration and compliance with the
interim use permit. The applicant must also pay the City an administration fee of $296
prior to the City signing the permit.
.
Storm sewer sizing calculations will have to be provided for a 10 year, 24 hour storm
event.
3. The applicant must provide a proposed haul route for review and approval.
.
If excess material will be hauled to another site in Chanhassen, a separate grading permit
will be required for the other property.
10
City Council Meeting -June 9, 2003
o
,
o
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
All disturbed areas as a result of construction are required to be reseeded and mulched
within two weeks of site grading.
A rock construction entrance must be installed at the beginning of the driveway
construction.
Add a four foot high chain link fence to the west side of the proposed bituminous path
along the entire length of the pond.
The applicant shall obtain and comply with all permit requirements of the Watershed
District and MnDot, if applicable.
The applicant shall supply the City with a mylar as-built survey prepared by a
professional engineer upon completion of excavation to verify the grading plan has been
performed in compliance with the proposed plan.
A stockpile must be provided for the topsoil which will be re-spread on the site as soon as
the excavation is completed. Top soiling and disk mulch seeding shall be implemented
immediately following the completion of excavated areas.
Noise levels stemming from the operation are not to exceed MPCA and EPA regulations.
If the city determines that there is a problem warranting such tests shall be paid for by the
applicant.
Hours of operation and hauling operations are limited to 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday
through Friday, 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Saturdays, and prohibited on Sundays and national
holidays. If the City Engineer determines that traffic conflicts result due to rush hour
traffic flows, the hours of operation will be appropriately restricted.
The applicant shall be responsible for any and all road damage sustained from the truck
hauling and construction activities. In addition, if any dirt or debris is tracked onto
Highway 41, the applicant will be required to sweep the road as necessary.
Use the City's standard outlet control structure for the pond outlet, as per City Detail Plate
#3109. Also, add the other following Detail Plates to the plans: 5300 & 5301.
Show the NWL and HWL of the proposed pond.
Show the proposed grading for the new bituminous path for the entire distance to Melody
Hill Road.
Revise the drive aisle widths of the eastern parking lot to be 26 feet in width, as per city
code.
Building Official conditions:
ao
b.
The plans must be signed by a professional engineer licensed in the State of
Minnesota.
Provide plans and details of the accessible parking space signage for review.
A plumbing permit must be obtained before beginning work on the site utilities.
11
City Council Meeting - June 9, 2003
19.
The applicant shall verify the hawthorns planted on the south side of the parking lot have
adequate growing space and protection if planted within the sidewalk.
20. The applicant shall make the minimum inside width of all landscape islands 10 feet.
21. An on-site water truck is required for daily dust control.
22.
Minnetonka School District 276 introduce a mosquito control plan that would be
acceptable to both the school and what the city staff recommends, based on what's an
acceptable norm.
23.
The Minnetonka School District lead a reasonable effort to resolve the drainage and trash
issues brought forth by the Mancino's, aided by Chanhassen city staff as necessary.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
REQUEST FOR LAKESHORE AND SIDE YARD SETBACKS, LOT AREA WIDTH
AND HARD SURFACE COVERAGE VARIANCES, 9221 LAKE RILEY BOULEVARD,
TOM AND SUE SUTER.
Public Present:
Name Address
Jim Hamilton
Tom and Sue Suter
9225 Lake Riley Boulevard
9221 Lake Riley Boulevard
Kate Aanenson: Thank you Mayor, Council. The Suter's are requesting a variance to a lakeshore
lot. A lot of record that has a home on the lot. This item appeared before the Planning
Commission twice. The first time on April 15th, at which time they were directed to make some
changes. And then most recently on May 20th. At that time the Board of Adjustment is required
to have a 4/5 or 75 percent vote. The Planning Commission made a 5 to 2 vote, therefore under
the rules of the city code that recommendation, the Planning Commission's f'mdings move
forward as a recommendation so it's before you tonight as the Suter's are still pursuing their
request. So again it was 5 to 2. Then this is the existing home on the lot. It's a lakeshore lot. It
does not meet the lakeshore setbacks. It is the Suter's desire to tear the house down. Leave the
garage and build a new home. The existing buildable area, as per ordinance is shown in green
right here. In trying to work with the existing structure of the garage and stay consistent with the
home that' s on the size of the home, modifying it. Two story with the second tucked in under the
roof line. They came back with their first proposal. At that time the Planning Commission had
some concerns about the amount of impervious surface had gone up. The clear directive at that
time was to stay at the 35 percent impervious surface and the Suter's in their due diligence
worked to pursue that and came back their second meeting with the revised. Again the home that
was shown on the front is going away, so one of the goals in staff supporting the request is that
they're moving the house back from the lakeshore, which is for us always a good thing and
maintaining that impervious surface the same. The other issue was improving the sight lines for
the other property owners. This is kind of anomaly sticking out. We're trying to the lakeshore,
maintain that integrity and they've also worked hard to provide lakescape, which is another
modeling technique that we're trying to work on. One of the issues I think the Planning
Commission struggled with is trying to maintain the existing home is further back on the one
side. The lot does taper as you go back to the existing garage and so that became kind of a
12
City Council Meeting- June 9, 2003
concern for some of the Planning Commissioners that we couldn't maintain that 8 foot, and again
staying within the integrity of the square footage. If you want to go to your staff report, right
behind the minutes on page 3 there's a table kind of showing the movement the applicant has
pursued on the lot. Again maintain the existing 35 percent. The other issue too is we did
measure the eaves of the house. Sometimes when you do a steep pitched roof you can kind of
capture additional setback actually because the roof line is dripping close to the property line, so
that was articulated and shown on this plan by the red showing that. Again the Planning
Commission, with a 5 to 2 vote, but the planning staff also supported the recommendation so it's
moving forward with a favorable recommendation and with the conditions outlined in the staff
report, and I'd be happy to answer any questions that you may have.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Questions for staff.
Councilman Peterson: I assume you have no reservations at all?
Kate Aanenson: Staff?. No. I think you know, they've been great to work with. They've
addressed the issues. They went back, brought in the technical people that we had concerns with
the lakescape and the setbacks. Again looking at the buildable area, it is a 6,000 square foot lot.
The home is a little bit bigger than the one that's there but trying to keep the integrity of making it
narrow. I think they did their good faith effort to try to find an architect that can meet that.
Councilman Peterson: Good, thanks.
Mayor Furlong: Other questions, if any. No. Mr. Suter, the applicants here?
Tom Suter: My name is Tom Suter at 9221 Lake Riley Boulevard. Appreciate the opportunity. I
submitted to you a two page handout which I'd like to reference. I'm not going to read through
it. The first document is what I consider the summary of the variance approval process that we
went through. It highlights a chain of events and the actions that we took in order to meet the
recommendations and the suggestions of the Planning Commission as well as staff. This process
for us started back in March. We contracted with, as Kate mentioned, an architectural fn-m who's
one, very accustomed to building on small, challenged lots and I think we've attempted to try to
compact the home into as small of a footprint as we can and still maintain a usable structure and
size. We're not trying to build a large home. In addition to that, one of the key things that came
out was the hard cover issue, as lakescaping issue. As I mentioned to Uli earlier this evening,
what I think the Planning Commission did for us at the first meeting was really forced us to go
back and do some further due diligence. As a result of that we contracted with an environmental
design team by the name of Kestrel Design and the gentleman who founded that company, Peter
McDonough. Very accustomed to dealing with lakeshore opportunities. Wetlands as well as lake
restoration projects. They helped us understand what we need to do from a lakescaping
perspective, which we're lay people at. He helped us understand how to deal with hard cover as
it relates to utilization of rain gardens and the ability to mitigate runoff and try to maintain a more
environmentally friendly environment, as well as meeting aesthetic requirements that we're trying
to do for both side yard neighbors. One of the things that came up that was highlighted was, at
the prior Planning Commission meeting we did have one of our neighbors present. It was the
Baker's. They were able to attend. Hamilton's were not due to personal commitments.
Hamilton's have shown up this evening so they can speak on this topic, if you'd like their opinion
to be heard. So from a variance process, that's what we've addressed. What I'd like to do then is
reference second page which is really the summary of the document. What we attempted to do,
and what we have done is, at this point is move the home from approximately 28 feet off the lake
today, to 57 feet. And in fact if you normalize that and you take out that little jet in area, if you
13
City Council Meeting- June 9, 2003
look on the drawing, we actually go well into the 60 plus foot range off of the lake, which deals
with both the environmental issues as well as the aesthetic issues for our neighbors. We did
improve the east side setback from the current home which is 3 feet 3 inches. We've moved that
to the 6 foot mark, and 5 foot if you factor the eaves in. On the west side, which is the Hamilton
side, we currently have a variance that we submit that was granted back in the early 90's for the
garage. That is a 4 foot 4 inch, or a 3 foot 4 inch with eaves factored in. From the prior meeting
what we would actually like to do is request that we have a little bit of flexibility with that
setback. Today we brought that in for the, as you can see here. From this distance here, which is
the back of the garage to the front, we brought that in an additional foot and a half to get us to a 6
foot or a 5 foot with eaves. One of the things we'd like to do is have a little bit of flexibility with
that so we can work with the architect to do some interesting scaling on that side wall if you will.
Not to move the entire wall out but do some scaling so that we can attempt to create a little more
interest on that side, and not have it be a large flat linear surface, which will be more I think
appealing to Hamilton's which are on the west side of the home. We did, and we want to be held
accountable to hard cover percentage of 35 percent so anything that we would from a foundation
perspective, move in on that site. We have to take out somewhere else. We want to be held
accountable to that number. The other thing we've done is we will and have moved ahead with
implementing the lakescaping design concept and like I said, we've retained Kestrel Design to do
that. We also suggested and have recommended, we'd like to turn our home into a demonstration
site to try to promote more lakescaping concepts on the lake. In fact we had a neighbor call this
evening complaining about erosion and wave control issues. One of the things we're going to do
when we get together is talk a little bit about the notion of lakescaping and some alternatives to
just putting in boulder retaining walls in that area. As I mentioned to Uli this evening, I'm going
to talk to Peter McDonough and see if he's willing to offer his assistance to even put on a mini-
seminar for lake owners. Homeowners on the lake in an effort to educate people on the whole
concept of lakescaping and doing things for an environmental perspective. And I guess in closing
we have talked to neighbors, the Hamilton's, the Yetzen's and the Pothoff's to the west. We've
talked to the Baker's and the Hastings to the east. And we have, I think safe to say full support
from all five of our side immediate neighbors in support of our project. Thank you.
Mayor Furlong: Good, thank you.
Tom Suter: Any questions?
Mayor Furlong: No. Thank you. Appreciate your efforts. Kate, I guess I'll ask the question.
The item that Mr. Suter brought up with regard to flexibility along that west side. How do we
define flexibility?
Kate Aanenson: Well we've changed the code on that. We were giving variances then we found
out the ordinance, our city code does allow for extended encroachments into that side yard
setback. For example bay window. Those sort of things. A box. So what we were finding is
people were getting a variance and then they were capitalizing and actually taking that additional
setback, so we changed the code to say, if you've got a variance you can't use that, built in
flexibility. Certainly I think the neighbors concern is the aesthetics on that wall. I think we'd like
to work with them but staff would like some definitive direction on how much flexibility you're
willing to give so we don't offend anybody as far as you know, that certain percentage of that
wall or something like that. I think that'd be helpful for us.
Tom Suter: Great point Kate. I apologize for not mentioning it. We would be happy to once we
know we've got the go ahead, when we get the architectural drawings back we'd be happy to
work with staff and we'll continue to work with our neighbors, which is what we've had. Which
14
City Council Meeting - June 9, 2003
is what we've done up to this point already. Shown them the drawings as well as incorporating
their ideas and thoughts into the landscaping strategies as well because of the constraints on the
sidewalks. So we have no issue working with staff and coming up with an acceptable solution so
we can get around that flexibility topic as well as the neighbors.
Kate Aanenson: Again, because this is a variance, we need something quantitative to say a
certain percentage to encroach, otherwise I just want to make clear for the record what that would
be. I mean are we talking.
Mayor Furlong: So working with staff, you're not comfortable just working with staff?
Kate Aanenson: I think that's a little ambiguous. I can check with the city attorney but it is a
variance.
Roger Knutson: Just help me understand it. Are we talking about not an encroachment of the
foundation but an encroachment of cantilevered something or other?
Kate Aanenson: What we're talking about this fascia right here.
Tom Suter: Yes.
Kate Aanenson: And they would like the opportunity, again our code doesn't allow for
encroachments on a variance.
Roger Knutson: Right, encroachment of what though?
Kate Aanenson: I'm assuming a bay window or?
Tom Suter: It could be a bay window, and actually if we did do a bay window, if it only extends
out a foot, we're still within the eaves so we're okay on that. But there could be some additional
dormers that we want to do on the roofline which could extend out which are going to be up at the
top level. Or we may decide to do some other you know on this comer right here, we may decide
from aesthetics perspective to bring a slight wing wall out so that it helps to widen the face to the
lake a little bit so it doesn't look tall and narrow. Those are the types of things, and if we said I
think somebody said a percentage. If that's acceptable we could say no more than 20 percent, 25
percent on that wall.
Roger Knutson: I mean you could, what I would suggest is you list the types of things and it
could be as generic or as general as, you'll allow additional encroachment for items that do not
extend to the foundation such as dormers and windows. And the encroachment may not exceed,
I'm very reluctant to throw out numbers. I don't know what the right number is, that's your job.
I'll just throw something out, one foot?
Kate Aanenson: I think he needs more than one foot.
Roger Knutson: Two feet? I have no idea what we're talking about.
Kate Aanenson: ...beyond the eave line would be enough?
Tom Suter: Yes.
15
City Council Meeting -June 9, 2003
Kate Aanenson: Okay, one foot.
Roger Knutson: One foot? Is that, one foot.
Councilman Ayotte: I heard what the lawyer said, did you Craig?
Councilman Peterson: Yes I did.
Councilman Ayotte: Okay.
Mayor Furlong: We're working on the advice of the lawyer here?
Councilman Peterson: For the first time, yeah.
Mayor Furlong: Well, might as well try something different.
Roger Knutson: So you allow encroachments of items that do not go down to the foundation up
to one foot.
Mayor Furlong: Is there any need, I mean the idea is to break up the straight wall but again.
Kate Aanenson: Right. It might be good to have an intent statement, going back to the way
Roger figured, maybe for architectural interest so it's clear what the intent is.
Roger Knutson: Right, so the whole thing doesn't cantilever over.
Mayor Furlong: Yeah.
Kate Aanenson: That's a good point.
Roger Knutson: Doors, windows, he said wing wall.
Kate Aanenson: He said wing wall.
Roger Knutson: I'm not sure what a wing wall is but okay. Wing wall. Architectural features
and similar architectural features that do not extend to the foundation.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, we're getting them all. Alright. Where are we? We've had the staff
report and the applicants. Discussion for the council. Anybody want to start?
Councilman Peterson: Yeah, I think that we always look for a couple things, or at least I do. I
think we all do generally. Improving the lakeshore. We've accomplished that. We've got a
building that we're going to be improving and we've got the setback clearly that is going to be
better. Neighbors are all okay with it. Staff is okay with it. This is one of those what I would
consider kind of a no brainer. The only thing I'm struggling with is how I'm going to word that
condition. So I'm comfortable with it and I'm comfortable with the condition as we've tried to
articulate thus far so.
Mayor Furlong: Other discussion?
Councilman Labatt: I would agree with Craig. This is an area of Chanhassen that some of us in
16
City Council Meeting - June 9, 2003
the next 4 years will see a couple more of these variances. And the one that we had was Brendan
Witt that...the City and we really did a great job down there on the end of Lake Riley Boulevard
so this is obviously, I would think all five of us would approve this. I'll just throw out a possible
wording here. I scribbled out here that we would allow encroachments on the west wall of the
residence of non-foundation items such as dormers, bay windows, wing walls of up to one foot or
12 inches beyond that line.
Councilman Peterson: Beyond the eaves.
Councilman Labatt: Beyond the eaves, yeah. That's what I mean. I just scribbled that out.
Mayor Furlong: Can they pick either the one foot or the 12 inches?
Councilman Labatt: I was just clarifying it for Ayotte.
Mayor Furlong: Okay.
Councilman Ayotte: 12 inches to me is pretty damn long.
Mayor Furlong: Alright, other discussion.
Councilman Lundquist: I would second the opinions of Mr. Peterson and Labatt and commend
the Suter's for their work and going, being flexible enough to go back and address the initial
concerns of the Planning Commission and the city and to the Planning Commission as well I
think, I recognize their 5 to 2 vote and where they were at by reading through the minutes and I
think it's an example of the process working well. And although it might have taken a little
longer than maybe we would have liked, I think that we had done the due diligence so I think it's
a great plan.
Mayor Furlong: Good. Mr. Ayotte.
Councilman Ayotte: Well one comment. I really appreciate the fact that you complimented the
Planning Commission because they do...in the city and they don't get enough nods so I think we
all appreciate that because they do work hard, thank you.
Mayor Furlong: Well I'll just, I won't take any time but job well done by the applicant, the
Planning Commission, staff, everybody. It's nice to see all this effort done up front because I
think we're going to have a much, you're going to have a much nicer home and it's going to meet
everybody's needs going forward so with that, is there a motion. Mr. Labatt.
Councilman Labatt: Sure. I would move that we approve the conditions outlined in the staff
report, subject to 1 through 6 as staff has indicated and I'll add number 7. That we allow
encroachments on the west side of the residence of non-foundation items, an example dormers,
bay windows, wing walls, of up to 12 inches beyond the eaves. Clear?
Kate Aanenson: Yep.
Mayor Furlong: Okay.
Councilman Peterson: Second.
17
City Council Meeting -June 9, 2003
Mayor Furlong: Is there any discussion? If there's no amendments. If there is no other
discussion, we'll call the question.
Councilman Labatt moved, Councilman Peterson seconded that the City Council approve
Variance g2003-7 for a 13,535 square foot variance from the 20,000 square foot minimum
lot size; 55 foot variance from the minimum 90 foot lot width requirement; a 38 foot
variance from the 90 foot lake shore width; a 6'8" foot variance from the 10 foot west side
yard setback, for the first 11.5 feet of the house only then reducing the setback to 5 feet for
the eaves; a 4-5 foot variance from the 10 foot east side yard setback; and an 18 foot
variance from the 75 foot shoreland setback for the reconstruction of a single family home
on an existing 6,465 square foot lot based upon the findings in the staff report and based
upon the following conditions:
A building permit must be applied for within one year of approval of the variance or the
variance shall become null and void.
.
The submitted survey shall be signed by a licensed surveyor, engineer, or landscape
architect and shall include: a north arrow; show a 12 inch or greater trees on the site and
along the neighboring property lines; and the existing shed to the east.
.
No grading within 37.5 feet of the Ordinary High Water elevation. Type llI silt fence
must be provided during demolition and during construction on the lake side. Type I silt
fence shall be installed along the side property lines. Silt fence shall be removed when
the construction is complete and the site has been revegetated.
.
As part of the building permit submittal, a grading, drainage and erosion control plan
must be prepared for city review and approval.
o
The applicant shall use all reasonable means to protect and save the trees along the
western property line. Tree protection fencing shall be installed prior to site grading. A
landscape plan must be prepared for city review.
6. Develop and install a landscape and lakescape plan.
.
Encroachments on the west side of the residence of non-foundation items, i.e. dormers,
bay windows, wing walls, of up to 12 inches beyond the eaves will be acceptable.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
REQUEST FOR INTERIM USE PERMIT TO BRING IN FILL IN EXCESS OF 1,000
CUBIC YARDS, 1916 CRESTVIEW CIRCLE, BRIAN CARNEY.
Matt Saam: Thank you Mayor Furlong, council members. The applicant is requesting an IUP to
bring in approximately 1,900 cubic yards of fill. The site located on the monitor, or on the
monitor just, it's located on the east side of Galpin Boulevard, north of Lake Lucy and just south
of Crestview Circle in Chanhassen. We do have a plan for the permit, and just to bring you up to
speed quickly on the existing site conditions and what is proposed. The site drops off quickly.
There's a steep slope going down to the east off of Galpin Boulevard. There is an existing creek,
or drainage way which goes through the site, flowing from north to south. The applicant is
proposing to utilize a 24 inch culvert to deal with the creek drainage. Because of the steep slopes
coming down off Galpin, the applicant is proposing steep slopes along both sides of the driveway.
18
City Council Meeting - June 9, 2003
In addition to two 4 foot tall retaining walls, double retaining walls for a total of 8 feet in height
on both the north and south side of the driveway. There are really three main issues or concerns
that were raised at Planning Commission. Those were the location of the access point or
driveway to the site. Whether it came off of Crestview or Galpin. The second would be sight
distance. Existing sight distance on Galpin Boulevard. And lastly the safety of the proposed
driveway. First off the site access location. The applicant has been working and meeting with his
neighbors to the north here at 1961 Crestview and just to the east of him at 1951 Crestview
Circle, to see about the viability of accessing his lot through their property to Crestview Circle.
That would require a private easement across his neighbors lots. I spoke with the applicant prior
to tonight's meeting. No headway really has been made. No agreement has been reached to
allow the driveway off of Crestview Circle. So without the driveway off of Crestview Circle, the
only access point left would be off of Galpin Boulevard. Now the County, Galpin is a County
road. They do have jurisdiction over that road and they have approved a driveway permit for the
applicant so he has the legal right to access his site off Galpin. Second issue was existing sight
distance on Galpin. I was out to the site, and if you're standing on the curb line, like a car would
be as it comes down to Galpin and you look to the north or to the right, you can see a very far
distance. There's sufficient sight distance to the north. It's when you turn to your left to look to
the south, there's a hill just to the south of the site that obstructs your view of an oncoming car
when it' s on the downstream side of that hill. Interestingly when I was out at the site, if we could
zoom in on this. This is a plan of Galpin Boulevard. Here's the property in question. There is an
existing driveway directly across the street from the site so there is precedence. We wouldn't be
setting new precedence here. An existing lot is accessing onto Galpin right across the street so I
find it difficult to deny this applicant the right to do the same thing. And lastly, the safety of the
proposed driveway was an issue at the Planning Commission. Their thinking was, when people
are either coming in to the site or leaving, we have steep slopes on each side of the driveway with
an 8 foot retaining walls with nothing to prevent cars in a winter condition from sliding off the
slope. The site does slope in off of Galpin Boulevard, so a condition has been added and the
applicant agrees with it to construct either a fence or guardrail to prevent cars from sliding off of
the driveway. With that we are recommending approval and I'd be happy to take any questions.
Mayor Furlong: Questions for staff.
Councilman Peterson: The only one that I have is, and I'm cautious to do it, is outside my realm
but 24 inch culvert seems awful small for a creek. I haven't driven by this spot to see a creek, but
during a 100 year rain, is 24 inches going to handle it?
Matt Saam: Well we have added a condition that the applicant supply drainage calculations from
engineer, someone like that to prove that the culvert would be sized big enough. He hasn't done
that as of yet so when he does that, we'll review it and ensure that it's sized or it's got to be
bigger.
Councilman Peterson: Thanks.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Other questions? Is there anything Matt with regard, maybe you could
talk a little bit about the creek and wetlands. Part of, residents need access to their property, but
with the steep fall off and just looking at the plan, there's a significant portion of what's currently
woods and the creek down there that will be covered. Did you, was consideration given to try to
mitigate the area of coverage from the fill standpoint, given the topography?
Matt Saam: Yes. I'll answer that in two parts. First off the applicant has obtained wetland
permit to do that filling because it is filling of the creek. He's gone through the process. Lori
19
City Council Meeting- June 9, 2003
Haak, our Water Resource Coordinator has approved that. I believe the amount of fill is under
the 2,000 deminimus so I don't think he had to go through the core and those sorts of things, but
Lori has looked at it. It was delineated so he did his due diligence that way. In regards to
minimizing the amount of fill, I believe the applicant is doing that. Without the retaining walls,
you would need to extend the slope down to the south, going down at 3 to 1 so we'd be doing
more filling. Same thing on the north side, so I think he's really doing about the best he can with
the situation he has. It's really a tough site if you've been out there so.
Mayor Furlong: Yep. And I guess that's the question. Is this the best that can be done to
minimize the fill and minimize the, in terms of the location. Location of the driveway and.
Matt Saam: Well location, I think everybody's in agreement we'd like to see it come off
Crestview Circle. You know we'd like to see something in this pattern. But again, without the
permission of the neighbors, he's really left with only the one access point. I think he's doing
about the best job he can to minimize the fill, without constructing taller retaining walls. He
could do that to minimize the fill but then I don't know what that gets you. It's more costly and
so it' s, six one way half a dozen the other.
Councilman Labatt: Mayor, I' ve got one more question.
Mayor Furlong: Councilman Labatt.
Councilman Labatt: What about in years past, in other things we've always had them supply a
route of which they're going to be hauling. I don't see that, is that a condition in here? Unless I
missed it.
Matt Saam: Yeah, there should be a condition stating that. I reviewed the staff report right
before, and let me grab mine. Yes, a haul route has to be provided. I have spoke with the
applicant. He told me where he's getting the dirt from. It's another active construction site down
Lake Lucy on a residential street. So, but he will have to submit that in writing.
Councilman Labatt: Okay. So I take it, it's coming from in Chan?
Matt Saam: Yep.
Councilman Labatt: And it's going to get dumped in Chan.
Matt Saam: It is coming from Chanhassen. We will review that.
Councilman Labatt: So why don't we then, similar to what we did with Minnetonka School, add
a condition about dust control and clean-up the road. If it' s on our streets, and it' s a rainy, muddy
day and they' re going to haul and fling mud down the road, and we as residents drive down Lake
Lucy and hit all these chunks of mud as go up to our homes, we should have the authority to shut
them down until they clean the road or the weather changes.
Matt Saam: Yes, we could add that condition. That's certainly something that we will do. I
guess my thinking was whether it's an actual condition or not. Staff, the City Engineer has the
right I'll call it to shut down hauling operations if they're dirtying the streets. But we can
certainly add that condition to this interim use permit now if you'd like to.
Councilman Labatt: Yeah, don't you think we'd like to? I mean Lake Lucy gets a lot of traffic.
20
City Council Meeting- June 9, 2003
Matt Saam: Another thing to keep in mind, this is different from the school site. It's about a
quarter of the amount of grading so it's a relatively small site, but I think it's a good point that
you raise.
Councilman Labatt: Yeah. I mean if it's that small a site, the chance of a lot of dirt and clunks
going back and forth just add up to me so. I'd like to add it as 26 and come up with something.
Mayor Furlong: If I may add, are you speaking to condition 13 on the Minnetonka permit?
Councilman Labatt: Let me look at your's real quick.
Mayor Furlong: Change out Highway 41. Is that the issue?
Councilman Labatt: Yeah, although that's in here. Where'd I read it? That's in here as 15. The
applicant is responsible for any damage sustained from truck hauling. I'd like to just make it a
separate one. Just take 13 from the Minnetonka and why don't you go ahead and make that as an
amendment when I make the motion.
Mayor Furlong: Maybe you can just add it in, in your motion. I don't want amendments.
Councilman Labatt: Okay. So that's my only comment so we'll have an additional coming down
the shoot here.
Mayor Furlong: Okay.
Councilman Labatt: Don't turn that page man. Put a marker there or something. Okay, that's
my only comments.
Mayor Furlong: Other questions for staff at this time? Okay, thank you. Is the applicant here
this evening? Sir, would you like to address the council?
Brian Carney: My name' s Brian Carney. I live on 6566 Shadow Lane. About a half a mile from
the site. I guess my only comment would be this stream that runs through this lot is nothing more
than a little drainage trough that's been probably eroded there over the years. I think it's runoff
from the street and there's actually a little percolating water on the neighbor's yard that adds to
this. I don't know how much water ever goes through there but it doesn't seem like, I've never
seen much go through there, even on heavy rains. I'm just trying to minimize my cost on this
piece of property because I don't want to get upside down on it so I just ask that we try to stay as
realistic as we can on some of these conditions. That's all I have to say.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, any questions? Thank you sir. Bring it back to council for discussion.
Councilman Peterson: I think it's reasonable. Let's go ahead.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. If there' s no discussion, is there a motion?
Councilman Labatt: I would move that we approve Interim Use Permit/fl33-1 subject to the
following conditions as laid out in the staff report, 1 through 25. And we'll add number 26 to
read, the applicant shall be responsible for any and all road damage sustained from truck hauling
and construction services. And in addition, if any dirt or debris is tracked onto Highway 41, or
21
City Council Meeting - June 9, 2003
Lake Lucy or any residential streets, including Galpin Boulevard, the applicant will be requked to
sweep the road as necessary.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, is there a second?
Councilman Peterson: Second.
Mayor Furlong: Is there any discussion on the motion? Hearing none we'll call the question.
Councilman Labatt moved, Councilman Peterson seconded that the City Council approve
Interim Use Permit #~)3-1, subject to the following conditions:
The applicant shall provide the City with a cash escrow or letter of credit in the amount of
$5,000 to guarantee erosion control measures and site restoration and compliance with the
Interim Use Permit.
2. Culvert sizing calculations will have to be provided for a 100 year, 24 hour storm event.
3. The applicant must provide a proposed haul route for review and approval.
.
If fill is coming from another site in Chanhassen, a separate grading permit will be
required for the other property.
.
All disturbed areas as a result of construction are required to be reseeded and mulched
within two weeks of site grading.
.
The applicant shall pay the City an administration fee of $208 prior to the City signing the
permit.
7. An erosion control blanket must be installed on the south side of the driveway slope.
8. Add the benchmark to the plan that was used for the site survey.
Comply with the Carver County conditions of approval letter dated April 11, 2002 for a
driveway access permit to the site.
10.
The applicant shall obtain and comply with all permit requirements of the Watershed
District.
11.
The applicant shall supply the City with a mylar as-built survey prepared by a
professional engineer upon completion of excavation to verify the grading plan has been
performed in compliance with the proposed plan.
12.
A stockpile must be provided for the topsoil which will be re-spread on the site as soon as
the excavation is completed. Topsoiling and disc mulch seeding shall be implemented
immediately following the completion of excavated areas.
13.
Noise levels stemming from the operation are not to exceed MnPCA and EPA
regulations. If the city determines that there is a problem warranting such tests shall be
paid by the applicant.
22
City Council Meeting - June 9, 2003
14.
15.
16.
17.
Hours of operation are limited to 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday and
prohibited on national holidays. If the City Engineer determines that traffic conflicts
result due to rush hour traffic flows, the hours of operation will be appropriately
restricted.
The applicant shall be responsible for any and all road damage sustained from the truck
hauling and construction activities.
The applicant shall construct and maintain a rock gravel construction access to the site.
Access to the site shall be restricted to this access point only.
Building Official conditions:
ao
co
do
The retaining walls must be designed by a professional engineer.
Soil and compaction testing is required on the proposed building site if any fill
will be placed there, the results must be submitted to the Inspections Division
before building permits will be issued.
If city sewer service is not available to the property, two (2) acceptable on-site
sewage treatment sites must be located by a licensed professional and the
information must be submitted to the Inspections Division. The sites must be
marked and protected to prevent damage from the grading activity.
The address for the property shall be 6591 Galpin Boulevard.
18.
The applicant shall plant a minimum of five trees and shrubs and 20 shrubs on the slopes
of the proposed drive to help minimize run-off and improve erosion control. The tree
species shall be deciduous and a minimum 1 inch diameter for the trees. Shrubs shall be
at least 2 feet high when planted. Proposed planting sites and species selection shall be
approved by the city prior to planting.
19. Grading will be revised near the garage and house pad to minimize the slope.
20.
The driveway will be revised to have a maximum 2 percent for the first 15 feet directly
adjacent to Galpin.
21. Submit fill material types and borrow sources to the city for approval.
22. Add a turn around to the driveway.
23. Submit an as-built survey to the city upon completion.
24.
The applicant will work with staff on the installation of a barrier along the north and south
side of the driveway.
25. The driveway shall line up with the driveway on the opposite side of Galpin Boulevard.
26.
If any dirt or debris is tracked onto Lake Lucy or any residential streets, including Galpin
Boulevard, the applicant will be required to sweep the road as necessary.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
23
City Council Meeting - June 9, 2003
REQUEST FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT FROM
OFFICE-INDUSTRIAL TO RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY; REQUEST FOR
CONCEPT PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL FOR A 427 UNIT
TOWNHOME PROJECT ON 94.8 ACRES, LOCATED SOUTH OF THE TWIN CITIES
AND WESTERN RAILROAD, EAST OF LYMAN BOULEVARD AND WEST OF BLUFF
CREEK; TOLLEFSON DEVELOPMENT AND CHARLES MATTSON.
Bob Generous: Thank you Mayor Furlong, council members. As stated, this is a two part
review. The first part is a land use amendment. This property is located on Lyman Boulevard,
south of the railroad tracks. To the north of it, across the tracks is Stone Creek subdivision. To
the west is industrial development within the City of Chaska. To the east is the Bluff Creek
corridor and then residential development across that creek valley, and to the south is additional
future office industrial development within the community. This land, the 94 acres in this land
represents a portion of, there's a total industrial development of 1,135 acres. There was an error
in the previous report that was pointed by the applicant. We had 1,035 acres and it's really 1,135
acres. This land use amendment would reduce the amount of industrial land from 8.3 percent to
7.7 percent. As part of our review of this we would, looking at the amount of vacant industrial
land from the 1998 comprehensive plan, it may be a little hard to see but we've passed this spread
sheet out to council members and to the applicant. In 1998 we had 758 acres of vacant industrial
land. These represent all the office industrial site plans that have been approved from them. It
comes to approximately 126 acres. That leaves us currently with 632 vacant gross industrial
acres in the community, including this 94 acres. Were we to remove this 94 acres from our
industrial land, it represents approximately 16 percent of our potential industrial development in
the community. Part of the comprehensive plan states that we want to preserve industrial land
and maintain a balance in our land uses. We believe the amendment for this reduces that beyond
an acceptable limit, so we're recommending denial of the land use amendment. The second part
of the review was a concept PUD review for a townhouse development on the property. While
we didn't go into detail with this, we are recommending denial of the concept plan because of
inconsistency with the office industrial land use. As part of the planning staff report, we did look
at this and were the council to approve the land use amendment, there are some conditions that
the applicant would need to review and overcome prior to moving onto the next phase. Again we
recommend, the Planning Commission reviewed this at their meeting, and also voted to deny the
land use amendment and concept PUD. With that I'd be happy to answer any questions.
Mayor Furlong: Questions for staff. If there are none, is the applicant here or representative?
Good evening.
Jason Osberg: Good evening mayor and City Council members. My name's Jason Osberg. I'm
with Tollefson Development, 17271 Kenyon Avenue, Lakeville, Minnesota, 55044. Tonight I
have with me the property owner, Mr. Charles Mattson and the president of our company, Carl
Tollefson. What I wanted to do this evening is address the staff memo. Address the concerns
that were raised at the Planning Commission and try to report a positive spin on that or show you
the advantages of why this is good for the city of Chanhassen. Number one, and I do have extra
of these can be handed out or not. About the first and most glaring piece of information is that
Mr. Mattson has had this property on the market since the mid 1990's and there's only been one
potential commercial industrial user step forward, and with the addition of more commercial
industrial land near Highway 212, 312 and in the future, and your existing inventory along
Highway 5, we feel that it's a hardship for the property owner to sell this property given the fact
that it's going to be passed over several more times by a possible commercial industrial users,
given the reasons I' ve cited. In addition to that, if you look at the topography on the site, it's not
conducive to commercial industrial. If you look at the sluggish economy right now for
24
City Council Meeting - June 9, 2003
commercial industrial vacancy rates in the southwest metro, you'll see that it's going to take quite
a while for them to rebound and then just the location itself, kind of off the beaten path away
from your traffic corridors, it just lends itself better for a residential site. Second thing I want to
talk about is something I read in the Star Tribune yesterday, but it's the 2004 LGA cuts for cities,
and Chanhassen here showing your current LGA level at $323,000. Now in 2004, the way I
understand this, the way it was approved is that the City of Chanhassen will receive zero dollars
in LGA next year if indeed this is correct, which apparently this was approved in the special
session. The importance of this is that we're here tonight with an application to put development
fees, building fees, tax revenue, available to the city to help offset this deficit that's going to be
occurring in the very near future. Third thing that I want to point out is on the tax analysis that
we had prepared by a professional individual named Bill Fahey in this realm. I've got a
commercial comparison, which I believe all the council members got this report but I've got two
pages that I really want to bring out. The first one is the potential Chanhassen commercial
development projected out to the year 2021. I know that it's hard to read but what it's projecting
is that development of this kind could occur in 2009. We don't even know if the marketplace
would sustain that at that time, given the reasons I talked about earlier. You're looking at
$11,200,000 roughly for commercial industrial taxes. In comparison we've got exhibit here for
residential showing $23,832,000 for residentially guided and approved development project. This
is a difference of roughly 12 ½, over 12 ½ million dollars in tax revenue between now and the
year 2021. City staff has talked about in their staff memos a good balance, a good mix for tax
base for commercial industrial versus residential. While we agree with that, we also cite the
importance and the ability for the city to make tax revenue today and proj~t out over the year
2021 that huge difference. South of our property there was a proposed, or there is a proposed
development by Town and Country. Now in that staff review, if I can read this to you. It says the
advantage of multi-family is that it creates a market for additional commercial uses and housing
for workers. It appears based on the current tax policy 2002, multi-family would pay more taxes.
What I wanted to do with this is just say that there are very many similarities between our
proposal to what Town and Country is showing in terms of the number of units, the type of units,
general location, things like that. So the next thing that we kind of wanted to talk about, bring out
and I know Bob Generous talked a little bit about this in his opening, but if you look at the
neighboring land uses to the north and to the east you have single family residential. Both of
which appear to be fairly expensive, very nice established neighborhoods. Now to the west in
Chaska you've got an industrial park and to the south you could have some commercial industrial
uses. From our perspective and a planning background, the transition from single family to
multi-family which we're proposing, to commercial seems to make good sense. It's a nice
transition of land uses as you move away from the single family neighborhood that is akeady
established on two sides of this project. Existing site conditions we already talked about, or I just
briefly mentioned, but this site is very, very rugged. You've got quite a bit of topography that
would have to be dealt with from any type of development standpoint. Now it's our feeling that
commercial industrial's going to require much more grading, flat pads, large expanse of areas of
building pads and parking lots. Now our residential development would be able to better hand fit
the contours of the land. We'd be able to create walkout units. We'd be able to create something
that goes a little better to the land than just simply flattening out for commercial and industrial
uses. Another item of note is this pipeline that exists on the property. That too is going to be a
major limiting factor in any type of commercial industrial development that could occur on the
site. Residential, we've shown a concept plan that works around that pipeline, and doesn't
require any moving or impact to that site with the exclusion of the one road crossing proposal.
While I'm on the topic of the concept plan I just want to let you know that that's a working
document. That is subject to change. This is something that we put together to show the city
staff what could happen on the site, so if a land use amendment were to be created here, by no
means is the concept plan something that we have to have approved. Parkland seems to be a key
25
City Council Meeting- June 9, 2003
issue in every community that we do work in. Right now we show on the east side of the
property quite a bit of acreage as future parkland. Now, if I understand correctly this is the last
segment, or last vacant parcel of the Bluff Creek trail corridor before you get down to Lyman
Boulevard. We feel this is an opportunity during platting process at the City Council, the parks
department and the residents can obtain this land for that connection. In addition to this parkland
we want to create something unique in your city. We're looking at a spray park which is kind of
a little different concept than a community pool, but we've got a couple of pictures. I don't know
if these made it into the packet, but these seems to be popping up in other locations and have got
good reviews by city officials. Kind of neat. They're ADA compliant and they seem to have
better safety track records than a regular pool may have. The last thing we wanted to talk about
during this is the fact that at the Planning Commission we heard a few of the residents say, we
bought the land knowing it's going to be commercial industrial. Now that's something you know
that can't really give you any good response to other than the fact that there was one lady who
spoke and she said something about the fear of the unknown. We highly agree with that. Who
knows, I mean the City of Chaska sent a letter saying that there's noise, odor, pollution or
something like that coming from their industrial park to the west. Well with the similar land
guiding, that's only going to create more of those potential adverse effects on the neighbors that
already are north and east of this site in Chanhassen. A high quality residential project that we
would propose, you know what you're getting. You're getting a nice looking project. You're
getting something where we're going to create many varieties of housing types. We can work on
styles. We can look at pads. We can look at affordability. The City of Chanhassen wants to see
affordability here, that's something we can work with the City and the city staff on. You've got
the possible, or possibilities for mass transit. You've got bus lines in this area. You've got a nice
business community here. We could create a walkable community or a non-car or non-
automobile related community. We'd have links to the downtown areas. We have the trails.
We'd have bus lines. Things like that, so we can work and create a new urbanism concept. We
can create walkability, but the thing we want to stress the most is that we're here to do a good job.
We'd like to do something in this community. We'd like to work with city staff, Planning
Commission and City Council, we know we can achieve something that the city would be proud
of. So with that, you know I think we covered the things that we wanted to talk about. I'd be
open to any questions, comments, concerns. Things like that.
Mayor Furlong: Are there any questions for the applicant?
Councilman Ayotte: I have some questions with regard to primarily to shoot towards staff with
the numbers that Mr. Osberg brought up, and Mr. Osberg I apologize for not returning your call.
It just got away from me but I have had some discussions with another fellow, I can't remember
his name but, on this subject so I think I'm fairly well aware of what's going on. Is there a linear
relationship to the revenue that he was describing and the offset of cost for utility? Have you had
any use of those?
Kate Aanenson: I think that's the one fire that we say they didn't address the service cost~ where
there might be a quick return on the industrial but there wasn't a service cost based with the
residential which is a big question mark.
Councilman Ayotte: Okay, and another question with regard to, and Mr. Osberg brought up
affordable housing. Did we ever approach the folks that were looking towards affordable housing
opportunities, the rental properties and so forth, we were going to have some staff discussion~
Did that.
Kate Aanenson: Are you talking about the rental licensing?
26
City Council Meeting - June 9, 2003
Councilman Ayotte: Right. Did that get anywhere which would influence our targets for
affordable.
Kate Aanenson: We're working on redrafting some of that.
Councilman Ayotte: Okay. Alright. And with regard, I think you stated 16 percent affect on the
commercial.
Kate Aanenson: Future.
Councilman Ayotte: The remaining 16 percent.
Jason Osberg: Right.
Councilman Ayotte: Is there any way that that would possibly change at some point, and what
vehicle would allow that amount of land available for commercial application?
Kate Aanenson: Change more or less?
Councilman Ayotte: Yeah.
Kate Aanenson: Yes. In the 2005 MUSA, as we're studying it, again that's our main premise
that we believe this is premature. We're studying that area. Looking at not only the traffic
generation but certainly the environmental features and looking at.
Councilman Ayotte: Do you have a sense as to, depending on which way we go, where our
commercial land availability would be?
Kate Aanenson: Well the wild card out there that we're looking at too is to say you know Chaska
has successfully filled that industrial park. To say this is that far out I'm not sure that we can
predict that but the one thing we do know is it looks like 212 is on the tracks and that's going to
change our world significantly as far as what's going to happen in that southern area of town, and
that's what we' re trying to plan for. With the implications of that.
Councilman Ayotte: I'm just kind of getting the feeling that if, in a little bit more time we'd have
a better view of the world.
Kate Aanenson: That's certainly staff' s perspective.
Councilman Ayotte: Thank you.
Mayor Furlong: Other questions for the applicant. I guess the only question I would have, as
long as you're here, I would just ask to staff if you have any comments on the issues that he
raised.
Kate Aanenson: Well the grading issue, I'm not sure that we can say that there'd be less grading
on this site. That's difficult to say based on that product type, because you have to match the
elevations of the garage going into the elevations of the garage on either side, and you do end up
mass grading it. We know Pulte's told us they've got the project. We know what kind of product
they do. That doesn't mean we can't ask for a different product but I'm not sure that we can say
27
City Council Meeting - lune 9, 2003
it's going to be less grading. I mean you have to do pads but you still have to match driveway
entrances and the like. Unless they come in with a much different product than we've seen that
they've done in there based on the density that they're showing with this project. The pipeline
runs through commercial and residential through town. I'm not sure that's an either or issue. Or
for the staff, it runs through the entire community.
Bob Generous: The one point on their commercial tax analysis, I did ask Bruce to look at that
and his comments were, he believed that the start of the industrial development may be a little
late from our perspective, and his present value analysis is a little high. They're using 6 ½
percent. We think 2 to 3 percent is more reasonable. The difference starts to go away. The other
option, or the other question is always the expenditure side. There's no good numbers on it but a
1990 study showed that for residential you spend $1,40 for each dollar you have in tax revenue.
For industrial it's 40 cents for every dollar so.
Mayor Furlong: I'm sorry, that was $1.407
Bob Generous: $1.04.
Mayor Furlong: $1.04, thank you. Okay. Good, any other questions or anything else?
Charles Mattson: I'm Charles Mattson. I reside at 2870 Wheeler Street North in Roseville.
Members of the council. I am here to support the applicant Tollefson Development regarding this
project. I have had this property on the market with various brokers for approximately 10 years.
I don't like signs particularly on my property so even though it's listed, you may not see a sign
out there. And up to this point, actually all of the valid purchase agreements I've had on this
property have been primarily for residential use. We did have a purchase agreement back about
'97 in which Lifetime Fitness was looking at this property, but the rest of the property would have
been residential, if that buyer had proceeded any further. Only one buyer has ever appeared
before the Planning Commission until now. That was the Horton Company, as you guys are well
aware of. And my feeling is that, I've owned this property now since October 30, 1987. Almost
16 years, and I can see owning this property probably for another 10 to 12 years if it's only going
to be allowed to be industrial commercial property. I'm also very familiar with this property. I
mowed the lawn personally by the old homestead from 1988 until 2001, and I never encountered
any foul odors from the industrial park to the west. If I were to walk down by the road once in a
while I would smell some baked goods from that pie plant up there, but that wasn't anything of
any concern to me. Also I've walked the farm road from Galpin Boulevard back to the underpass
on the railroad numerous times, especially in the later 80's prior to the development of any
property to the east of my property. And in taking those walks again I never experienced any foul
smells coming from the Chaska industrial area, so I don't really take that very seriously, as that
could be of any concern to any residential development here. And I also am quite an
environmentalist by nature. I fought to keep my oak trees back in 1988 when that power line
went through but that didn't quite work out, since someone had gone in there and already had cut
without authorization some oak trees down so the issue became somewhat moot. There is a well
on the property which I have maintained it's permit for over the years thinking that this well at
some point could become part of a trail going from the southern boundary of the property along
the trail that's also out there. And so I would than you for your consideration of this and if you
have any question, I'd be happy to answer them.
Mayor Furlong: Are there any other questions? No? Okay, thank you. I'll bring it back to
council for discussion.
28
City Council Meeting - June 9, 2003
Carl Tollefson: Say Mayor, mind if I just have a couple words here?
Mayor Furlong: I don't mind at all.
Carl Tollefson: Alright, good. Thank you very much. My name is Carl Tollefson and I just
wanted to address one of the staff members. I didn't quite understand when he was saying when
he talked about industrial land versus single family land on a dollar, was it a $1.04 or $1.40,
what'd you say again? I'm sorry.
Bob Generous: There was a 1992 study that came up that said residential development costs
$1.04 for every dollar of revenue. And industrial was 40 cents for every dollar of revenue.
Carl Tollefson: Okay, and that was based on single family or townhomes?
Bob Generous: No, it was based on residential housing. They didn't make the distinction.
Carl Tollefson: So that's a 11 year old study you're going by? There wasn't even townhouses
built back that many years ago hardly. Today we're talking about townhouses today. I mean
that's a big difference.
Mayor Furlong: Sir, I would appreciate if you could direct your comments to the council.
Carl Tollefson: Okay, well anyway I'm thinking that his report is really an obsolete report he's
referring to. You know we all know townhomes and a single family home is going to be much
different. First of all the townhomes have less school kids. You've got less school impact on the
schools and a lot of your money goes towards schools and so I think that study is an obsolete
study. Number two is, I guess with all the parkland, I mean this is like a 90 acre site but it's only
about a 50 acre usable townhouse site so you've got about 40 acres of open space out there and it
seems to me that's more of a conducive area for single family versus industrial. You get the
residents could use the park and it'd be more of a conducive, it's more compatible I feel for
residential use there. And the sellers mentioned, as he said a moment ago, he's been on this, this
land's been on the market now for about 10 years. Over the last 10 years he hasn't found a buyer
for it and some of the numbers they were throwing out tonight is based on this land being
industrial some day. Well, 10 years from now that land could still be vacant and still no dollars
coming in on it so, I mean here's an opportunity today for the city to generate some income off
this site. I mean we're saying here today, we will develop this site for residential use and you
know where you're at today with some of these numbers. If you don't do that, you're looking at
the unknown. You don't know when this site's ever going to be developed. Maybe never. You
have some land coming on line apparently in 212 and your future land use here and if you've got
industrial coming in that area, why would anybody want to go to this area? They're probably
going to go where the 212 is area, the easy access for industrial and they'll just by-pass this site
entirely so this land seller who's been paying taxes for the last 10 years wants to get this property
sold and he could be sitting there 10 years, he could be walking in the door 10 years from now
and asking to rezone again because he still hasn't sold it so. And as far as the city's study goes
right now, if they know they're going to rezone this to single family, or excuse me to residential,
they know that, well then they do their study, they know that maybe they want to put some more
industrial over there then. It seems to me like it should work in reverse. Like here's an
opportunity to do a proper study, because you know this industrial's no longer available, this land
so. There's my two cents. Thank you.
29
City Council Meeting- June 9, 2003
Mayor Furlong: Very good, thank you. With that if there's no other discussion presentations
we' I1 bring it back to the council. For discussion.
Councilman Labatt: Just a quick question of staff.
Mayor Furlong: Councilman Labatt.
Councilman Labatt: Our comp plan was last updated last year or two years ago?
Bob Generous: 1998.
Councilman Labatt: Okay, '98 and we went through last year, what, I'm trying to, refresh my
memory again when we last went through an actual update.
Kate Aanenson: It was guided industrial in '91 and it didn't change when we did the 1998
update.
Councilman Labatt: Right, and in this time, has the owner ever come in and ask for, to explain
that he can't develop this as commercial industrial, has he ever come in and asked for a land use
amendment or an amendment to the comp plan in that timeframe?
Kate Aanenson: There's been other applicants. The one you have in here that they mentioned,
D.L. Horton came in for residential one.
Councilman Labatt: Right, but we've never looked at amending our comp plan to change this?
Okay. I just, my quick comment with our 2005 area coming down the shoot here and looking at
what we have there, I think this is just the wrong time to look at changing this. As I explained to
Mr. Atkinson from this company, when I talked to him on the phone, my position when Pulte
was in here is, hasn't changed with this is residents in Stone Creek and Valley Ridge bought their
property, some took the due diligence as myself and my neighbors over in Longacres of what's
on the comer of 5 and 41. It was medium density and low density housing, north and south of
West 78th. When Pulte came in and tried to make it high density, we told them no. Come in and
give us what it's guided for. Don't come and change it. And that's what I'm heating from people
over in Stone Creek and Valley Ridge. You'll have your one or two that say well this is fine with
me but the majority prevails and I've heard from too many people that they don't want this so,
leave it at that.
Mayor Furlong: Further discussion?
Councilman Ayotte: First off, I think the fact that the discussion between staff and Mr. Mattson
and the developers is a good thing. However I'd like to wait longer to see where things brash out
with the possibilities of having an effect on what properties would be available for commercial
application. And I'm not being facetious. When you showed me this picture right here, I was
listening but when that one came up, going next to Longacres, I'm sure they'd come after me.
So I think what Steve's a little bit more integration with the sense of, what would be desired at
some point in time but again I prefer to wait a little bit longer to see where we are with
commercial application down the road. 212 is a big deal. I think waiting a little bit longer would
be prudent.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Further discussion?
30
City Council Meeting - June 9, 2003
Councilman Lundquist: I do not share the opinion of Mr. Ayotte and Labatt. I think that the
transition is good from the single family home to Lyman for the changes in multi family housing
and can't argue with the bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush so for the financial impacts as
well I favor the proposal.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Anything further?
Councilman Peterson: Yeah I think where I'm at, I look at 2005 area that I'm not willing to
forego lOP in this area until I do know what everything else is going to be appropriate so, and I
don't want to make a decision until I have to for the general benefits of Chanhassen so I'm not
ready to make that tonight.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. I think a lot of the issues have come up and I agree in a sense with
Councilman Lundquist in terms of you have something. You like growth, you like development.
I'm not sure that right now is the right time. I think a lot of the issues that have been raised are
interesting given the planning that's going on with the 2005 MUSA, since that is so close. We're
not that far away especially when we're looking at a permanent change. And it doesn't preclude
from re-visiting this at some point in the not too distant future, if that's deemed appropriate. A lot
of the issues here I think are interesting. The financial issues of course are issues that this
council's going to be working with in the coming months as we deal with the loss of state aid
going forward and all the other issues we have to do, but I guess I don't hear the compelling
reasons to change the diversity of our land use at this time so. While maybe later is not what the
applicants to hear, I guess that's the best I can do at this point because I don't have the
compelling reason to make this change at this time. So is there a motion? Or further discussion.
Councilman Labatt: Mayor I would move that we deny land use amendment #2003-2 from office
industrial to residential medium density based upon the following fmdings as outlined in the staff
report.
Mayor Furlong: Is there a second?
Roger Knutson: Just a point of clarification. Is your motion to deny the comprehensive plan land
use map amendment and the PUD concept plan both?
Councilman Labatt: Well I was going to make two separate motions.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, so we'll just do the one at this time.
Roger Knutson: Those are based upon the findings of fact as set forth in your packet?
Councilman Labatt: Page 13.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Is there a second?
Councilman Ayotte: Second.
Mayor Furlong: Is there any discussion on the motion? Sir.
Jason Osberg: Mr. Mayor, if I may. What we show on our application is a 100 percent rezoning
for medium density residential. Listening to your conversation tonight, there might be some
discussion that this site may be better served as both potentially. Is there another number or is
31
City Council Meeting - June 9, 2003
there something that we as the applicant can do to bring a different concept back that integrates
both non-residential and residential uses on the site?
Councilman Labatt: Get back with staff.
Councilman Peterson: I didn't hear that. I mean I heard that it's too early to consider anything. I
mean we didn't say anything but I think it's intuitive that that will be the case, speaking on behalf
at least.
Mayor Furlong: I would concur you know, if there's a desire to work with staff on those issues,
that would certainly be the way to go but you know what I heard tonight is maybe not yet. It's
too early. It's premature to look at that so.
Jason Osberg: So if I may ask one more question. If we were to bring forward an application for
a chemical user for industrial user, is it too early to look at that since the land is guided for that
use?
Kate Aanenson: I'm not sure it's a permitted use in that district. I'm pretty confident it's not.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Alright. Okay, thank you. Is there any further discussion on the motion?
If not we'll call the question without objection.
Councilman Labatt moved, Councilman Ayotte seconded to deny the Lane Use Map
Amendment ~2003-2 from Office/Industrial to Residential-Medium Density based on the
following findings:
The proposed land use amendment has been considered in relation to the specific policies and
provisions of the comprehensive plan and has been found to be inconsistent with the official City
Comprehensive Plan. City land use goals and policies require that the city maintain an
appropriate balance of land uses, preserve a tax base mix and create new employment
opportunities. The city needs to preserve industrial land for development since only 8.3 percent
of the land is guided for office/industrial uses. The proposed land use amendment represents a
reduction of 7.6 percent of the industrial acreage in the community. This 7.6 of industrial land
use equals an estimated 16 percent of future industrial development and future industrial tax base.
The proposed land use amendment will be incompatible with the present and future land uses of
the area. Industrial development exists and is planned to the south and west of this property. The
noise from the substation located in the southern part of the site is incompatible with residential
development. Noises, traffic and smells from the industrial development conflict with any
residential development in this location.
All voted in favor, except Councilman Lundquist who opposed, and the motion carried with
a vote of 4 to 1.
Councilman Labatt: And Mayor I would also recommend that we deny the concept planned unit
development #2003-1 for a townhouse development based upon the following findings as
outlined in the staff, and subject to the findings of fact on page 13.
Mayor Furlong: Is there a second?
Councilman Ayotte: I'll second.
32
City Council Meeting - June 9, 2003
Mayor Furlong: Is there any discussion on the motion? Heating none we'll call the question.
Councilman Labatt moved, Councilman Ayotte seconded that the City Council denies the
concept Planned Unit Development g2003-1 for a townhouse development based upon the
following findings:
Development must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed development is
inconsistent with the comprehensive plan designation of the property for office/industrial uses.
The proposed development does not conform to all performance standards contained in the
Zoning Ordinance for office and industrial development. The development of the site for
residential townhouses does not preserve the bluff area as required by the bluff protection
ordinance, nor adequately preserve the Bluff Creek Corridor.
All voted in favor, except Councilman Lundquist who opposed, and the motion carried with
a vote of 4 to 1.
APPROVAL OF KEY FINANCIAL STRATEGIES, JIM PROSSER, EHLERS AND
ASOCIATES.
Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, I'd just like to introduce Jim Prosser from Ehlers and Associates to give
you a brief overview of our Key Financial Strategies and your consideration of approval of those
strategies. At this time Jim Prosser.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you, good evening.
Jim Prosser: Good evening Mayor, City Council. Jim Prosser, Ehlers and Associates. I'm
pleased to be with you this evening to provide the final report and more importantly the strategy
for the city of Chanhassen, your financial strategies for 2003. As we have talked about, the
financial strategies really provide a framework for integrating your operational and capital
planning with financial planning. Working with your staff and with the council over the past 9
months, 9 plus months, we have worked to prepare this plan with the revisions that you have
directed that's presented for you this evening. Just two comments I would like to make. First of
all, it's evident by the actions at the state level, but also the general economy and even some
discussion tonight that providing a framework for considering financial, considering the financial
implications and decisions is really important for cities and Chanhassen is one of a few
communities in the metro area who have taken the step forward to prepare such a plan. The
second point I wanted to make is that this is just the beginning of your financial strategy process.
The financial strategies really are used to help guide, not only the budget preparation decisions
but also other relevant parts of your strategic planning process. So this is just the beginning. We
were pleased to be partners with you and your staff in preparation of this and want to thank all of
you for your efforts in preparing this important plan, and would be pleased to respond to any
questions you may have.
Mayor Furlong: Good, thank you. Are there any questions?
Councilman Peterson: I think they've integrated everything we've asked them to do so I'm
pleased with the results and ready to put it in play.
Mayor Furlong: Alright. Any other comments? I guess the only comment I'll say to Mr.
Prosser, thank you for all your efforts and those on your staff and for working, and for the staff.
33
City Council Meeting - June 9, 2003
Our city staff in terms of the hours that went into putting this together. It should be a very useful
document and one that we're going to need to keep alive. It's a living document I guess is the
key if we're going to be successful and get a return on all our investments. So with that is there a
motion to approve?
Councilman Lundquist: Motion to approve the Key Financial Strategies final report as presented.
Mayor Furlong: Is there a second?
Councilman Peterson: Second.
Mayor Furlong: Motion's been made and seconded. Is there any further discussion?
Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman Peterson seconded that the City Council
approve the final report of the Key Financial Strategies as presented. All voted in favor and
the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
CONSENT AGENDA: APPROVAL OF ON-SALE BEER LICENSE, FOURTH OF JULY
CELEBRATION, (JULY 3 & 4), CHANHASSEN ROTARY CLUB.
Councilman Peterson: Mr. Mayor, my only question is probably for Roger. As I read l(a), it has
nothing to do with the Rotary Club per se. I was raising the question for Todd earlier. We don't,
on this license specifically we're saying that they're allowing to sell beer, even though they
haven't requested to sell wine, I don't know why we're not allowing that automatically. I think
we're discriminating against...per se, but I tried calling the Rotary today to f'md out whether or
not they'd even want to. Personally I talked to one person and they just thought that they
couldn' t, so I don't know whether or not we have to change the ordinance.
Todd Gerhardt: We would have to make an ordinance amendment Also allow the sale of wine
in our parks.
Mayor Furlong: Not the sale, the use.
Todd Gerhardt: Yeah.
Mayor Furlong: Or use and sale?
Todd Gerhardt: Use and sale, yes.
Councilman Peterson: That's in one of our, it's in the code that we're to review. I've already
noted that, but I don't know whether or not we want to take any time tonight to change that but I
think it's, I don't see any reason why we wouldn't. Our license is to sell beer and wine are
together, everything else is. I mean, am I making something bigger?
Councilman Labatt: The only question, is the beer sold there 3.2 or, I mean some wine is 7
percent alcohol by volume. The beers that they may be selling there is less than 3.2.
Councilman Peterson: The license we're granting doesn't denote whether it's 3.2 or otherwise so
they could do either.
Roger Knutson: No. They can only do 3.2.
34
City Council Meeting - June 9, 2003
Councilman Peterson: Well that's not what I read. The ordinance doesn't specify 3.2.
Roger Knutson: Unless you have an on-sale hard liquor license. If you're just getting a regular
beer license and nothing else, it's 3.2.
Councilman Labatt: If you go to the dome and buy a beer, it's 3.2. It's not you know your 4 or 5
percent alcohol.
Councilman Peterson: Or if you go to Target Center for a cocktail, they've got a full license I
think so I don't whether or not I agree with you or not. If you buy a beer.
Councilman Labatt: Well they may have a different liquor license.
Roger Knutson: The Target Center has a full liquor license so they can, when they sell beer they
can sell strong beer.
Councilman Peterson: So wine coolers would meet the 3.2 aspect.
Roger Knutson: I believe they call wine coolers a 3.2 beer. Wine coolers are a malt beverage
under 3.2, you can sell them if you can sell 3.2 beer.
Councilman Ayotte: Why does Roger know so much about liquor?
Councilman Peterson: He knows everything about everything.
Roger Knutson: The answer is I get 10 phone calls a week on these issues.
Councilman Lundquist: Hey Craig I'd be willing to go there with you if you drink the wine out
of the box.
Councilman Peterson: I'll do it.
Roger Knutson: That I don't know about.
Councilman Peterson: Let's push this thing through. I just didn't want to be preventing it from
doing something but if it is 3.2, then it's longer than tonight's discussion so.
Mayor Furlong: I mean I'd be interested in exploring the issues, both the pros and cons to that.
Maybe we pick that up in the ordinance, as we review the ordinance. With that.
Councilman Peterson: Motion to approve.
Mayor Furlong: Very good. Is there a second?
Councilman Lundquist: Second.
Mayor Furlong: Any discussion? Further discussion.
35
City Council Meeting - June 9, 2003
Councilman Peterson moved, Councilman Lundquist seconded to approve the On-Sale Beer
License for the 4th of July Celebration (July 3 & 4), Chanhassen Rotary Club. All voted in
favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR A SALE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION EQUIPMENT
CERTIFICATES.
Bruce DeJong: Mayor Furlong and council members. Here to ask just for a slight modification
for the resolution that you passed back on May 12~. That is we've resolved a couple of issues
through the legislative process and we have discovered that we are unable to issue bonds for
remodeling the senior center space which will be available when the library moves into it's
existing building. So we are asking you to reduce the amount of the bond sale by the $100,000
that's included in the original issue. We've got another issue also that I think because there was
significant amount of cities that were scared about being able to issue bonds this year that Ehlers
is really back logged and they've asked us if it would be possible to move our bond sale back by
one council meeting. I gave them preliminary approval for that after discussing with Mr.
Gerhardt, but I'm here asking you for formal approval of that so we'll come back with the bond
sale on July 14th at our first council meeting in July.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Are there questions for staff?. I guess I just have a couple
based on the issues raised. Since we're unable to bond for the remodeling, as was originally
planned is, has staff had an opportunity to identify alternative sources for the remodeling effort or
is that in the works?
Bruce DeJong: The only alternative that I've identified so far is that we have $515,000 budgeted
for street maintenance projects that will be unused this year. We passed on issuing those kind of
assessment bonds. They won't be needing the city's participation in any of those projects and it
seems like the most logical place right now.
Mayor Furlong: Did the law change prohibiting then bonding for remodeling? Was it a change
in the law or was it just a clarification?
Bruce DeJong: No, I think it's just a clarification from our bond counsel that we, the stuff that
we're installing is really more of a construction project than capital equipment, which is what this
specific statute that authorizes us to issue bonds talks to. Although we'll be installing some
capital equipment, it really doesn't meet the requirements. Most of it's going to be reconstruction
remodeling.
Mayor Furlong: And I doubt this is a case where the delay at all affect any of the purchases or
cause any problem if there's any important items that were purchased.
Bruce DeJong: No. It won't affect any of that. We certainly don't have any problems from a
cash flow standpoint. We'll be able to cover the purchases of those capital items as they come in.
So, and I don't think that there's any significant interest rate risk in the next month, 3 weeks that
would cause me to be worried about issuing these at a much higher rate.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Any other questions or discussions? I fmd it interesting that Ehlers
is inundated with bond requests given some of the e-mails that they were sending out earlier this
year, so they' re trying to encourage that. With that, is there a motion? To approve the resolution.
Councilman Peterson: Motion to approve the resolution as recommended by staff.
36
City Council Meeting - June 9, 2003
Councilman Labatt: Second.
Mayor Furlong: Is there any discussion?
Resolution g2003-53: Councilman Peterson moved, Councilman Labatt to approve the
resolution to modify the general obligation bonds for equipment certification. All voted in
favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
FUTURE PUBLIC SCHOOL CAMPUSES IN CHANHASSEN.
Mayor Furlong: Next item is an item that was discussed in our work session this evening. It is
pertaining to proposed resolution regarding potential, well pertaining to a potential high school or
middle school land in Chanhassen, so with that I'll open it up. Is there a staff report or other
presentation?
Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, Council members. Staff has attached a resolution supporting for siting
School District 112 middle school or high school/park campus somewhere in the city of
Chanhassen. Staff is requesting that the City Council consider approval of this resolution and
directing staff to execute the resolution and send it down to the school district for their
consideration. Staff is looking for direction from the council on the proposed resolution.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Is there discussion?
Councilman Peterson: Mr. Mayor, in an effort to streamline the conversation perhaps a bit I'd
recommend some deletions and some additions. Can I just run them through for you? I would
recommend that we delete the first Whereas where it cites the 2005 MUSA area. Going down to
the second Whereas, I would recommend on the end of the first line, delete this study area and
replace it with the word Chanhassen. Then move down to the Now Therefore, Be It Resolved,
item number 1. I would replace that sentence with the City of Chanhassen resoundingly supports
efforts to secure land for a middle school or high school in Chanhassen. And then moving down
to the second point, delete all the narrative after the word manner. So you're deleting so that the
completion of the AUAR remains on schedule.
Mayor Furlong: Just for clarification, could you read 1 and 2 as you would have them.
Councilman Peterson: One would say, the City of Chanhassen resoundingly supports efforts to
secure land for a middle school or high school in Chanhassen and the City of Chanhassen seeks a
response from School District 112 in a timely manner period.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Good, is there other discussion on those?
Councilman Lundquist: One just minor point of clarification. When we were in our work session
tonight, when our Superintendent was speaking we referred to it mostly Bev as a secondary
school.
Bev Stofferahn: Right.
Councilman Lundquist: Does it make sense to follow kind of that's how you're reports and
studies have shown a secondary school. Does it make any difference to say secondary school
versus middle or high school or are they the same thing?
37
City Council Meeting - June 9, 2003
Bev Stofferahn: Same thing. Same thing. Secondary school encompasses anything from grade 6
on up.
Councilman Lundquist: Okay.
Mayor Furlong: Other discussion?
Councilman Labatt: I would support and I like what Craig has done here and I'll take that as
motion and I' 11 make it a second so we can get onto the EDA meeting.
Mayor Furlong: Very good. The motion is made and seconded. Is there other discussion? I
guess I'd like to say, it was brought up at the work session this evening that we've got I think a
real good concept here in the way the City and the School District can work in a very
collaborative effort to try to accomplish a goal that I think we're both looking for. So I would
hope that this helps in the process and if there's anything we can do in terms of participating in
work sessions or meetings or other things, let us know because we'd like to help any waY we can.
Bev Stofferahn: Thank you Mr. Mayor. As I had indicated in the work session, the School Board
will be very much involved over the next month to 6 weeks to form a fall referendum and this
piece of that securing land now for a secondary school later will be an item to be discussed very
thoroughly by the Board and taken up so how much that is, where it is and so on is still all to be
decided, but our taxpayers have told us that they would prefer that we purchase land earlier rather
than waiting because it price is only going one way so that should help that effort and I appreciate
your efforts very much in being willing to partner with us. We have got a wonderful parmership
going as far as the school is concerned on both Chanhassen Elementary and Bluff Creek. It just
works beautifully and if we can do something similar on a future site in Chanhassen, I think it is,
number one it makes very good use of land. And two, I think it gives the taxpayers a better return
on their dollar so appreciate very much your support.
Mayor Furlong: Any other discussion? If there's none, without objection we'll call the question.
Resolution 92003-54: Councilman Peterson moved, Councilman Labatt seconded to
approve a resolution of support for siting a District 112 middle school or high school/park
campus in the City of Chanhassen as amended by Councilman Peterson. All voted in favor
and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
Bev Stofferahn: Thank you.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you.
COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS. None.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS. None.
CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION. None.
Councilman Ayotte moved, Councilman Lundquist seconded to adjourn the meeting. All
voted in favor and the motion carried. The City Council meeting was adjourned at 9:20
pem.
38
City Council Meeting - June 9, 2003
Submitted by Todd Gerhardt
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
39
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
WORK SESSION
JUNE 9, 2003
Mayor Furlong called the meeting to order at 5:40 p.m. The meeting was held at the
Chanhassen Fire Station.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Furlong, Councilman Labatt, Councilman Ayotte,
Councilman Lundquist and Councilman Peterson
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Justin Miller, Kate Aanenson, and Todd Hoffman
Ae
SAFETY/SECURITY STRATEGIC PLAN: HOMELAND SECURITY/
EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS REVIEW.
Greg Hayes, Fire Inspector and Fire Department Training Coordinator, Fire Chief John Wolff,
Sheriff Bud Olson, and Scott Gerber from Carver County Risk/Emergency Management Dkector
were present. Greg Hayes and Scott Gerber gave a detailed power point presentation which
highlighted the key components of the Emergency Management Plan for the City of Chanhassen
and Carver County and how the city and county work together. Sheriff Olson touched on the
aspect of law enforcement in the plan. Councilman Ayotte stated that terrorism was still a
concern and that he would like to see neighborhood battle drills established to go along with city
wide or county wide drills; pre-bill for critical items in case of emergencies; resource list of
people located in the city i.e. doctors, FBI; and redundant communications. Greg Hayes asked
for volunteers from City Council to assist in the large scale emergency drill being held on
Monday, June 16th at the Dinner Theater. Sheriff Olson asked that County and State elected
officials be invited as well.
Be
RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT FOR SITING A DISTRICT 112 MIDDLE OR
HIGH SCHOOL/PARK CAMPUS IN CHANHASSEN.
Bev Stofferahn, District 112 Superintendent and Judy Christensen, a resident on the District 112
referendum task force, were present. Todd Gerhardt explained that District 112 was looking for
support to the resolution to locate a middle school or high school in the city of Chanhassen.
Possibly combining a school and park site together, such as has been done with Chanhassen
Elementary and Bluff Creek Elementary. Bev Stofferahn stated the school board would be
making a decision on the referendum in July and outlined what the district would be looking for
to finance with referendum money. The Council expressed concern over the wording related to
supporting a referendum but were in favor of supporting the need to look at available land in the
city. Mayor Furlong asked about the timing issue and if the item could be brought back at the
next meeting. Bev Stofferahn stated the Board will go ahead with or without a resolution from
the city but it would help to have a resolution of support, otherwise property could be secured for
less money elsewhere in the district. Mayor Furlong stated he did not hear anybody against the
concept and asked the council to address the issue at the regular city council meeting where the
wording could be adjusted.
Mayor Furlong adjourned the work session meeting at 7:10 p.m.
Submitted by Todd Gerhardt
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
WORK SESSION
JUNE 9, 2003
Mayor Furlong called the meeting to order at 5:40 p.m. The meeting was held at the
Chanhassen Fire Station.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Furlong, Councilman Labatt, Councilman Ayotte,
Councilman Lundquist and Councilman Peterson
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Justin Miller, Kate Aanenson, and Todd Hoffman
mo
SAFETY/SECURITY STRATEGIC PLAN: HOMELAND SECURITY/
EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS REVIEW.
Greg Hayes, Fire Inspector and Fire Department Training Coordinator, Fire Chief John Wolff,
Sheriff Bud Olson, and Scott Gerber from Carver County Risk/Emergency Management Director
were present. Greg Hayes and Scott Gerber gave a detailed power point presentation which
highlighted the key components of the Emergency Management Plan for the City of Chanhassen
and Carver County and how the city and county work together. Sheriff Olson touched on the
aspect of law enforcement in the plan. Councilman Ayotte stated that terrorism was still a
concern and that he would like to see neighborhood battle drills established to go along with city
wide or county wide drills; pre-bill for critical items in case of emergencies; resource list of
people located in the city i.e. doctors, FBI; and redundant communications. Greg Hayes asked
for volunteers from City Council to assist in the large scale emergency drill being held on
Monday, June 16th at the Dinner Theater. Sheriff Olson asked that County and State elected
officials be invited as well.
Be
RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT FOR SITING A DISTRICT 112 MIDDLE OR
HIGH SCHOOL/PARK CAMPUS IN CHANHASSEN.
Bev Stofferahn, District 112 Superintendent and Judy Christensen, a resident on the District 112
referendum task force, were present. Todd Gerhardt explained that District 112 was looking for
support to the resolution to locate a middle school or high school in the city of Chanhassen.
Possibly combining a school and park site together, such as has been done with Chanhassen
Elementary and Bluff Creek Elementary. Bev Stofferahn stated the school board would be
making a decision on the referendum in July and outlined what the district would be looking for
to finance with referendum money. The Council expressed concern over the wording related to
supporting a referendum but were in favor of supporting the need to look at available land in the
city. Mayor Furlong asked about the timing issue and if the item could be brought back at the
next meeting. Bev Stofferahn stated the Board will go ahead with or without a resolution from
the city but it would help to have a resolution of support, otherwise property could be secured for
less money elsewhere in the district. Mayor Furlong stated he did not hear anybody against the
concept and asked the council to address the issue at the regular city council meeting where the
wording could be adjusted.
Mayor Furlong adjourned the work session meeting at 7:10 p.m.
Submitted by Todd Gerhardt
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
JUNE 3, 2003
Chairman Sacchet called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Uli Sacchet, Rich Slagle, Craig Claybaugh, Kurt Papke, Bethany
Tjornhom, Bruce Feik, and Steven Lillehaug
STAFF PRESENT: Bob Generous, Senior Planner; Angle Auseth, Planner; and Matt Saam,
Assistant City Engineer
PUBLIC PRESENT FOR ALL ITEMS:
Janet Paulsen 7305 Laredo Drive
Debbie Lloyd 7302 Laredo Drive
OATHS OF OFFICE.
Chairman Sacchet administered the Oath of Office to Bethany Tjornhom and Kurt Papke.
PUBLIC HEARING:
CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR DEVELOPMENT
WITHIN THE BLUFF CREEK OVERLAY DISTRICT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF
AN ADDITION TO A HOME ON PROPERTY ZONED A2, AGRICULTURAL ESTATE,
LOCATED AT 9201 AUDUBON ROAD, ERIC THESHIP-ROSALES.
Angie Auseth presented the staff report on this item.
Sacchet: Thank you. Questions from staff. Let's start, no questions? No questions?
Feik: Just one.
Sacchet: Go ahead.
Feik: Do you have any concern regarding this as it relates to the AUAR that's being done
simultaneously? Do you have any concerns?
Auseth: Bob could.
Generous: Mr. Chairman, it should have no impact on that because it continues an existing use of
the property for a single family home. At some time in the future this area may redevelop, then
that's a separate process.
Feik: Okay, thank you.
Sacchet: Is that it Bruce?
Feik: That's it.
Planning Commission Meeting -June 3, 2003
Sacchet: No questions? I do have a couple of questions. To kind of tie on with your question
Bruce. Currently this is guided in the 2020 Land Use Plan for parks, open space or office
industrial. Now that does not in any way limit what happens on this property at this time?
Generous: No.
Sacchet: It does not?
Generous: Only the zoning is limiting in this instance.
Sacchet: So, okay. So there is no conflict between those two things?
Generous: Long term maybe but then the second he develops. The applicant actually has a
separate application to rezone the property but we're not.
Sacchet: That's a separate thing?
Generous: Yes, that will be coming later.
Sacchet: Okay. Then I have a few more specific questions. On page 4 in the grading part. I
don't know whether that's something for you Matt, it talks about potential damage to the septic
tanks, piping and drain field. Is that concern sufficiently mitigated through the conditions or is
that still a concern? I'm trying to understand where we are with that.
Saam: I think this point was brought out more as a FYI to the applicant to be aware during
construction to watch for the piping. It is shown on the survey so it should be, the applicant
should be well aware of where special care needs to be taken. Don't be running over the pipes
with heavy equipment, that sort of thing.
Sacchet: So that'd be more an applicant question in that sense. It's not really a requirement from
the city, a liability or a condition?
Saam: No. No.
Sacchet: Okay. That's I think all the questions I have for staff. The other one's an applicant.
Thank you. With that, if the applicant wants to come forward and address the commission, please
do so and state your name and address for the record please.
Eric Theship-Rosales: Hello, Eric Theship-Rosales. 9201 Audubon Road.
Sacchet: Welcome.
Eric Theship-Rosales: Thank you. Questions?
Sacchet: Okay, questions. Do you want to start with questions? Do we have questions for the
applicant?
Slagle: I don't have any.
Claybaugh: I'd just like to dove tail the question or the comment that you made regarding the
zoning. Is there a zoning proposal coming on this piece of property in the future for rezoning?
Planning Commission Meeting - June 3, 2003
Eric Theship-Rosales: Well my plan is to, if we could go to the video on the. What I was hoping
to do is to run my business out of this shed and to be able to do that, try to split the zoning this
way. Zone this for a business, office industrial and keep this A2 or residential or whatever the
city might propose.
Claybaugh: I guess my follow up question to that then would be, is any of the business going's
on, administrative elements of your business taking place in your primary residence that you're
looking to expand?
Eric Theship-Rosales: Yes. In '99 1 guess it was I set up a home business in my basement and I
have a small office space there with my phone.
Claybaugh: That's all the questions I have Chair.
Sacchet: Any questions Kurt? Bethany?
Tjomhom: I have a clarification question I guess. When I look at the plans I see a beautiful new
addition, and then I see a breezeway and then it says existing structure and I'm sorry, I didn't go
out to look to see, what is the existing structure? Is that a house?
Eric Theship-Rosales: Yes. It was built in 1940. It's approximately 20 feet wide and 24 feet
long.
Tjornhom: So what will happen to that? Will that be remodeled or what will happen to that
structure?
Eric Theship-Rosales: Well ideally we'd use it for a while. Use it for the construction phase of
the new home and then either completely remodel it or bulldoze it or make it smaller in order to
make the driveway wider. Put a garage there. Lots of different options. It was made out of old
barn board and it's seen it's better days.
Tjornhom: Okay, that's all the questions I have.
Feik: No questions.
Lillehaug: None.
Sacchet: So you're not sure yet what you're going to do with the old structure basically?
Eric Theship-Rosales: No I'm not.
Sacchet: Okay. I do have a few questions for you too, that kind of tie into what the framework
is. Like I was kind of maybe curious when he pointed to the drawing on the table. You built, I
remember you came in what, was it 2 years ago or 3 years or what, for the permit to make this
bigger shed behind the structure where you now you plan to build between that shed and the old
house, right? Do I have my orientation correct?
Eric Theship-Rosales: I don't want to build.
Planning Commission Meeting - June 3, 2003
Sacchet: Well the new part. The addition to the dwelling. It's like in a space somewhere
between the expanded shed and the old house, isn't it? Do I got that straight? Maybe I didn't get
that straight.
Eric Theship-Rosales: Why don't we go back to the drawing.
Sacchet: Yeah, why don't you show us on the drawing. So where your finger is is where you
come in from Audubon, right?
Slagle: No, Audubon's to the your left.
Sacchet: Audubon's here.
Sacchet: Okay. So that's good. I get my orientation straight. So the new shed that you added is
that square thing.
Eric Theship-Rosales: This here, yeah.
Sacchet: That one, yes. Okay. So what is the house to the north? The structure to the north.
Eric Theship-Rosales: Okay, I'll just give you a quick mn down here. The original structure
built in 1940.
Sacchet: Now you move up to the stuff we're adding, right?
Eric Theship-Rosales: Right.
Sacchet: And then you go a little further and there's another square up there. Another rectangle.
That one. What is that?
Eric Theship-Rosales: That's the leech field for the septic system.
Sacchet: That's the septic, okay. Well that answers my questions really clearly. Okay, that's
good. So you don't foresee that you have to touch that septic area much, do you?
Eric Theship-Rosales: No. I think sewer and water will come some day and maybe that land can
be used for a garden or something.
Sacchet: Okay. That's all my questions. Thank you very much.
Eric Theship-Rosales: I have a bunch of clarification questions myself. I don't know.
Sacchet: Well this is your turn. That's why you're up here.
Eric Theship-Rosales: Okay. Maybe this has been made moot by comments from this gentleman
but I took some measurements today about the location of the tanks, etc. This is north and this is
south. We have 37 feet 7 inches to this comer, which is the comer in question on the first pad
coming from the house this is the existing residence north face. The line comes out into this tank
and, while I made this measurement just to clarify, it's not going to be quite 10 feet to the
proposed foundation line. Code requires 10 feet. It's going to be somewhere in the 8 foot range.
Planning Commission Meeting - June 3, 2003
Sacchet: Did staff look at that?
Eric Theship-Rosales: This would be new information for them. They have approximate
measurements here.
Sacchet: Is staff going to be playing into the conditional use permit part for discussion? Or will
that be an issue with the building permit?
Generous: That's a building permit issue.
Sacchet: I would so isn't it.
Generous: There's a separation requirement.
Sacchet: So at this point that should not be an issue. That's an aspect that you're going to have
to look at when you come for building permit.
Eric Theship-Rosales: I guess what I wanted to do today was maybe make sure that if I had to
actually move the plan towards Audubon Road, in other words build this building a couple feet
over, we should cover that today and make sure the setbacks are correct. This is 82.2 feet plus
another 20 feet to the curb.
Sacchet: Yeah, that' s an issue you would want to work with staff I would expect. Is that correct?
Saam: Yes. I just wanted to point out if I could Mr. Chair.
Sacchet: Please, go ahead.
Saam: Condition number 2 does state, and I think this is what he's referring to is that the septic
tank must be 10 feet from the addition. Is that what you're getting at?
Eric Theship-Rosales: Yeah, that's code I understand.
Saam: So and that I do believe is a building permit requirement.
Claybaugh: Requirement yes. That would be fully enforced so.
Eric Theship-Rosales: So tentatively speaking I should move the design.
Claybaugh: Either that or you're going to end up relocating that tank so you're going to have to
have that 10 foot separation. That isn't anything for debate.
Eric Theship-Rosales: Make sure I knew that. Other conditions I wasn't clear on. Number 4.
The applicant shall enter into a conditional use agreement with the city. What's that likely to be?
Sacchet: Can you explain that please.
Generous: Yes. It's a document that's recorded at Carver County saying that the City approves
your development within the Bluff Creek Overlay District subject to the conditions that are
approved by the Planning Commission and City Council.
Planning Commission Meeting - June 3, 2003
Eric Theship-Rosales: Okay. So it's a repeat on this. It's not a new condition.
Generous: No.
Eric Theship-Rosales: Item number 5. The application for building permit shall include a haul
route for removal of excavated material from the site. There will be perhaps 20 yards excavated.
Sacchet: It's a standard requirement. It doesn't apply when there's like small numbers. I mean.
Saam; I don't think it will be a big issue but we just want to put it out there just in case there's
more than 20 cubic yards. It doesn't sound like this should be a concern though.
Sacchet: It's a standard condition that we put on there if somebody has a lot of earth to move,
that it can be regulated.
Eric Theship-Rosales: Okay, well maybe this isn't the proper time to ask but I should ask the
building department but when it comes to removing that material, we have a berm blocking the
traffic noise to the residence that was installed when Audubon Road was widened. I just wonder
if we could add that to the top of that?
Sacchet: That's a question you can discuss with staff. I don't think this should be too much of an
issue, but that's not what we're deciding here.
Eric Theship-Rosales: Okay. Then one other thing I have circled here just to make sure I'm not
missing anything. Erosion control shall meet the City's Best Management Practices. The
applicant shall submit an erosion control plan with the building permit application. Is that likely
to be expensive?
Sacchet: Everything costs money. You want to address that at all Matt please.
Saam: It will probably entail just installation of silt fence.
Eric Theship-Rosales: Above ground? I understand there's a below ground silt fence on some.
Saam: Well most of it' s above ground. It gets buried so it catches the dirt off the hill. It' s meant
to keep your dirt and sediment on your site. We can address that at building permit too. We can
dash that on the plan even for you and show you where it's supposed to go and everything.
Sacchet: Again that's a standard requirement.
Lillehaug: $2.50 a foot.
Eric Theship-Rosales: That's the kind of thing a guy with a shovel could do, right?
Saam: Oh yeah.
Sacchet: Pretty much. Thanks Steve. Anything else?
Eric Theship-Rosales: That would be it, thank you.
Planning Commission Meeting - June 3, 2003
Sacchet: Alright, thank you very much. Well this is a public hearing. If anybody wants to come
forward and address this item, this is your time to do so. Is there any takers? Doesn't look like
anybody's moving so I assume nobody wants to address this item. I close the public hearing and
bring it back to commissioners. Do you want to start Bethany? Comments. Discussion.
Concerns.
Tjornhom: Nothing.
Sacchet: You're fine with it?
Feik: No concerns.
Sacchet: No concerns? Steve.
Lillehaug: No comments.
Sacchet: No comments. How about you Kurt?
Papke: Just one. I guess I am a little sensitive to the comments of the neighbors. Are we sending
any kind of a signal here in approving this that the addition is far bigger and probably of higher
value than the original structure. Are we sending any signals here or constraining ourselves in the
future for rezoning this as parkland by taking this action tonight?
Generous: No.
Sacchet: Can you address that please Bob.
Generous: It would make it more expensive if the City or anyone were to try to purchase it. I
think the intent of the parks and open spaces, preserve the sloped area and the treed area on the
back side of this property. So more in the Bluff Creek, close to the, behind it is that big wetland
complex, the stuff adjacent to that. But this is just in, it was a wider area than we anticipated
actually preserving.
Sacchet: So you don't see much of a conflict with that?
Generous: No.
Sacchet: That's the gist of what you're saying?
Generous: Correct.
Sacchet: Okay. That's all I have, thank you. Craig.
Claybaugh: Yeah. I guess my comments would be directed to staff. It's similar to what Kurt had
commented on and pertains specifically to the second paragraph on page 3 under the heading of
background where staff identified both the, that the property's guided for the 2020 land use plan
for parks and open space, office industrial. And then it goes on to reference that it is currently
conducting the AUAR study of 650 acres which includes the subject site. The report didn't really
bring home specifically beyond just the mention of that, of what bearing that had on this
applicant. You know if there's anything at this point I should have brought it up during questions
Planning Commission Meeting -June 3, 2003
to staff. I apologize for that but, I'm trying to make that connection. What was staff trying to tell
us. Is there anything beyond just the mention, making us aware of it.
Generous: Be aware of that and as a part of that we may look at this area. Maybe it's more
appropriate that it be an office institutional type use or zoning rather than an industrial office
park. We don't know that yet and that's part of what we hope the environmental study will give
us some direction. Are there runoff issues? Traffic issues that are going to happen. That would
need to be addressed. It's too early now, we don't know.
Claybaugh: Okay. What was, they're also, if there was background on the original variance to
make that a buildable lot, what the commission and council is thinking with respect to the 2020
land study and how that was going to be rezoned in the future when they approved the variance
for non-conforming lot. So if you build I believe it was 1.66 acres, I would have been curious on
some level to know what the thought process was at that time. To me they certainly made a
commitment at that point to take it down a different path. That's what makes the reference to the
2020 land use in the AUAR all the more confusing to me. That's all the comments I have.
Sacchet: It's a good comment. Rich. No comments. Yeah, my comment is somewhat along the
same line what Craig brought up. At this point we don't know exactly what's going to happen in
the immediate surrounding. Obviously, what is that, northeast area is the primary zone so that
would be preserved. But other than that we don't really know, is it going to be office industrial?
Is it going to be medium density, high density to the south? And I think I just want to point it out
because it's a little bit of a risk for the applicant in terms of what's going to be around there.
Exactly how well this blends in. I mean there's an advantage of going in before it's all settled,
but there's also a disadvantage so I just want to point that out. It's not up to me. I don't think it's
up to the Planning Commission to resolve that but I do want to point that out. Other than that I
don't see much of an issue with this and I would welcome a motion.
Lillehaug: I make a motion the Planning Commission recommends approval of conditional use
permit//2001-5, number 2 to permit construction of a 1,4335 square foot addition subject to the
following conditions numbers 1 through 9.
Sacchet: There is a motion. Is there a second?
Feik: Second.
Sacchet: Any friendly amendments? I do have one. Condition number 7. I think there's
something missing in there. The existing driveway shall act as the construction entrance. All
tracking of dirt or debris from the site onto the public roadway shall be removed daily. Upon
verbal. I think it should say or upon verbal notice. That's if that doesn't take place then if it
doesn't take place, then a verbal notice, the City shall clear dirt or debris using contractor or the
city forces and equipment charged to property owner. With my not being a native speaker it
seemed like it could benefit for making this a separate distinct thing, so that's my friendly
amendment. Is that acceptable Steve?
Lillehaug: Sure.
Papke: I have one.
Sacchet: Yes, go ahead.
Planning Commission Meeting - June 3, 2003
Papke: On point number 1. It says the system must be increased to accommodate the addition of
two bedrooms. That kind of presupposes that that will be necessary. I propose that we insert the
words if necessary before to accommodate.
Sacchet: Accommodate if necessary the addition. How would we del'me if necessary?
Papke: If required.
Sacchet: It' s not the bedroom that requires the sewage. It' s the people that potentially, so how do
we control that?
Claybaugh: The capacity of the system determined by the number of occupants.
Papke: The way this condition is written, it must be increased and I don't think, there's no data
presented here that says it's insufficiently sized, to my knowledge. Unless I missed something.
Lillehaug: But it is saying that there's an increase to the property. They're adding two
bedrooms.
Feik: But it doesn't say that the field is large enough.
Papke: Right. There's no, I don't know whether there's an engineering analysis of the drain field
and septic system.
Sacchet: Let's see if staff can address this first. Is this, would you want to address that please
Matt?
Saam: This is actually a building permit, or building official issue. This wasn't a condition from
engineering but I do agree that, I think it's worded a little ambiguous. I believe the meaning is
after inspection if necessary it may be needed to be increased.
Sacchet: That would...if necessary.
Lillehaug: I accept that.
Sacchet: Accepted, okay. Alright, we have a motion. We have a second. We have two friendly
amendments.
Lillehaug moved, Feik seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of
Conditional Use Permit g2001-5 g2 to permit construction of a 1,435 square foot addition,
subject to the following conditions:
o
The on-site sewage treatment system must be inspected to determine if it is in compliance
with City Code and the size of the system must be increased after inspection if
necessary to accommodate the addition of two bedrooms. The compliance report must be
received, and the permit to increase the size of the system must be issued, before the
building permit for the addition can be issued.
The septic tank must be a minimum of ten (10) feet from the addition. This site as well as
the existing site must be protected from damage during the construction of the building.
Planning Commission Meeting -June 3, 2003
3. A building permit must be obtained before beginning construction.
4. The applicant shall enter into a conditional use permit agreement with the city.
o
The application for building permit shall include a haul route for removal of excavated
material from the site.
°
Erosion control shall meet the City's Best Management Practices. The applicant shall
submit an erosion control plan with the building permit application.
.
The existing driveway shall act as the construction entrance. All tracking of dirt or debris
from the site onto the public roadway shall be removed daily or upon verbal notice, the
City shall clear the dirt or debris using a contractor or city forces and equipment and
charge the property owner.
o
All disturbed areas will be seeded and mulched within 2 weeks of grading work stopping,
except in the case of temporary delays longer than 2 weeks, in which case the applicant
may submit an alternate for temporary stabilization of the site for consideration by the
City Engineer and Water Resource Coordinator.
°
Construction shall be limited to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on weekdays
and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays. No construction shall be allowed on Sundays or
legal holidays.
Ail voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0.
CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR AN INTERIM USE PERMIT TO BRING IN FILL IN
EXCESS OF 1,000 CUBIC YARDS FOR THE RECONSTRUCTION OF PARKING LOTS
ON PROPERTY ZONED OI, OFFICE INSTITUTIONAL AND LOCATED AT 6241
HAZELTINE BOULEVARD, MINNETONKA JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL.
Public Present:
Name Address
Stan Lim
Tom Berge
Sam and Nancy Mancino
5801 Duluth Street, Minneapolis 55422
Minnetonka Schools, 5621 Highway 101
6620 Galpin Boulevard
Matt Saam presented the staff report on this item.
Sacchet: Thanks Matt. Any questions from staff?
Lillehaug: Do you have a method that you're going to implement to regulate or control mosquito
problems?
Saam: You can maybe ask the applicant. I guess as staff we didn't see that as a huge problem.
In talking with the school, it sounds like they do do some spraying but there's a fine balance
between doing too much. You have some parents who are concerned with too many chemicals
10
Planning Commission Meeting -June 3, 2003
around the area where their children are at so it's a fine line there. As I said, from a staff's
viewpoint we want the pond there for water quality purposes so I don't really see it as an issue.
Lillehaug: Do we do any other control measures anywhere else throughout the city?
Saam: No, not that I know of.
Lillehaug: What amount of material do you anticipate being excess on the site? I can direct that
to the applicant too.
Saam: Yeah. They gave me the number of 8,000 cubic yards. They did say that was a high
estimate. They believe it will be less than that.
Lillehaug: Okay. That's all I have, thanks.
Papke: Question on the fence. A 4 foot tall fence is probably tall enough to keep a bicycle from
tumbling down the hill but it's not going to keep a 12 year old out of the pond. Any concerns or
issues with the height of that fence?
Saam: I guess I looked at it with our Parks Director who regulates trails all over the city. His
recommendation was a 4 foot high fence. I just went with that. To me that seems high enough.
Certainly if you wanted to you could increase it as a condition, but I guess we're, as staff we're
fine with the 4 foot high fence.
Sacchet: Could you point out which, where exactly that fence would be because it's just a
stretch. I mean they can walk around it.
Saam: Yeah. Let me just go back to the old grading plan, and the pond will pretty much stay the
same. Here we have the pond. The trail is right here. The slope goes down so we were going to
have the fence put in along this side. Maybe curve it around there like that. There are some
existing tennis courts here and I believe they do, yes, have their own fence.
Papke: So there's no intent to use the fence to keep the kids out of the pond?
Saam: What do you mean by out? I guess it's meant as a safety hazard. If somebody would fall
and want to roll down the hill.
Papke: But we're not trying to prevent the kids from heading into the pond?
Saam: No. No.
Papke: Okay. So it will serve the purpose of safety but it's obviously not going to be effective.
Saam: Yeah, it's not meant to be a barrier type surrounding the pond.
Papke: Okay.
Claybaugh: Nothing new to add.
Sacchet: Rich.
11
Planning Commission Meeting - June 3, 2003
Slagle: Just a few questions. Getting back to the fence. I mean in your opinion is it over kill that
you would consider putting a fence around a pond that's located on a school property?
Saam: I guess my opinion, yeah. Just because we don't do it everywhere else or on other public
properties. Churches that sort of thing. Can maybe get the school's opinion on it and their
engineer, but in my opinion yeah. I don't see a need for it.
Slagle: Do we have ponds in areas that close to school within the city?
Saam: Well Bluff Creek is an elementary school. I know there's either a pond or creek right by
there that we don't have a fence around. That's the only one that comes to mind right now.
Slagle: The trail going north to Melody Hill Road. Lane. There' s also a, for lack of a better term
a trail that cuts over to the water tower. To sort of a, you cross the fields if you will.
Saam: It's not a paved trail I believe.
Slagle: No.
Sacchet: It's an opening.
Slagle: Yeah it's opening. My question is, is there, as long as we're going to be doing trails, is
them an interest in cutting a trail over to that versus having the kids walk across soccer fields or
snow covered fields or what not?
Saam: I think it's a good point and one maybe we should pose to the applicant so.
Slagle: So that wasn't brought up in your discussions with them?
Saam: No. No.
Slagle: Okay. And then lastly, the handout we got today, can you briefly tell me from the
number of parking spots and I guess just a general overview, what changed?
Saam: Sure. The major change.
Slagle: I mean you've got the one.
Saam: I'll show you the whole one and then I'll show you the new one at the end. Basically the,
well the turnaround's gone. The bus turnaround ama. There's some parking up in here with this
bubble being cut out is down here, and this area on this side is now it's own drive aisle for the
buses.
Slagle: And the applicant knows, at least according to the plan was to, the reason that we're
avoiding this was because it would potentially have some impact on the stand of trees to the east.
Saam: Correct.
Slagle: We're avoiding that?
12
Planning Commission Meeting -June 3, 2003
Saam: No. I believe, again you can ask the applicant the exact count but there will be a few trees
taken out in that grove.
Slagle: Okay. So basically we just got, you just got this recently too.
Saam: Yesterday, yeah.
Slagle: Alright. I'll wait.
Sacchet: Is that it?
Slagle: Yep.
Sacchet: I do have a few questions too Matt. First of all, the impervious is about the same
between the revised one and the one we got?
Saam: Yeah. I mean percentage points.
Sacchet: Not big difference?
Saam: No.
Sacchet: In terms of trees. It says staff report on page 10 says the proposal will result in the
removal of some existing trees. Do we have any indication of how many? How big? How much
trees?
Saam: Yeah, you know I discussed this with our City Forester and her concerns or maybe
jurisdiction had to do with the tree plantings in the median area. I asked her about the trees
coming down here, if there's any requirement to replace and, but the basic answer is because it's
not a subdivision. Because they're not changing or increasing really the use, it's just like if you
put on a house addition, maybe you have to cut a tree down. That's the way she looked at it. So
and her feelings we didn't have to require any replacement of those trees there just to redo the
parking lot.
Sacchet: So it's not something we can get involved with basically is what you're saying?
Saam: That's the opinion I got, yeah. And I did provide her with this new plan to show her that
additional trees were coming down and she didn't have any additional conditions.
Sacchet: Alright. Thank you for this. That's all the questions. That is our staff report so at this
point I'd like to ask the applicant to come forward and make a presentation if you so wish. State
your name and address for the record please.
Tom Berge: My name is Tom Berge and I'm Director of Finance and Operations for Minnetonka
Schools. And in terms of the project, the reason that we have this as a proposal is the traffic
conditions at West Middle School are such that we have bus parking and parent drop off
overlapping. There is congestion. I don't know if you've been up there during dismissal or in the
early morning hours but there's usually cars jockeying for position around the buses. The kids
are trying to get out of the cars to get into school and it's really created a very congested
condition. During even hours when we have school activities there's a lack of adequate parking
and that's creating some congestion as well. And with the proposal we'll be able to, as you've
13
Planning Commission Meeting -June 3, 2003
seen, separate the parent and bus traffic. And when I looked at the reVised plans that have been
developed to address the angle parking issue, I think it actually makes for a better flow of traffic
because the buses won't be back tracking against the area where kids will be crossing to get into
the parking lot to be picked up by their parents. So I think it's a better layout all the way around.
And in terms of additional parking, we're looking at expanding daytime parking by
approximately 30 cars and evening parking will be more than that because cars would be able to
park where the buses are parking for their loading and unloading so we're looking at a significant
increase in the capacity of that area for evening events. As we looked at the, and I looked at the
drawings for the pond and the fence, I think the fence is a good idea. I think we'll probably
administratively talk about the height of the fence. Four feet might be just a tad low. I think
that's one thing we need to take a look at. In terms of mosquito control, we try to control those,
that issue but really it's a very sort of balance between how much you go after it and the issue of
using chemicals and so forth so, unless there are other complaints we probably wouldn't
aggressively go after that issue. In terms of the tree issue, we are adding a number of trees
around the perimeter of that parking lot that currently aren't there. I think I took a quick count as
I saw it on the screen, probably around 18-20 trees around that perimeter area and right now in
that center circle drive I think there's 4 trees so there's additional trees that are being added even
though the new drive may take out some trees just to provide that exit. With that I'll turn it back
to you for questions. Our engineer from Inspec is here, Stan Lim and if you have technical
questions I guess I'd turn it over to him. Policy questions I think I can answer that on behalf of
the school district.
Sacchet: Thank you. Questions from the applicant.
Slagle: I have just a couple. If you can take a second sir and address the, what I'll call the
informal trail to the east that connects to the little path or roadway where the water tower. Is
there a plan to connect as you have a trail going north? Would you cut off and go to the east?
Tom Berge: Currently we don't have a plan to install a trail by that opening by the water tower.
That hasn't come up as an issue.
Sacchet: If I may jump in. Maybe staff could clarify whether that is really a real trail or whether
it's just an access to the water tower where there happens to be an opening in the fence that
people go through? Do we know what the status is of that particular?
Saam: It' s not a real trail on any map or any city trail, no. Kids just use it.
Sacchet: Okay.
Saam: They come up our gravel drive for the water tower I think...
Sacchet: There's basically to the water tower and then the school left an opening in the fence and
people go through it but it's not a formal connection in any form.
Saam: That's my understanding of it.
Tom Berge: That's accurate.
Sacchet: Thank you for clarifying that, okay. Go on Rich.
14
Planning Commission Meeting - June 3, 2003
Slagle: Thank you. The other question I have is with respect to the parking lot. The proposal we
received today. It looks like, from what I can see, you've got the trail coming from the north.
Cutting down. I don't know if there's a map that we can pull up of the newest. We've got a
sidewalk or a trail going down right there, and then it cuts over. Is there other means within the
parking lot of a sidewalk? And what I'm getting at is, you've got parents, kids coming in for
functions within the school or heading to the north east to the fields and I'm just trying to get an
idea of what the patterns of walking would be in a traffic area.
Tom Berge: Stan, maybe you can come up and point out the sidewalk layout on this.
Stan Lim: My name is Stan Lim from Inspec. I'm the engineer working on this project. Could
you clarify the question?
Slagle: If you could just take your pen and show me in that parking lot where the sidewalks are.
Stan Lim: The sidewalks are on this whole side if you, this is a sidewalk right here and down,
and then this is a big open walk for the crossing, and there's another sidewalk over here. So if
you park over here and parents would drop off, can basically let, so their kids can basically come
across the sidewalk down the middle here. Here's the front door of the building. There is another
sidewalk over here too, right here. The other side is just a landscape.
Slagle: Is it running on the north, east and west type?
Stan Lim: This path goes all the way to the north and then it would go up here and then, we
haven't it striped it yet but...crosswalk in here and it would take you...
Slagle: Okay, if I can. Just go down to where you go up. Right there and then do you have an
east/west sidewalk on the north side of the parking lot?
Stan Lim: No. Because there really isn't any, I guess the building's here so we wouldn't want to
keep all the sidewalk where people...
Slagle: Okay, I'm just wondering if people are coming to park to go to the fields as well.
Stan Lim: I think there's only what two baseball fields out there. Do people, I guess I'm not sure
the reason for it.
Tom Berge: Baseball fields, softball fields.
Stan Lim: I guess you park in here you could, you know get to this. If you park over here, the
sidewalk will be here and walk north into there are some tennis courts. That way or to get to the
ballfields over here, but there isn't a sidewalk...
Slagle: No, no, just on the very north side of it. Right there. And the reason I ask that is because
again you've got people coming to the school. I think you're well suited for that but you've got
soccer fields, softball fields, tennis courts, track. And so I was wondering if that was a
consideration?
Stan Lim: I guess the soccer fields are down to the south here. The athletic track on the south
end off to the right. Up here I guess. Southeast comer. This would serve the tennis courts right
15
Planning Commission Meeting - June 3, 2003
here. I guess to answer your question, you know the mason, we'd rather have green space
between the parking lot and the drive.
Slagle: That's it.
Sacchet: Craig?
Claybaugh: Nothing to add.
Papke: What do we expect the maximum depth, water depth of the pond to be after a heavy rain?
Stan Lim: The pond, the permanent bottom of the pond is going to be about 8 feet deep. And the
pond is designed with some safety in mind as most NURP ponds. The first foot of water is going
to be a 10 to 1 slope so you'd have to walk 10 feet before the water gets to be a foot deep. And
then from then on it's going to be about another 7-8 feet deep. There's going to be another 2 feet
of..., what we call it. That would take care of all the peak rains in case you've got a big rain.
That water will fluctuate up and down within 2 feet. As the rain subsides it will go down to the
normal water level again. So the normal water level would be at the top of the 10 to 1 slope and
that' s fairly flat I guess. And that' s a safety feature of most NURP ponds you see out there.
Papke: So you don't have any concerns with the kids taking a dip in the pond at some point in
time?
Stan Lim: You know I've talked to Matt about that and most cities don't put fences as a rule for
the NURP ponds. You know we see in public parks and places like that. I've wrestled with that
question myself but I asked the advice of the City of St. Paul, Eagan, the watershed districts even
and they said as a rule they don't put in fences.
Papke: That's all I have, thanks.
Tjornhom: I had one question about the pond again. Everyone's worded about the pond. I'm
wondering, is it going to or could it be used, is it designed for educational purposes also?
Stan Lim: Yeah. Typically on a pond like this, a NURP pond, the first few feet of water, that
would be seeded with some sort of a native grasses and typically the schools or most public
places, they don't mow all the way up to the water edge so that stuff will just basically grow long
and natural. You' ve seen it in most ponds before so I guess you could use it as a nature thing.
Tjomhom: So will it be easily accessible to the children? To get down to.
Stan Lim: What I've heard from most engineers and most public entities like the watershed
districts and stuff, as a rule they tell you not to mow all the way up to the water's edge so that the
tall grasses in itself is a deterrent to the kids going in there. I mean it will take a couple years
before the grasses are growing long enough but we're talking about seeding with native grasses
that will be more, that are more water born type vegetation. So and give it 2-3 years it will grow
tall enough that I'm guessing 6-7 feet tall that you really don't want to walk into anyway.
Sacchet: Bruce.
Feik: Yes. You had mentioned that one of the goals was to separate the bus traffic from the drop
off traffic. Will the bus lane then be, have signage on it for buses only during school hours or, I
16
Planning Commission Meeting - June 3, 2003
quite frankly don't see how the division works. I still cars coming right down by the buses and
dropping kids off.
Stan Lim: First of all, during drop off and pick up there will be, it will be supervised by school
staff, as it is now I'm sure. And we do have signs planned for, you know as they come in, school
buses only. So, but it will be supervised. What we've learned in the past is, if you give people
one shared entrance between buses and cars, everybody will try to go in there. If there's a distinct
separation, people will most likely go into the respective paths which is what we were trying to
achieve here.
Feik: Okay, thank you. That's it.
Sacchet: Steve.
Lillehaug: My comment again, or question would be the yardage that you anticipate being in
excess to the site, is it approximately 8,000 yards?
Stan Lim: Yeah, that's the combination of most of it is coming from the pond and the other one,
the remaining yardage is coming from the extra sub-cut that we had to do for the bus loop. Well
for all the blacktop out there .... our engineer recommended we put in about 12 inches of extra
sand below the parking lot and an extra 24 inches below the bus areas and the main drive just
because they have a lot of clay, bad soils out there.
Lillehaug: That's all I have, thanks.
Sacchet: No question from my end. Thank you very much.
Stan Lim: I've got just one question.
Sacchet: Yeah, if you want to add anything, go ahead.
Stan Lim: As far as the letter of credit from the school, being it' s a public entity, a school district,
do you still require that letter of credit or?
Saam: I guess as far as I know. I can double check that.
Stan Lim: Okay.
Saam: I can check on that.
Sacchet: Thank you for your presentation. Now this is a public hearing. I open the public
hearing if anybody wants to address this item, please come forward and state your name and
address for the record please.
Sam Mancino: Hi there. I'm Sam Mancino. My wife Nancy and we live adjacent to the school.
This is the school and that's us right there. From what we understand of the plan it looks pretty
good. I understand the need for redirecting the traffic and the parking lot, particularly the thing
that interested us was the controlling of the water runoff so we have a couple of questions that
we'd like to talk through and see if we can get some help on this. In the past there has been no
water control per se and everything along that southern border drops onto our property and erodes
our property and is creating a real problem. We've talked to the school about it a couple of times
17
Planning Commission Meeting - June 3, 2003
before. They have made a little change. Put in a drain, you know one of those things you can
buy at Home Depot, the drain tile thing, and that's actually making it worst. So as, as long as
we' re now talking about you know their only draining the northern section of that parking lot, and
that's going to all drop into what is an 8 foot NURP pond, and it fluctuates 2 feet in heavy rains.
You can imagine the runoff that comes off the southern part where the whole ballfield is on the
top part. All flows onto our property. In a heavy rain it gets pretty substantial. So we'd like to
see some study on that to be able to ask the school board to be able to control that. It's starting to
wreck some havoc.
Nancy Mancino: Yeah, there's about a 12 to 15 foot difference between our property on the
southeast border of the school property which is their soccer fields and we noticed in the last 5
years the erosion, the slope in certain areas, I don't know, sloping and erosion happening and then
they did try to correct it by putting in a long piece of drain tile that actually now comes into our
property. So it's gotten worst not better so we'd love to be able to have the city address that with
us and with the school district and see how we can remedy that.
Sam Mancino: I assume that when the school was built, we've only been here for 20 years or so
but we think that when the school was built, that whole field was raised to make it level, which
created quite a height differential between our property and that's the part that's creating the
problem.
Nancy Mancino: And there's no retaining wall or anything so there is a fence there, but there is
nothing that keeps the water from coming onto our property.
Sam Mancino: So if you can help us.
Sacchet: May I just clarify. So if I understand it correctly, and I want to be really clear about
this, there is a drain tile there but it actually.
Sam Mancino: A single one.
Sacchet: It actually empties into your property?
Sam Mancino: Yes it does.
Sacchet: That's what I wanted clear, okay.
Nancy Mancino: And that's just been added in the last couple years because we said that we
were having problems. We went over to the school so.
Sacchet: Okay.
Sam Mancino: So a couple of other quick questions that we had, and I don't know how to resolve
this. You guys know how to do all that. One thing had to do with hours. 7:00 til, what was it,
6:00 work days seems workable to us but on Saturdays, could that be amended to 9:00 to 5:00?
We've heard every construction on all of the developments around us and it is something with
your windows open on a Sunday to Saturday when you're trying to sleep in at 6:30 or 7:00 in the
morning a big Cat fires up or a Matsu or something like that. Can we push that back to about
9:00 to 5:00 on Saturdays? The other question was, what is the estimated completion date? I
didn't really see that in any of the documentation. I would assume by the end of summer but I
don't know that for sure.
18
Planning Commission Meeting -June 3, 2003
Sacchet: Do we know? I believe the staff report said that the intent was to finish it before school
starts.
Tom Berge: August 15th.
Sacchet: August 15th, okay.
Sam Mancino: And then the last piece is a nuisance thing that has to do with the garbage that's
dumped over the fence from the school. There's a small fence there adjacent to the southern
boundary where the big field is, and when we walk back in our woods there, we found potato chip
bags. We find pop cans. We f'md people have taken whole dumped cans and thrown it over the
fence. Tires, etc, etc. And particularly with the increase of capacity for evening events and
things that are going to be happening, we'd like to see the school take a little bit more
responsibility in cleaning up the...I don't know how they monitor that, if on a daily basis but I
was thinking on a quarterly basis go through and police that and clean it up a little bit.
Nancy Mancino: Yeah, but we just have a new garbage can there so we'd love some help on that
too.
Sam Mancino: So those are our questions. Otherwise it looks good to us.
Nancy Mancino: And we've love to have them included in the conditions of approval.
Sacchet: Thank you very much.
Nancy Mancino: Any questions for us?
Sacchet: Actually I have a question to staff about what was presented. Is there a possibility to
connect that drain tile on the, I guess it would be the south, the eastern part of the south line. Is
there a way to connect that into this drainage system that's being built?
Saam: No, I don't believe so.
Sacchet: Not really.
Saam: But the area that the Mancino's are speaking of is well to the south of this construction
area.
Sacchet: It's opposite basically.
Saam: Yeah. I do however think that city staff deals with drainage problems in the city every
day. We could sure come out and meet with yourselves and maybe the school to try to come up
with a solution to this. In my mind though it's separate from this construction. But we'd
certainly as a city be willing to help correct that drainage problem in any way we can. And I
would think the school would be too.
Nancy Mancino: Appreciate it.
Sam Mancino: Thank you.
19
Planning Commission Meeting - June 3, 2003
Nancy Mancino: Thank you very much.
Sacchet: Thank you. Well this is a public heating. Does anybody want to come forward and
address this item? This is your turn to do so. Seeing nobody, I close the public hearing and bring
it back to the commission. Who wants to start with this one?
Lillehaug: I can.
Sacchet: Go ahead Steve.
Lillehaug: One thing I would like to do is be a little more proactive in dealing with this potential
8,000 yards of excess material. That's going to be plus 500 trucks leaving this site. As well as all
the grading on that site. Rather than, staff spoke of dust control in here but I think we should be
proactive and mandate water usage to control the dust because there's going to be dust. A lot of
grading. A lot of trucks. There will be dust. And the other thing is with that many trucks, again
we should be proactive. 41's a pretty busy highway and during rush hour it's real busy, so we
should really, I guess I'd like to maybe revise or add to condition 13 and limit any hauling to non
rush hour periods. And then when we get to a condition I can elaborate on that closer. Other than
that, I agree with staff that it would be good to take care of this drainage issue to the south. It
would be good to take care of this right now while they're constructing this, so I would hope that
the school and the city can work with the Mancino's on this and take care of this during this
construction. But like staff said, I don't think it's really part of this project. I think that's all I
have, thanks.
Sacchet: Thanks Steve. Bruce, you want to jump in?
Feik: Yeah. I generally support, Matt I have a question though. In the hours of operations
during our last working session we addressed hours of operation, and I thought there was a
difference in Saturdays. Different hours between Saturdays and work days.
Saam: Yeah. We're in a little Catch-22. We're revising the code currently. We want to get the
Saturday hours to say 9:00 to 5:00 but currently in the code they say 7:00 to 6:00, Monday
through Saturday. With a private development, when we have a DC, a development contract, we
limit those to just Monday to Friday 7:00 to 6:00 and then Saturdays 9:00 to 5:00. We want to
get that into the code. We haven't made that change as of yet, so that' s why the conditions reflect
what the code says. If you would want to change that, I guess I would be in support of that as
what we're going for.
Feik: 9:00 to 5:00 would be consistent with what the new code is going to be, is that correct?
Saam: With what we're proposing it to be, correct. Yep.
Feik: Yeah, proposed. Okay. That was it, thanks.
Sacchet: Okay. Bethany. Kurt. Bruce?
Feik: I'm down here.
Sacchet: Yeah I figured...
20
Planning Commission Meeting- June 3, 2003
Claybaugh: There's only two left. Me and Rich so. I would just like to add to the excellent
points that Steve made with respect to being proactive. One of the concerns that I had that I
didn't hear addressed was just in terms of what the sheer amount of haul material coming out of
there, that the drive down to 41 be swept on a regular basis and silt controlled. Because there's
going to be a lot coming off of those trucks and it's all going to get washed down onto 41, so
incorporate that as well. I would be in favor of supporting the 9:00 to 5:00 on Saturday. !
remember part of our code compliance review and just wanted to note that I could certainly
empathize with the Mancino situation. Unfortunately with respect to the drainage issues and the
garbage over the fence, those aren't things that we can address in this particular forum or venue.
We'd like to encourage obviously the school district, people involve to take a good close look at
that and work in good faith. And reiterate what's been said already with respect to having the
equipment on site. Now would be the opportunistic time to address that issue so that's all my
comments.
Sacchet: Thanks Craig. Rich. No comments. I don't have too much extra to add. We heard the
concern about the mosquito control. I think that's in the hands of the school. I don't think we
need to get involved with that. In terms of the request from the Mancino's, I think the erosion is a
significant issue and makes perfect sense to address it while there is equipment out there, so I
could support something like work, applicant work with staff to address that issue and then
basically look to the responsibility of the applicant to work that issue. Since we are in the process
of revising the conditional use permit code to reflect that Saturday will be 9:00 to 5:00, it would
be consistent in my opinion that we put that in at this point. And I think your concerns Steve
about the non rush hour and the dust control is certainly appropriate, considering the considerable
amount of hauling that's going to have to take place. The garbage over the fence, I think that I
would see that as an issue between the school and the neighbors. That really doesn't play into the
application in front of us. That's my comment. With that, ! would be willing to take a motion.
Feik: I'll make a motion.
Sacchet: Go ahead Bruce.
Feik: Planning Commission approves Interim Use Permit.
Sacchet: We need to say Planning Commission recommends approval.
Feik: Recommend approval.
Sacchet: Is that correct? We're not approving. We're recommending approval. Alright.
Feik: Planning Commission recommends approval of Interim Use Permit //03-2 with the
following conditions 1 through 7, 9 through 21 with number 13 modified to indicate that hours of
operation shall be 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on
Saturdays. And you worked out some language over here so I'll let you deal with that later.
Lillehaug: And then add additionally.
Feik: I think we need to.
Sacchet: We need a second fh:st. Did you second?
Lillehaug: I second it.
21
Planning Commission Meeting - June 3, 2003
Sacchet: You did?
Lillehaug: I do now.
Sacchet: Alright. So we have friendly additions?
Lillehaug: Sure. A friendly addition to 13. Additionally trucks hauling material to and from the
site shall be limited to non rush hour traffic times from the periods of 6:00 to 8:30 a.m. and 3:30
to 6:00 p.m., or revised as such from the city.
Feik: Okay.
Sacchet: Is that accepted?
Feik: Absolutely.
Sacchet: Any other ones?
Lillehaug: Another friendly amendment. Water shall be used for dust control.
Feik: Okay.
Saam: Steve what was the second, if I could interrupt. What was the second hour period? You
said 6:00 to 8:30 and.
Lillehaug: 6:00 to 8:30 a.m. and 3:30 to 6:00 p.m. Would you concur that those are typical
hours? Maybe before I add them you could.
Sacchet: Would we be able to do something like applicant work with staff?. Because do we need
to be that specific? I see that is.
Lillehaug: They are pretty specific rush hour times. That's a busy road.
Sacchet: But then if the applicant work with staff they could, I mean I personally think we don't
need to be specifying the hours at this point. Those are more detail than we need right now.
Claybaugh: Typically pretty standard hours that are specified.
Sacchet: That's pretty standard, okay.
Claybaugh: Civil engineering fh'ms for construction projects but again we can hear from the
applicant if that's appropriate at this stage or.
Sacchet: Well let's try to go through our process.
Lillehaug: Let me add to that. And/or approved by the City and County. I think it is a County
road. Is it a County road?
Saam: State. State highway.
22
Planning Commission Meeting - June 3, 2003
Lillehaug: It's a State highway.
Saam: Yeah, and we didn't, I guess we didn't mention that. We haven't received comments so
they will still apply though because it's a state road so.
Sacchet: So it' s really a State issue in terms of that part?
Saam: I think it's a combination of the City and the State.
Lillehaug: The State may impose those restrictions. I guess.
Sacchet: You'd like to have the specifics?
Lillehaug: Yep.
Sacchet: Okay. And you accepted that?
Feik: I accept the specifics actually yes.
Sacchet: Any other?
Claybaugh: Yes, I had a friendly amendment. I just wanted the drive down to 41 monitored and
swept as required to mitigate silt washing down onto 41.
Feik: The drive lane, or the driveway.
Claybaugh: Yeah, the street sweeping of the driveway down to 41 as part of the truck haul route
down to 41.
Feik: Require to keep the dirt.
Claybaugh: It needs to be monitored for excess soils and silts so all that comes off the truck as
they're hauling down to 41 doesn't get washed down onto 41 in terms of silt.
Feik: I'll accept that.
Sacchet: Accepted? Any other ones? I would like to add one, applicant shall work with staff to
address the erosion problem to the south on the eastern half of the property. Is that acceptable?
Feik: Matt, what's the distance between the parking and the erosion problem to the south? This
is a significant distance away. Can we reasonably link these or not?
Saam: I guess in my opinion, like I said, I think it's a separate issue that the staff can work with
the residents on. But this is up.
Feik: It' s hundreds of yards, is it not?
Saam: Excuse me?
Feik: It's hundreds of yards. It's a long way.
23
Planning Commission Meeting - June 3, 2003
Sacchet: It's a whole soccer field. So we'd better address it separately, is that what we're
saying?
Saam: In my opinion, yeah.
Slagle: We can just assume too, if I can throw out.
Sacchet: Please.
Slagle: I'm sure the school district will work with the neighbors.
Saam: And I'll certainly mention it as the city staff and we can contact the Mancino' s.
Sacchet: I think that's acceptable.
Feik: Should we withdraw the amendment or?
Sacchet: Well you didn't accept it. That takes care of that. Alright, we have a motion. We have
a second. A couple friendly amendments.
Feik moved, Lillehaug seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of
Interim Use Permit g03-2, subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall provide the City with a cash escrow or letter of credit in the amount of
$8,400 to guarantee erosion control measures and site restoration and compliance with the
interim use permit. The applicant must also pay the City an administration fee of $296
prior to the City signing the permit.
2. Storm sewer sizing calculations will have to be provided for a 10 year, 24 hour storm
event.
3. The applicant must provide a proposed haul route for review and approval.
4. If excess material will be hauled to another site in Chanhassen, a separate grading permit
will be required for the other property.
5. All disturbed areas as a result of construction are required to be reseeded and mulched
within two weeks of site grading.
6. A rock construction entrance must be installed at the beginning of the driveway
construction.
7. Add a four foot high chain link fence to the west side of the proposed bituminous path
along the entire length of the pond.
8. Deleted.
9. The applicant shall obtain and comply with all permit requirements of the Watershed
District and MnDot, if applicable.
24
Planning Commission Meeting - June 3, 2003
10. The applicant shall supply the City with a mylar as-built survey prepared by a
professional engineer upon completion of excavation to verify the grading plan has been
performed in compliance with the proposed plan.
11. A stockpile must be provided for the topsoil which will be re-spread on the site as soon as
the excavation is completed. Top soiling and disk mulch seeding shall be implemented
immediately following the completion of excavated areas.
12. Noise levels stemming from the operation are not to exceed MPCA and EPA regulations.
If the city determines that there is a problem warranting such tests shall be paid for by the
applicant.
13. Hours of operation are limited to 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, 9:00
a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Saturday, and prohibited on national holidays. Trucks hauling
material to and from the site shall be limited to non rush hour traffic times periods
of 6:00 to 8:30 a.m. and 3:30 to 6:00 p.m., or revised as such from the City Engineer
working in conjunction with the State.
14. The applicant shall be responsible for any and all road damage sustained from the truck
hauling and construction activities.
15. Use the City's standard outlet control structure for the pond outlet, as per City Detail Plate
//3109. Also, add the other following Detail Plates to the plans: 5300 & 5301.
16. Show the NWL and HWL of the proposed pond.
17. Show the proposed grading for the new bituminous path for the entire distance to Melody
Hill Road.
18. Revise the drive aisle widths of the eastern parking lot to be 26 feet in width, as per city
code.
19. Building Official conditions:
a. The plans must be signed by a professional engineer licensed in the State of
Minnesota.
b. Provide plans and details of the accessible parking space signage for review.
c. A plumbing permit must be obtained before beginning work on the site utilities.
20. The applicant shall verify the hawthorns planted on the south side of the parking lot have
adequate growing space and protection if planted within the sidewalk.
21. The applicant shall make the minimum inside width of all landscape islands 10 feet.
22. Water shall be used for dust control.
23. The driveway shall be monitored and swept as required to mitigate silt washing
down onto Highway 41.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0.
25
Planning Commission Meeting - June 3, 2003
Sacchet: This will go to City Council on the 9th of June, is that correct? And if anybody wants to
appeal, that can be done too. So I thank you very much.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Lillehaug noted the Minutes of the Planning
Commission meeting dated May 20, 2003 as amended by Chairman Sacchet on pages 18 and 32.
Chairman Sacchet adjourned the Planning Commission meeting at 8:15 p.m.
Submitted by Kate Aanenson
Community Development Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim
26
CHANHASSEN PARK AND
RECREATION COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
SUMMARY MINUTES
MAY 28, 2003
Acting Chair Spizale called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Amy O'Shea, Jack Spizale, Paula Atkins, Susan Robinson and Glenn
Stolar (Rod Franks arrived late to the meeting.)
MEMBERS ABSENT: Tom Kelly
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman, Park and Rec Director; and Jerry Ruegemer, Recreation
Superintendent
PUBLIC PRESENT:
Kent Ludford
Laura, Stephen & Paul Graves
Joni Nelson
Grant & Tim Moore
Jim Manders
Melissa Gilman
Jeff & Peter Fliss
Mike, Connor, Ryan & Linda Howe
Clay Muhlenhake
Tyler Farrell
Jason & Barbara Kayati
8615 Valley View Court
8634 Valley View Court
8610 Valley View Court
1812 Valley Ridge Trail So.
6791 Chaparral Lane
Chanhassen Villager
8710 Osprey Lane
2169 Stone Creek Drive
8040 Erie Avenue
2243 Boulder Road
APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
Commissioner Stolar added under commission presentations an update from the City Council
meeting and to discuss impacts of the conceal and carry law.
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None.
COMMUNITY OPEN MICROPHONE OPEN HOUSE.
Paul Graves, 8634 Valley View Court was present to address the paint ball situation that was
addressed in the Chanhassen Villager a couple weeks ago and the impacts on the Bluff Creek
corridor. He felt it has been a positive activity for his family and friends, teaching safety and
responsibility and was asking that the neighborhood be allowed to continue to play paint ball in
that area. Kent Ludford and his son Michael, 8615 Valley View Court explained what paint ball
is and gave a demonstration of some of the equipment used. A 10 minute paint ball video was
shown. Jason Kayati, 8715 Valley View Place asked the commissioner to consider a site in
Chanhassen for paint ball to be played. Barbara Kayati wanted to clarify a couple items brought
up in the Chanhassen Villager article regarding the litter and parents not knowing where and what
their children were doing. She stated the litter has been there for many years and that she always
knows where her children are and requested that the City provide an area for the kids to play paint
ball. Tim Moore, 1812 Valley Ridge Trail South ask the commission to consider a paint ball park
Park and Rec Summary - May 28, 2003
and charging admission to help offset the cost of running it. Jeff Fliss, 8710 Osprey Lane said
that he's been walking in this area for a long time and it's been a mess long before the children
started playing paint ball, and that the newspaper article was very slanted against the paint ball
players. Joni Nelson, 8610 Valley View Court wanted to dispute some of the information in the
newspaper article as well. The parents did not feel it was illegal to play paint ball because
they've seen real hunters in orange vests with real guns in this area as well. She felt that rules
needed to be set as far as littering and boundaries. The kids that play in that area have actually
cleaned up a lot of the litter and hazards out there. Tyler Ferrell and Stephen Graves gave their
perspective on why they like to play paint ball. Kent Ludford stated he would leave the video if
anybody wants to watch it for further reference. Tyler Raymond stated he didn't own a paint gun
but he's seen the other kids playing and feels the city should give them a place to play. Jacob
Graves asked the commission to consider a place for them to play so they don't have to drive.
Clay Muhlenhake, President of the Chaska Area Football Association asked the City for their
assistance in providing additional football fields, with one 100 yard field, possibly lit. Ron
Roeser, 222 Chan View, asked if the city had any plans to continue bike paths on Lyman and
Galpin Boulevards. He explained he was a biker not a paint ball player. Chairman Franks and
Todd Hoffman explained how the trails on the comprehensive trail plan are being constructed
when property is developed and that the trail along Lyman Boulevard will get developed when
the County upgrades that road. Mr. Roeser also asked that the tunnel under Powers Boulevard
possibly get painted in the future. Chairman Franks asked if there was anyone interested in a dog
park, and Barbara Kayati stated she would be in favor of a dog park in the city. A member of the
audience got up and wanted to commend the city staff who run the park department on a daily
basis for the great job they do, stating he's lived in Chanhassen for 8 years, had a business in
town for 20 years and sponsors a men's and women's softball team.
O'Shea moved, Atkins seconded to recess the Park and Recreation Commission meeting to
hold an informal open house with the public at this point. Chairman Franks called the
meeting back to order.
Chairman Franks thanked Todd Hoffman for advertising the community open microphone/open
house and inviting the public in to speak and stated he'd like to see that continue in the future.
The commissioners also discussed putting a dog park, paint ball area, and lighting of a football
field to be placed on future agendas.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: O'Shea moved, Spizale seconded to approve the Minutes of
the Park and Recreation Commission meeting dated April 22, 2003 as presented. All voted
in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
INITIATE REVIEW OF ACCESSIBILITY EVALUATION FOR CITY OF
CHANHASSEN PARKS.
Todd Hoffman brought this item to the commission's attention as an informational item only. No
action was taken. Chairman Franks asked that when this is brought back, that staff provide
documentation of the current revisions to the ADA requirements.
2003 SUMMER ACTIVITIES AND 2003 LAKE ANN PARK OPERATIONS.
Jerry Ruegemer highlighted the new activities being offered in the 2003 summer activities, i.e.
skateboard camp and demonstration and reported that the first weekend of concession operations
at Lake Ann Park had been very successful with approximately $1,000 in sales. Now with the
Park and Rec Summary - May 28, 2003
nice weather arriving, picnic reservations were increasing and he stated he would be providing
the commission with a report in the future. Chaff Franks asked if there had been any resistance to
the increase in fees. Staff reported there had not.
SELF SUPPORTING PROGRAMS: SUMMER ADULT SOFTBALL.
Jerry Ruegemer gave an update on the summer adult softball league. He stated that numbers are a
little flat and there is an overall decline in younger adults playing throughout the whole state.
2003 PARK AND TRAIL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP).
Todd Hoffman provided the commission with an overview of the current status and history of the
Fund 410, park and trail fund and the projects projected to be completed this year. Chaff Franks
threw out that possibly bonding will have to be used as a funding source in the future.
Commissioner Stolar stated he would be in favor of recommending to City Council that they
review the funding of $700,000 out of Fund 410 for the City Center Park and reduce the
expenditure. Todd Hoffman suggested the Park and Recreation Commission take a tour of the
parks in the city and then come back for a work session to discuss capital improvements and
budget issues.
4TM OF JULY TRADE FAIR.
Todd Hoffman asked the commissioners for ideas for the Park and Recreation Commission booth
to be set up at the Business Expo.
4th OF JULY PARADE.
Jerry Ruegemer outlined the 4th of July parade events planned for this year. Chaff Franks asked
for possibly more participation in the parade theme by political participants.
RECOGNITION OF BOKOO BIKES FOR TRAIL MAP PARTNERSHIP.
Todd Hoffman informed the commission that Bokoo Bikes will be presented with a framed
edition of the trail map they helped fund with a $5,000 contribution at the City Council meeting
on June 9, 2003.
COMMISSION MEMBER COMMITTEE REPORTS. None.
COMMISSION MEMBER PRESENTATIONS.
Glenn Stolar provided the commission with an update of the City Council meeting held May 27,
2003 and discussion about the conceal and carry law and how it affects city property.
ADMINISTRATIVE PACKET.
Todd Hoffman informed the commission that the City Council had decided to take no action on
the tobacco use policy in city parks. He asked the commission if they wanted the council to
reconsider the issue in specific areas such as the skate park or beach areas. The members of the
Park and Recreation Commission unanimously agreed to place the issue of tobacco use in parks
on a future agenda for discussion. Chairman Franks asked that city residents be notified, if only
in the Chanhassen Villager, when mosquito spraying was planned to occur in city parks. Todd
Park and Rec Summary - May 28, 2003
Hoffman informed the commission of School District 112's upcoming plans for a referendum to
purchase land for a middle or high school. A 80 acre site with 40 acres of city owned park
property and 40 acres for the school.
Robinson moved, O'Shea seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the
motion carried. The Park and Recreation Commission meeting was adjourned.
Submitted by Todd Hoffman
Park and Rec Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim
CHANHASSEN PARK AND
RECREATION COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 28, 2003
Acting Chair Spizale called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Amy O'Shea, Jack Spizale, Paula Atkins, Susan Robinson and Glenn
Stolar (Rod Franks arrived late to the meeting.)
MEMBERS ABSENT: Tom Kelly
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman, Park and Rec Director; and Jerry Ruegemer, Recreation
Superintendent
PUBLIC PRESENT:
Kent Ludford
Laura, Stephen & Paul Graves
Joni Nelson
Grant & Tim Moore
Jim Manders
Melissa Gilman
Jeff & Peter Fliss
Mike, Connor, Ryan & Linda Howe
Clay Muhlenhake
Tyler Farrell
Jason & Barbara Kayati
8615 Valley View Court
8634 Valley View Court
8610 Valley View Court
1812 Valley Ridge Trail So.
6791 Chaparral Lane
Chanhassen Villager
8710 Osprey Lane
2169 Stone Creek Drive
8040 Erie Avenue
2243 Boulder Road
8715 Valley View Place
APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
Stolar: Just a couple things on, I guess it goes under presentations. I should present from the
City Council last night. I was at the meeting, so if we want to add that. And then also, I was
wondering Todd maybe you could help us. Based on the meeting last night, do we want to have
at least an initial discussion on the conceal and carry law impact? Oh, you probably had gone by
then.
Hoffman: Yep. Certainly you can.
Stolar: I don't expect any action but at least to start the discussion. The fire chief discussed it in
his presentation.
Hoffman: Okay.
Stolar: Would that be administrative item e? 5(e)?
Hoffman: Actually it would be a commission member presentation to place it on a future agenda.
Stolar: Okay.
Spizale: Okay, anybody else?
Park and Rec Commission - May 28, 2003
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None.
COMMUNITY OPEN MICROPHONE OPEN HOUSE.
Spizale: Right now let's open up to the audience. If anybody has, would like to come up to the
podium. State your name and address and what you've got to say.
Hoffman: First one's always the toughest.
Spizale: I see a lot of people ready to get up. Here we go.
Paul Graves: Hi. My name's Paul Graves. I just wanted to, 8634 Valley View Court in
Chanhassen. I wanted to address the paint ball situation that was addressed in the newspaper, in
the Chan Villager a couple weeks ago and just simply would like to just kind of state our thoughts
on that. We were playing paint ball in the Bluff Creek corridor in the area that was pictured in
the newspaper with our family and our neighbors throughout this entire year and it's really been
for all of us a pretty, real good positive experience. It's helped teach responsibility and safety to
the kids. It's been just a truckload of fun for us. We've gone down and the newspaper I thought
was somewhat deceiving in the article that was presented. In talking about littering and sort of a
disrespect for the area, and I think kind of quite the contrary. That there's been a lot of respect.
The kids have gone down and built bunkers in areas to play in. They've always plated with
supervision in that area. It's been a great area to play in because it's far removed from the path.
It has been one, just for safety sake. They've always played with proper supervision, whether it
be in the case, at least with our family and in our neighborhood, it's always required a parent to
be down there or appropriate supervision when they've played. There was some talk about the
people causing littering and so on and so forth. I think Michael actually had some demonstration
of that that they're biodegradable, and I just can't stress enough how much fun we've had with
this and what a good experience it has been altogether for us as kind of a whole neighborhood
group. Had just a ton of fun playing down there. And essentially didn't feel disrespectful like
kind of the way that the newspaper had put it, and would like to ask for consideration for a
variance or allowing people to continue possibly in that area. The area provides good shelter and
a lot of fun. It was set back where it didn't feel like we were interrupting anybody else's,
occasionally somebody might walk through. The times that we were down there, we always
showed respect when somebody was coming through. We stopped playing. Let them kind of do
their thing, and then would continue play when they felt. And would just like to I guess publicly
say that we would like some reconsideration of the rules around the people in that area.
Spizale: Okay, thanks for your comments. Next person.
Kent Ludford: My name is Kent Ludford, 8615 Valley View Court. We have my son with me
tonight, if you wouldn't mind him stepping up. I'm not sure, and I believe Michael brought this
stuff along to, in case you're not familiar with what paint ball is. The projectiles are sent out by
compressed air. Just to put it in quotes, the paint ball industry does not call them guns. They're
not paint guns, they're markers. The device that shoots the paint ball, which are these little 68
caliber, little biodegradable pellets and they have a little of paint in it. Do you want to explain
Michael?
Michael Ludford: These are just the paint balls that the...shoots. When they get wet they
dissolve and they're like 99 percent water and one percent paint. This is one broken up and it's
like, it doesn't stain anything so in the rain it will all just wash off and then it disintegrates...
This is a paint ball mask. It's made especially, there's special stuff on here made for paint balls
Park and Rec Commission - May 28, 2003
so if you get shot it won't break. Then on the markers there's a little safety, just like on any
regular gun. And this is a paint ball stopper for, you plug it into your barrel so if you pull the
trigger and the safety's not on, you have this in your barrel so the paint ball won't fly anywhere
else where you don't want them to go. So that's pretty much it.
Hoffman: You have a video you wanted to show?
Michael Ludford: Yeah.
Kent Ludford: When this is in the barrel then all the other players know he can't do anything.
The lens in here is specially made for these. This is actually stronger than safety glasses that
construction workers use, plus it's got full ear, mouth and chin protection, visor. This whole tape
that he's going to play is only a 10 minute take, and this one we got his first starter kit marker.
Came with that and with the helmet was second but this videotape came with the marker that we
bought. It's a Brass Eagle...manufacturer of paint ball equipment.
Spizale: Maybe Michael could pass the, could we see the paint balls too and see what they look
like and the solution. Thank you.
Kent Ludford: Just one question, we had...a couple ounces and you can tell, it's almost starting
to break down on that...
(A video was shown at this point in the meeting.)
Paul Graves: ...Safety is an issue. There are other people in outskirt Chan, 2 or 3 acre woods,
open fields and they've got an ideal situation for private land. We at Bluff Creek can't do it. So
we were using the city land, unknown that there was something stopping us. We apologize for
doing something that we had thought was perfectly f'me because we weren't being destructive, at
least our group was not. We always had a parent down there with them. That was an ideal
situation. That was a set up part specifically for the purpose. It looked to me about the size of a
hockey rink, maybe a little bit bigger but now you can see why the kids needed the trees, the little
bunkers. They need places to maneuver. To take cover. And that's the ideal situation. Small
piece of wooded area. Could be roped off. We could put fences around it. Some signs requiring
the safety issues, but there is a lot of people in Chanhassen that really enjoy this sport. If the
commission can do something to make it easier for them to enjoy it, the closest park that I know
of that you go out and pay 20, 30, 40 dollars for an afternoon, you're going way up to Eagan or
Lakeville. There's nothing that I know of anywhere in the close proximity. So after school they
want to go out and play for half an hour, you can't run them to each side of the metro area. So
that's where our dilemma is. We'd like to see some controls. Make it somewhat legal so the kids
can have some fun, and there's good learning experience. Thank you.
Spizale: Thanks for your comments.
Hoffman: We'll acknowledge the presence of Chairman Franks.
Franks: On time as usual.
Jason Kayati: My name is Jason Kayati, 8715 Valley View Place, Chanhassen. I'm not
requesting anything down in that specific area but some place in Chanhassen, maybe the city
could set aside somewhere for a local paint ballers to play. I've got a couple good reasons for
that. It gives somebody, or it gives us a place to play when we want to play after school or
Park and Rec Commission - May 28, 2003
whenever, and it will attract more players around like Chanhassen, Chaska, Victoria area to play
there. And if the city wanted to they could set up a post where they can sell paint balls and refills,
C02, do that. It just gives us something to do after school where we're not bored during the
summer. Over summer vacation we have a place, things to do and that's about it.
Audience: I'm 10 and I play paint ball. It's a really fun sport if it's played properly and it's
really safe. Usually we play at Bluff Creek after school, or on the weekends. And I play with all
my brothers and some of their friends.
Franks: Thanks.
Barbara Kayati: My name is Barbara Kayati and I live at 8715 Valley View Place, and my son
Jason was just up here speaking. A couple points I wanted to clarify in the article that appeared
in the Villager that I think kind of didn't truly portray what really was happening. It had alluded
to the littering that was found back there. That litter has been there for a long, long time. We've
lived in that area for almost 9 years and my husband's gone back there with my son and said that
that litter and trash has been there for quite some time. The other thing the article alluded to was
parents didn't know where their children were and what they were doing. I knew where my son
was at all times and what he was doing. Just like Mr. Ludford said, we didn't, we weren't aware
that that was against the rules and illegal in Chanhassen for them to play paint ball. And just
what I'd like to ask the city is to consider an area where these kids can go and play paint ball.
Thank you.
Franks: Thank you.
Tim Moore: Hi. My name is Tim Moore. I live at 1812 Valley Ridge Trail South. One of my
sons, I actually have two boys 15 and 14 that play down there. I would ask that the city take a
good look at this sport and allow an area to be set aside, like you've done progressively for the
skate boarders. This would not cost a lot, and the reason I say that is, is that the area would not
need anything to, you saw, if you saw the article, what the boys did with the wood that was down
there. You know all the carts, and you could see the age group that it does cross, even Mr.
Graves has said he's played. I know I have played. I've not played down there, but it is
something that I think that could be done relatively inexpensively and I think you can get a lot of
kids who actually, if you did need to have people to be there to monitor that, you could get a lot
of children to do that. And probably for free. And when I saw that, if you do charge a fee for it,
to help replace like the grass and just keep it up, you can get a lot of kids that would want to come
there and then maybe they would be able to do it for nothing and be able to use the area as well
for nothing. So you charge the children 10 bucks, 15 bucks, 20 bucks. Like you say, they go to a
lot of places that can cost you $50 pretty quickly, and if you charge you know $25-30 and you
have an attendant there that's 18, I'm sure he'd want to play, he or she, and they could maybe
play for free. That type of thing to help offset some of those costs that would be involved with
that, but I know how aggressive you were with doing the skateboarding and boys really
appreciated that when they came on line. And I also know there was an expense in paving that
and buying a lot of equipment for that, but I think it's paid off in the long run. And I think that
something like that could be done very inexpensively. It can be done in an area that is away
from everyone else. You probably would even get adults to come there. I'd probably be willing
to do it you know, to spend weekends there at some point. And like the article said, I am one of
the adults that let my children go down there unbeknownst of not checking in before hand.
Claiming ignorance on that part, but we did know where our children were and we were very, we
knew who they were with. At the most with my boys, there was about 8 kids at a time and it
seemed like they never crossed paths with the other children that were down there that were
Park and Rec Commission - May 28, 2003
younger. The older boys never played with the younger boys. They always seemed to come at
different times and so forth, and I don't think that in that area, that particular area, no one was at
risk of being hurt because there is a pretty dense as far as any shots coming out of there. But
hopefully you consider that, thank you.
Franks: Thank you.
Jeff Fliss: I don't have the water because I'm long winded or anything. My name is Jeff Fliss. I
live at 8710 Osprey Lane and I walk through that area a lot and I walked through that area before
they started playing. My son plays down there and that area was really a mess before, and I do
agree that the article was really slanted. It came across as a very pristine nature area. It wasn't.
If you walk out there now there's old machinery, equipment, rusted pieces, fencing and really
that's probably a lot more dangerous than what's happening out there right now. You look at
these kids, they're all good kids. Good students, and I do really think that they've done a really
good job of identifying an area that gets them out of the way of everybody. If you look at that
specific area, it's down in kind of a hollow. There's a set of railroad tracks on one side, which
prevents them from encroaching on anybody's private property, and the possibility of hitting any
homes. And because they're down in that hollow it's pretty much contained so I think they've
done a very good job of finding an area that they can stay out of everybody's way and do the
thing that they like to do. And I do think that you should give them the benefit of the doubt and
give them an opportunity to find a place to play in Chanhassen. Thanks.
Franks: Thanks.
Joni Nelson: Hi. I'm Joni Nelson. I live at 8610 Valley View Court, and my neighbors have
been playing out there. My son wanted to play out there. I was a little not sure, but saw how
much enjoyment that they had, so I just want to again go over some of the article because I think
that's probably really not showing the full facts and kind of tough in the way that it was written.
First of all, right. The parents were not aware that it was illegal on public property, as well as
private property, that the paint balls are not allowed as per the article. Why would I think that it's
illegal? Because I've seen hunters with orange vests on and real guns. We also have the conceal
and carry guns right now and so to be real concerned about paint balls, I don't know if any of you
have ever played this sport. I have played this sport and I have been hit and I have had welts but
I' ve also played softball and I' ve also played baseball and those welts actually take longer than a
paint ball welt to go away. In fact I have one on my leg right now from 4 weeks ago.
Franks: We'll take your word for it.
Joni Nelson: But I was happy that Paul brought out really that there hasn't been any crossfire.
That there has been parents that have been supervising. Kent even talked about how their paint
markers, not a true gun. Mike was good at demonstrating that the paint will wash away. It's not
going to stain the sidewalk or the building sides and so forth. I too did not like the fact that
there's garbage. There shouldn't be garbage. Kids need to know what the boundaries are and so
forth. The rec center should not be hit by paint balls and so forth and I think those rules do need
to be set. I was curious that we had a concentration on that path that people looked at, it was
probably 15 to 20 feet away to find that paint ball field where if you just look 5 feet by the creek
you will see barbwire. And we have talked about barbwire in our area for quite a while when
those paths first went in and that was probably 5 years ago and even when we moved in 8 years
ago we talked about the barbwire. Do you know who's actually taking care of the barbwire?
You're looking at them over there. Do you know who's actually cleaned up some of that area?
You're looking at them over there. So should they clean up what's been there? Sure. And there
Park and Rec Commission - May 28, 2003
is rusted, old machinery out there. So I do look at this as a positive of what it's done for the
neighborhood. It has brought people together. In our particular development there's 70 houses
and when we were first built we tried to get the city and our developer to actually put in a
playground. No one passed on that but we had a neighbor who built an unusually large
playground for our neighborhood. We have parents out there that are scrapping the pond off so
the kids can go out there and play ice hockey. We've got parents out there in the cul-de-sac
playing street hockey. Our parents are very involved with our kids and they do know where
they're at. And when I look at all the things that they have to do, I mean we're looking at kids
that are from age 10 to 15. They can't drive vehicles. They're on their bike. Our neighborhood
actually can't bike that far to the skate park. So we are looking at some kind of activity around
our area. Would I want my kids to bike over to the skate park? No, I feel that's too far. Would I
prefer my kids to play paint ball than go to Lake Ann? I'm sorry, I would. We've had a lot of
things happen at Lake Ann and paint ball is much safer. Problems arise, and as my company has
trained me, problems mean opportunities and we must understand them in order to provide an
opportunity and a solution. I do not feel that tearing down and vandalizing the forts that these
kids have spent hours on really resolve the problem. We actually need to find some kind of
activity that will keep these 10 to 15 year old kids occupied. And this article is telling us that we
should send our kids to another town. They should go to Buffalo or to Eagan to play. What are
we really telling them? Chanhassen isn't willing to allow them some kind of activity. We're
telling them to leave our city. Aren't we saying that already with our rec center. We go to
Chaska and we go to Eden Prairie. We have 500 acres of open space out there. We pride
ourselves in Chanhassen about that open space. We also have a tough budget. This is very cheap
land. Very cheap sport. My kids are responsible. They purchased their gun and they purchase
all their supplies. They're held responsible. We can also look at corporate America. Where is
corporate America sending their employees to learn strategic planning? It's to the paint ball
fields. That's where I learned how to play. The only disappointment I have tonight is we actually
don't have any girls that have played this sport yet. Thank you.
Tyler Ferrell: Hi. My name's Tyler Ferrell.
Stephen Graves: Hi, I'm Stephen Graves.
Tyler Ferrell: And we're coming to the stand to tell you why we like paint ball. You go first.
Stephen Graves: We've had lots of fun with our friends and our family playing paint ball and it's
fun and a great opportunity.
Tyler Ferrell: Just recently it was my dad's birthday and we got him a paint ball gun so he could
play along with us. And he couldn't play with us anymore because the rock, or the article in the
paper and we're hoping that you can change that so that we can play again, instead of having to
go out to a way, way out, just to play for half an hour. This weekend we're going to Wisconsin to
play and we' re going to...Wisconsin so.
Franks: Good job.
Kent Ludford: Frank, you missed we had a 10 minute video.
Franks: I saw a good portion of the video.
Park and Rec Commission - May 28, 2003
Kent Ludford: I was going to say we're welcome to leave it if you want to watch it or if anybody
wants to watch it again to catch any fine points. You're more than welcome to just let Todd or
Jerry know to get it back to me.
Franks: My personal experience is I've caught a few of those f'me points right in the goggles so,
maybe it doesn't compare. Is that, anyone else wanting to come up and talk about paint ball?
We've, okay. We have.
Tyler Raymond: My name is Tyler Raymond and I live at 35...Parkland Way, Chanhassen and I
don't own a paint ball gun but I've been down there and I've seen them playing there and it
seems like they have a lot of fun and I think you should give them an area to play.
Franks: Thanks Tyler. Okay. You know we're open for all topics tonight. Not anything that
needs to be on the agenda. We just really want to hear from people and if there's anybody else
that's out there who has something that they want to bring up, just like this paint ball issue, I
really want to invite you to come on up and we'd like to hear what you have to say so.
Jacob Graves: Hi. My name is Jacob Graves. I own a paint ball gun and it's just a really fun
sport and we wouldn't want to drive way out to the places.
Franks: Thanks Jacob. They didn't help too much with the laughing did they? That's a lot to get
up and speak.
Clay Muhlenhake: First of all my name's Clay Muhlenhake. I'm the President of our Chaska
Area Football Association and very few kids are very passionate, as passionate and as willing to
get up as you guys are to talk about your sport. I've played paint ball and it's a blast. And it is
corporate America teaching strategy and when you get shot right away, you think wow. I thought
I was doing the right thing. That's not the reason I'm here tonight, but I'm glad I. got to hear you
guys' point of view because the article was slanted. Now I know both sides of the story. No
matter how thin you slice a piece of meat there's always two sides. I'm just here to talk about
football and the program. The youth football program. We've been, I met with Jerry Ruegemer
and Todd several times about our football program, and just want to put in a bid to try to get some
fields done. We're going to put together a letter to offer some financial support to try and get a lit
100 yard field. Right now our current program has about 500 kids involved, all in District 112,
and once you get into the 6th, 7t~ and 8t~ grade you play on a 100 yard field. We don't have a lit
100 yard field other than the high school field right now. We've had conversations with Jerry and
Todd about making an offer, trying to get some money raised to put together a 100 yard lit field,
so every Thursday night our 7t~ and 8th graders don't have to leave town and get home late that
evening. So just like to consider that. We will be putting together a letter within the next month
or so and maybe hopefully by the 2004 season we'll...share the responsibility, as well as the
wealth of a program that's great. And if you guys aren't signed up for football.
Franks: Thank you. Well there's some faces out there that haven't stood up yet so, anybody else
have anything more that they'd like to add? Bring it up in front of the commission. Except for
you.
Ron Roeser: Hi, I'm Ron Roeser. I live at 222 Chan View and I'm a biker, not a paint ball
person.
Franks: And Ron is a former Park commission members.
Park and Rec Commission - May 28, 2003
Ron Roeser: Yeah.
Hoffman: City council member.
Ron Roeser: And city council. I've done it all, no. I was just wondering about, you know you
get down to the end of the big hill there, is that Audubon? If there's any plan to finish that bike
trail over to the comer where it picks up on Chaska's trail. That and Galpin ends kind of
suddenly too. Are we thinking about putting trails or f'mishing that?
Franks: Well it's all part of a comprehensive trail plan and what we've been working on is as the
parcels of land develop and we're able to acquire the trail through the development of the
property we connect all the pieces, but what that's left us with is, just like what you're saying.
Trails in one spot and then a gap.
Ron Roeser: It abruptly ends and all of a sudden you've got to go on Lyman, which is kind of
terror trail.
Hoffman: Lyman Boulevard is a county road, and we've been waiting and waiting and waiting,
just as you have, for the county to go ahead and upgrade that road. It's a cooperative proj~t
between the county and the city. It needs to happen and all of the trails have dumped right down
onto Lyman starting at 101 you pick that up there and Powers, Audubon and Galpin and Lyman is
really seen as the east/west connector to allow for all those loops to come back and forth and also
to get down into Chaska. So independent of the county getting the road built, the trail won't go in
so we're simply waiting for the county to kick that project out.
Ron Roeser: Yeah, I was sure you were aware of that. I just thought I'd point it out. Also the
tunnel under Powers Boulevard's about the ugliest thing you can ride through. I'm just
wondering if they have any plans of painting it. Why not put a mural in there or do something
but it's really ugly. The other tunnels are great. You know really nice. So, and I love the trails.
Franks: Thanks. Come on up. There's no one out there that wants to come and talk about a dog
park? Alrighty.
Barbara Kayati: I own a dog. That would be nice.
Franks: Well come on up and get it on the record. You can have more than one issue tonight.
Oh yeah.
Barbara Kayati: Okay. Barbara Kayati, 8715 Valley View Place. I'm a dog owner and I'd love
to see a dog park here. A fenced in area where we can let our dogs mn. So I'd like you to
consider that.
Franks: Great. We'd like to see that too. Well anybody else? Sure.
Audience: I'd just like to commend the commission, I've lived in Chanhassen for about 8 years
but I' ve had a business here for over, our 20th year now. And you have one fantastic park system
and I know I personally have sponsored a number of ball teams. I have a men' s team for 18 years
and a ladies team for maybe 15 and 16 years and the people who mn your park department on a
daily level are fantastic. I think they need a hand.
Park and Rec Commission -May 28, 2003
Franks: I agree with that. Thanks for sharing that because I know that they have to field all the
calls when things aren't going the way that we want them to go. And I think it's really great for
you guys to hear too that there' s a lot, most of the time things are going the way we do want them
to go. You just don't hear that enough so, you hear that tonight. Well if there isn't anybody else
that's even thought of another issue, since you came here maybe for something else and there's
anything else you'd like to get out, let us know. If not what I'd like to do is temporarily suspend
our meeting tonight and we're going to come down and give everybody an opportunity to just
kind of pin us in a comer and talk with us a little bit and we'll give you a little bit of feedback of
what some of our ideas are and then after that we'll try to move on with our business and you can
stay if you want after that or you can certainly leave if you'd like too. So do I require a motion to
temporarily suspend the business? I'll ask for that anyway. Is there a motion to temporarily
suspend the meeting.
O'Shea moved, Atkins seconded to recess the Park and Recreation Commission meeting to
hold an informal open house with the public at this point. Chairman Franks called the
meeting back to order.
Franks: The next item that is before us, well you know what, before we get to that. Todd, I'd just
like to thank you for advertising, for letting people know that we're having our community open
mic. We are kind of focused on one issue today but that's the way it goes. I'd like to consider
maybe doing this more than once a year. Just during some slow times of the year, so it gets to be
something that is known and gets spread around that you can come and bring up anything. Good,
bad or ugly. Hopefully good.
Stolar: Also if we could start a little bit earlier if we do that.
Franks: On those days it might be worth our while to start earlier. Keep the rest of the agenda
light.
Stolar: Do we need to take action on what we heard or have an opportunity to discuss?
Franks: When you're saying take action, if anything were to come up it'd have to be set as new
business on a future agenda.
Stolar: I'm sorry, I meant take action to discuss whether we want this on a future agenda. Not
take action today.
Franks: Discuss of whether any of the things that came up today we want on a future agenda?
Stolar: Yes.
Franks: Well let's take some time to do that. Well Glenn since you bring up the question, why
don't you start with comments that you have.
Stolar: Well I guess I heard three things. One prompted by our chair here. A place to play paint
ball, a lit field and a dog park. And I guess the question being is have these issues come up?
Obviously we're going to talk later about the capital budget which may influence a lot of this but
I think from the paint ball perspective the big issue there is the ordinance, correct?
Franks: Correct.
Park and Rec Commission - May 28, 2003
Stolar: So the question there would be is do we view this as a recreational opportunity for which
there might be an exception made if there's a designated area. Not saying we're building one.
Not saying you know a lot of other things but do we feel this is a recreation need I guess is where
I'm asking you guys, have you seen it anywhere else come up as a big issue?
Hoffman: It's come up at other cities as a big issue. There's really no one currently that I'm
aware of, and when I say no one I'm talking municipality or public entity that has taken it upon
themselves to say it's an allowed activity in public space. But it's a new issue. If we go ahead
and broaden that spectrum and take a look across the country we'll probably be able to start
finding some municipalities or counties or agencies that have done that. It's a very popular sport.
Very popular activity, but I think any time you talk extreme sports there's always that shock of
well is this allowed. Where do you allow it and once you have to start putting controls on it, then
how do those controls, how are they enforced and what are the activities. This little area, as nice
as it is could not be opened up as a public paint ball area. There's no access to it. The
neighborhood has great access but beyond that there's no public access to it.
Stolar: We did talk to them because I figured this area would not be an appropriate one, but the
question would be more generally like a state park, like or other municipalities and you answered
it, that have areas designated for this type of activity.
Hoffman: Since the article came out and the phone calls started tinging at my house that night,
I' ve had some, taken every opportunity to have a conversation, make some phone calls. We had a
Board meeting today of a statewide parks and recreational professionals. We brought it up as a
topic and it's an issue that people are talking about, but currently there are no public. There's
private, plenty of private ones across the metropolitan, or across the state and no public.
Franks: Well I'm not interested in letting that stop me since we pushed the envelope with a
public free skate park when it was the same kind of issue and it was just through exploring it that
we really kind of I think set the trend for municipalities like our's to go do it. And look around,
everybody' s got one now and when we put our' s in, nobody had one. So not to say that paint ball
is something that would be viable, but I think it may be, were it the same type of exploration.
Just open up the Fleet Farm ad any Sunday and you'll see how popular it is. They're not putting
ads space in their circular for nothing. They know that that stuff is selling so. Herman Field
Todd.
Hoffman: Need a place for a dog park. Need a place for a paint ball park.
Franks: So the question is, at some future point does the commission wish some report from staff
regarding paint ball? So, and is that something that commission members are interested in?
Okay. Some of the things I'd like to see then is, as Glenn mentioned, who else is doing it and if
they are, what are they doing and how. Some history on the ordinance and it's inception and
why. And liability issues. I don't know if the city attorney's involved in that. And just some
thought about possible locations, if any, required equipment and cost.
Hoffman: Okay. There's really two kinds of parks. The one you saw in the video. You could
fence off anywhere and put in artificial obstacles, or a location in a wooded location.
Stolar: ... where we talked about the Rollerblade rinks not being used that much. I don't know if
that's a good location but those are questions of do we have the space. And I'm not trying to
10
Park and Rec Commission - May 28, 2003
suggest that we should do this. I'm just saying they came en masse and we at least owe them the
diligence of exploring what options exist, if any.
Hoffman: Absolutely. Very good group. They contacted, well Kent hit me up in the hardware
store. When you get done buying that paint come and see me.
Franks: As far as the dog park you are indicating we're going to tour a possible site sometime in
the future?
Hoffman: Yep.
Franks: And then lights for fields always has been an issue.
Hoffman: Jerry can probably talk to that. 100 yard fields, I don't know that we have one.
Ruegemer: We do not have a 100 yard field at this point. What we've done for about the last 3,
4, 5 years we've played at Lake Ann Park on opposite nights of fall softball and that sort of thing.
What we've done is we've put 80 yard fields on Fields 4 and 5 out there, and kind of pacified
their need for a little while. They've played 3rd, 4t~ and 5t~ and 6th grade football out there. And
we've done fall soccer on Field number 1. What we're trying to do is kind of utilize our fields as
much as we can for different uses. And now the football association is relatively infant in it's
existence. This is probably their about fourth or fifth year too. We've kind of started with them.
They started with 150 kids approximately. Now they're going to be up over 500. No question
football has a need. There's a lot of kids from Chanhassen playing in that league. They are
getting to the point where they're kind of busting at the seams and need to have those types of
opportunities.
Franks: I'm just thinking that if we had a multi-use lighted field, soccer, football. You know part
of my vision at Bandimere was that it be you know a great tournament location and for that really
you're going to need soccer. A tournament location for that you're really going to need lights on
one of those fields.
Ruegemer: And that certainly could happen and we've had some issues with it being the fourth
wettest year last year in hundred years or on record or whatever. We did do some damage, turf
damage to our fields out there because of some football play. And certainly I've met with Clay,
Dale Gregory and I met with Clay and Rob Norby with the football association and kind of went
through a lot of different things. They're well aware, they want to be good stewards of the fields.
That can certainly happen. We talked a lot about where location might be for a lighted field in
town, and the commission certainly can direct staff on if you want to identify one of the
Bandimere fields, Lake Ann as a designated football field, we can certainly do that. And that
could be a dual purpose field, but you need to dedicate that, if it's going to be football in the fall,
then it needs to be football in the fall. We can't probably do both. And then what needs to
happen in the spring is we need to have some growing time before we schedule that field so do
we keep soccer off it til June 17 June 15th? That all can certainly can happen through creative
scheduling so. And I know Clay's going to put together a letter for the commission to review and
identify some potential sources of income to pay for those lights.
Franks: I know Glenn and I were talking about putting a cell tower up. Trading the lease space
for assistance in getting the lights up. I'm sure that's been done before.
Stolar: So for this one should we wait until we get the letter?
11
Park and Rec Commission - May 28, 2003
Ruegemer: I would wait until you get the letter and that's coming to you soon. So football has a
need. I mean soccer has a need and you can certainly double your...
Franks: I mean there's nothing that's going to happen this year anyway obviously, or probably
not next year either so.
Ruegemer: Yeah, it's a significant investment.
Franks: Alright, so we'll wait on that one. And as far as the paint ball, Todd we'll let you slip
that in when you're ready and then on an agenda for a meeting where it seems to fit and we'll
have the proper amount of time to deal with it.
Hoffman: Should be in June.
Franks: In June, oh okay. Any other comments? Questions from commissioners.
Spizale: I hear a lot of people still asking about the dog walking thing. I think that is quite a
popular thing to bring up. I have people asking me that all the time. I know we have a hard time
finding a spot for it but boy if we could, it's something that people really want.
Hoffman: We've got a potential spot.
Stolar: I was just driving in Chicago and they have a little beach by Belmont Harbor for dogs.
Just a beach, right on Lake Michigan by Belmont Harbor. It's been there for years. Kind of fun
to see those dogs out there.
Hoffman: The dogs typically are at either the Lake Susan public access or Lake Ann public
access as far as water's public access.
Franks: Any other comments? Questions? Again thanks Todd in your work in getting this put
together.
Hoffman: That went very well.
Franks: Cookies were a hit. So were the 20 ouncers. All the old people went for the cans and the
kids went for the 20 ouncers. Alright.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: O'Shea moved, Spizale seconded to approve the Minutes of
the Park and Recreation Commission meeting dated April 22, 2003 as presented. All voted
in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
INITIATE REVIEW OF ACCESSIBILITY EVALUATION FOR CITY OF
CHANHASSEN PARKS.
Franks: We've set it up to take a look at the assisted accessibility evaluation for the city parks.
This was done a long time ago Todd.
Hoffman: Ten years.
12
Park and Rec Commission - May 28, 2003
Franks: So our process tonight is to just kind of go over some of the high points with you and ask
some questions and the plan is that this will be updated to take in the current park situation, at
some point.
Hoffman: Yeah, Chairman Franks. Really no need to go over it this evening. I wanted to get the
document into your hands just to begin to, so you can start to take a look through it. It' s complex.
It's comprehensive. And then what I will do is go ahead and do a complete overview of this
document for your next meeting and do some photo documentation of what has been done. What
is not completed as of yet, and provide you with a complete assessment of where the city is at
with accessibility. ADA was the biggest thing going for about 4or 5 years when this came out,
and after that it kind of, it's one of those issues that didn't receive a whole lot of press. And then
with the recent lawsuit, I believe it was in Brooklyn Park, it has some renewed press and so, again
I would never guess it was '93. 10 years ago so it is time that the city go ahead and take a look at
that issue. There's been some great improvements. Hard surface trail one of the biggest ones.
Some other, all the accessibility portable restrooms all came out of this and people are utilizing
those facilities but I can guarantee you there'll be a long ways to go once we go through this
document.
Franks: Could we also include with that Todd and update on the current ADA requirements. My
understanding of ADA is that a lot of it is based on the case law that is being built up as you
know suits are being brought and such, and I'm guessing that since 1993 there's.
Hoffman: Been some changes.
Franks: Been some changes.
Hoffman: Sure.
Franks: Great. Any other comments? Okay, we'll move on.
RECREATION PROGRAMS:
2003 SUMMER ACTIVITIES.
Ruegemer: Thank you Chair Franks. Just the summer program report is more of an FYI for the
commission to kind of give you an idea as to what's going to be happening for the summer. For
that registrations have been coming in. Our summer brochure went out about 3 weeks ago now
and numbers are a little down a little bit but hopefully they'll rebound with that so. We're doing
a couple, one thing I think the commission will be interested in and we're offering for the first
time, a skateboard camp. And Third Layer had called us initiating some conversation on that and
I said yeah, let's go for it so we're going to do it July 14th through the 19th, right here at the park.
A week long camp. I was very apprehensive at first because I didn't know how it would, $160
price tag was the price of the camp, and we've already got our minimum already so it's definitely
a go already.
Franks: And what's the take from the city?
Ruegemer: 20 percent. Of all registration so for relatively little work, it could be an additional
revenue source for us. They can take up to 40 kids, all age groups so it's exciting. And we're
having a skateboard demonstration on Saturday. Third Layer's coming down and doing some
tricks and bringing the team and stuff down so it should be fun.
13
Park and Rec Commission - May 28, 2003
O'Shea: What time?
Ruegemer: 11:00. I wanted to do it earlier but they talked me into doing it later so the kids could
get up out of bed. But that's kind of a synopsis of the summer. That's kind of what's going on.
Corey' s doing a great job on offering different things and kind of sticking to our core programs.
Atkins: Can I ask what kind of a response you got to the Peter Pan play, the Homeward Bound
thing?
Ruegemer: Homeward Bound has been a program that we've struggled with, to be honest with
you. In getting kids signed up for. I know that Corey tries hard to get that to go. It just doesn't
seem to take off, and we' ve had conversations between the two of us and what we can do to try to
improve in those areas. It seems like he cancels more than it goes.
Atkins: But this is something kind of new. It's really similar to the program that we're running
out of the community center.
Ruegemer: Yeah, so I can report back to you on that.
Atkins: Okay, I'd be interested.
Stolar: The Homeward Bound, is that what they ran at Bluff Creek Elementary last year?
Ruegemer: Yeah, Bruce Kirkpatrick.
Stolar: Yeah, my kids loved it.
Franks: Alright, any questions for staff regarding summer programs? Alright, looks good.
Corey's keeping busy.
Ruegemer: He is.
Franks: That's good. That's a good thing.
Hoffman: We also have a summer intern.
Ruegemer: Lisa Anderson from the U of M will be here until August and we did, I think it was
Glenn, we had talked about our intern budget that got cut. She's working for a stipend every
week.
Hoffman: Out of a program budget.
Ruegemer: Yeah. We hired one less program leader to fund the position so. $100 a week she's
working for. So if there's any special projects the commission would like to direct staff on, on
her behalf, if you'd like her to perform something for the betterment of the commission, please let
me know.
Hoffman: She'll be doing some research on swamps.
14
Park and Rec Commission - May 28, 2003
Franks: Would she be interested in doing some research on bringing a midway attraction to our
4th of July festival so maybe in 2 or 3 years we' 11 be prepared and ready to go.
Ruegemer: If we change our 4th of July date, I think we' 11 be in a lot better shape.
Franks: You've got to get on the list.
Ruegemer: We could certainly direct her to do that Rod.
Franks: I had to put that out there. You know if we would have gotten on the list the very first
time I brought this up 5 years ago we'd be, we'd only have 15 years.
Ruegemer: I've been combing the state Rod looking for somebody for those dates. It's been
tough.
Hoffman: I found one once in Willmar but.
Franks: Alright, thank you Jerry. We'll move right onto the Lake Ann Park operations report.
2003 LAKE ANN PARK OPERATIONS REPORT.
Ruegemer: Thank you Chair Franks, rest of the commission. We did open up the concession
stand last weekend. Had an awesome weekend. Close to $1,000 in sales, which has got to be top
5 all time for Memorial weekend. Typically it's cold and rainy and kind of cruddy out. I was out
there again today and definitely had to re-order all the sodas and the ice cream and all the good
stuff so it was a fantastic first weekend. And we'll be open weekends until June 7th when the
beach opens, and then we'll be open 7 days a week, 11:00 to 6:00. Lifeguards will be on duty
again 10:30 to 8:00 as you know from the contract that we reviewed. So it's going to be coming
up on a good summer again. I don't know with the nice weather now, picnic phone calls have
been going off the phone ringing here. It's just been crazy and so Lisa's been taking some of
those phone calls and it's been nice to have her around so. Been keeping a daily log on the picnic
phone calls as far as dates, so I can share that with the commission at the tail end of the summer if
you'd like and kind of show you kind of the patterns of the requests of certain dates. It looks like
July 26th is the big winner right now, so that Saturday. So but I'll share that with the commission
in a report later on.
Franks: And I noticed your statement that you're not getting much resistance from the fee
schedule.
Ruegemer: That's true. None at all.
Franks: Even from people who are coming back.
Ruegemer: I haven't had a whole lot of the 300 plus dollar reservations with non-resident
businesses, but I have done some and it's been fine. It's been, I'm an old dog doing the same
thing here. It's been, I just need to make sure I look at the fees because it's always been memory,
memory, but now we have the two tier system it forces me to re-evaluate here a little bit so it's
been great.
Franks: Great.
15
Park and Rec Commission - May 28, 2003
Ruegemer: And we have had some Boy Scout groups and Cub Scout groups that want to do splat
ball, or not splat ball, but paint ball at day camps in our parks and that has been, we've indicated
that's not an allowed use at this time.
Franks: I'm sure that the city must have some old culverts they want to get rid of, well anyway.
Any questions about the Lake Ann Park operations? No? Okay, great.
SELF SUPPORTING PROGRAMS: SUMMER ADULT SOFTBALL.
Ruegemer: Thanks again. Going on our fourth week of softball now. We started late April and
with a lot of the leagues were up a bit. Thursday night's probably our most popular league.
...the Tuesday night league again we're combining with Eden Prairie. We were flat with about 5
teams for years now, and we have 10 this year. We've had 12 in the past but it's been a great
match for us to partner with a neighboring organization so other than that, everything else is
going real good for softball.
Franks: Good, thank you. Any questions regarding the summer adult softball league. Jerry just
one. You know just thinking back on trends. Is the participation in softball, is it increasing? Is it
staying about the same?
Hoffman: Getting older.
Franks: Are the people getting older?
Ruegemer: It's definitely getting older and kind of what we've seen through the trends is that
there's not a lot of younger population replacing the older generation with that. Numbers are flat
or declining slightly. But hopefully it will cycle. Maybe at some point in time but it's been
across the state...recreation sports commission and it's that way all over the state.
Franks: All over.
Robinson: I'm wondering Jerry if it has something to do with the increase in extreme sports. The
younger folks are doing more of the extreme sports type of things and getting out of the
traditional sports.
Ruegemer: Exactly.
Robinson: So I'm wondering if it will cycle or if we're going to keep seeing more extreme sports
coming our way.
Ruegemer: There's a lot more opportunities in other areas. Golf is one and you know a lot of
people bike or jog or skate, Rollerblade and other things.
ADMINISTRATIVE:
2003 PARK AND TRAIL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP).
Hoffman: Thank you Chair Franks, members of the commission. I see this as a good news, bad
news report. Little heavy on the bad news, but the good news is that over the past half a dozen
years or so, Fund 410 it's called, or the park dedication, park and trail dedication. It's official
title is Park and Trail Acquisition and Development Fund. Fund 410. Has been called upon to
16
Park and Rec Commission - May 28, 2003
finance a variety of very nice improvements in the community parks and trails. The reason, one
of the reason it was so capable of taking on those large projects has to do with the '97
referendum. That was passed. Generated millions of dollars in park improvement funds, which
were then put into use and actually gave some leeway in the park dedication fund to allow it to
build up. That fund was at an all time high of about a million 9 and it kept cycling in that general
area for a number of years. But after the referendum improvements were complete and projects
had no other funding sources financed through Fund 410, we're starting to hit the bottom of the
cash reserves. The current cash balance as of last week, $767,000 in the bank. There's a
correction to your packet, and that correction is on the remaining 2003 revenue forecasts,
remaining revenue, park dedication, again that's an estimate, approximately $200,000. It's very
volatile depending on which projects come through the door in 2003. The park dedication
ordinance was just changed to state that all park dedication funds are collected of the signing of
the plat. Before, previous to that it was one-third was collected at the time of the plat. Two-third
was collected at the time of the building permit, so go over to the Americlnn and Houlihan's and
you look immediately south, Presbyterian Homes is going to build hundreds of units there.
That's like an $80,000 or $90,000 check that will come to the city in park dedication. If that
happens this year, this $200,000 will be surpassed. If it doesn't happen, you'll never reach that
$200,000 this year, so a single project in today's world can make the difference. Power Ridge
Apartments is another one. Power Ridge Apartments just south on Powers. If they come in with
their second phase this year, again big...$60,000 to $80,000. In that range. So that gives you an
idea about those numbers. The grant is just to clean up billing back to the DNR for the grant
money, which was dedicated to the 101 trail. Approximately $350,000 to $400,000 will be
collected. There was $500,000 eligible, or available but there was not that much money
expended on the project that was eligible for reimbursement from the DNR so we'll collect about
$400,000 back. And then the addition is an $81,000 transfer from the library project over to the
City Center Park project. So the City manager informed me after I published this memorandum,
distributed it, that that additional cash transfer will be coming in. So the bottom line to that is
now we're not in a negative situation estimate at the end of the year. We're in a positive $16,000
estimate position. Briefly I'll talk about the liabilities that we have going on in 2003. City Center
Park, you've seen the activity. Contractor recently pulled off to allow NSP or Xcel to get their
work done with those power issues out there. The Pulte trail, if you've driven 41, you've seen the
Pulte trail going in. Those trail segments, both the Pulte and Vasserman Ridge projects were
arranged with the developer as, they come in for a development contract with the City. We
stated, you build the trails. The comprehensive trails. We'll pay you for that. We'll pay you for
the rock, for the asphalt, and you go ahead and assume the responsibility for the cost associated
with engineering, planning, overhead costs, those type of things. Previous to that, the city would
say no. We want to take your money. We're going to collect your fees and then we're going to
build the trails because we want to build them how we want to build them. It ended up to be not
the best practice because you get into all sorts of conflicts with their contractors and your
contractors and timing and who's going to do this first and who's going to do that and where is
the trail going to be and oh our homeowners didn't know the trail was going to be in that location,
so we changed that about a half a dozen years ago and it's worked out very nicely for us. So both
the Pulte trail and the Vasserman Ridge trail will go in and they will be billed for them. The
Highway 101 north trail has about $75,000. That may go up to $100,000. It may go down to
$50,000, depending on how much clean-up work is left out there in the 101 north trail. You've
seen that.
Stolar: Plus there are change orders that they talked about yesterday.
Hoffman: Yes, yesterday. And that number is, it will either go up or down depending on how
large that change order is. The Marsh Glen trail is a trail down near Mission Hills which is being
17
Park and Rec Commission - May 28, 2003
completed over the next 2 weeks. Roundhouse renovation, approved by the City Council at
$25,000 level. Trash receptacles, that's a f'mal order of a 3 year order. Skate park improvements
coming in and those were on the fax machine this evening, and then the connection trails
retainage, that's the retainage for seeding on Highway 101 south trails. So there you have an
estimate of $1,062,000. That puts our cash down to a negative $65,000 with that additional
transfer I talked about, back up to a positive $16,000. To give you some idea of what's been
happening in this account over the past few years. The million 6 and then with the other items
that are included in this year, we're at about $1,200,000 in expenditures or investments in this
year in park dedication. Last year I believe it was right around $900,000. Year before a million 6
so those are large capital investments coming out of Fund 410. Next year it will be right around
zero, or $100,000. Annual revenues are averaging 200-250, up to $400,000 in a high year,
depending on how much building activity is taking place in the city. We have future obligations
or future liabilities that will be placed against this fund, specifically the two trails out on
Arboretum Village. The industrial park out on Highway 5 and Highway 41. There's two lots
that remain there to be developed that are east of Century Boulevard. Same thing. Development
Contract written. The City will pay for these trails that are on thebacks of these lots when you're
ready to develop. When a building permit comes in for that lot, it trips the development contract
specifying that they will build the trail and bill us for it. So those two lots are going to come in.
Those trails will cost X amount of dollars. $100,000-$150,000. One good thing is that still is in a
TIF district which has an excess TIF balance and we may be able to finance those through that so,
depending on how that issue is determined will give you some potentially extra leeway in your
budget in the future years.
Stolar: We' ve gotten park dedication fees for those already then?
Hoffman: Yes, park dedication fee is coming in. You've got one-third. You'll collect two-thirds
when they come in. The remaining two-thirds.
Stolar: Which will be less than the trail costs or?
Hoffman: Oh yes.
Stolar: Far less?
Hoffman: Far less. On a lot like that, 2-3 acre lot, $7,000 an acre or $21,000-$30,000 for a little
larger lot. $7,000 per acre, and you've already collected a third of that so it's not going to be less
than that. So there's tough times ahead in capital f'mancing for the city in the area of parks and
recreation. Many projects were put on hold. Fund 410 was looked at from a variety of different,
what I would call philosophies. The park commission had a philosophy that you wanted to
continue on and do certain things. The City Council had limited resources to complete the
Highway 101 trail. They looked to this fund. We have limited resources to fmance the park in
front of City Hall. This fund was looked at to finance that, and I knew we were headed in this
direction. I actually thought we would be here this evening prioritizing the remaining
improvements that we wanted to see happen. That's not the case. We're here simply to say that
we are staffed and we will just really be taking a no spend position for at least this year and then
we' 11 evaluate 2004 coming up a little later in the budget cycle. I'll answer any questions that the
commission has and if I can't answer them tonight I'll bring them back to you in a future packet.
Franks: I think we should take our advice of our state government and they can bond for
freeways, heck we can bond for park improvements. You know I'm being a little funny but that
might be the wave of the future for any kind of large capital projects that we'd be looking at so. I
18
Park and Rec Commission - May 28, 2003
know that that's not questions we've really had to face as a commission about the in's and out's
of bonding so when we have our discussion, that might be something that would be helpful for all
of us is a little mini education on how the city goes about bonding for projects.
Stolar: Plus maybe some.., see what other park districts have done. What have been recent bond
funds approved for cities like Chan that have gotten older and losing some of the development
park dedication.
Franks: And as we'll also have to consider at what point will we want to push for another
referendum. Park referendum.
Hoffman: Well that's what we're talking about is park referendum bonding. We were at a
similar position financially speaking back in 1994-95. The commission sitting where you're at
this evening were saying you know what, man we're growing. We've got all these people
coming in. The park dedication fund is not keeping up with what we want to accomplish. How
are we going to make this happen? There are people that come in and stand at that podium and
say we'd like this facility. We'd like that facility, and after about a year and a half, 18 months of
that they just threw up their hands and they said, we can't do it. We have to have a referendum
and they made a recommendation to City Council and at that time the City Council agreed.
Franks: Okay. Thanks for putting this together Todd.
Stolar: Any questions?
Franks: Sure.
Stolar: You gave us a sheet back in September, and I'm trying to reconcile some things. This
$500,000 additional expenditure for the City Center Park from the September memo.
Hoffman: Okay. September memo of last year?
Stolar: Yeah.
Hoffman: Last year I was, it was my hope and at least I had the, at that time the backing of the
city manager that we would only use $200,000 out of park dedication for this project. No other
available resources or financing source came to the forefront and so the entire amount was taken
out of Fund 410.
Stolar: It has been or has been passed by the City Council to do it?
Hoffman: Approved by the City Council. The contract has been let. The funding source has
been identified, and so now it's on paper that those dollars will come out of Fund 410.
Stolar: I'm sorry, the contract has been signed for that amount?
Hoffman: The contract has been signed for 657 and change and then we have costs for the
architect and other costs in there so the number, the budget number is $700,000 that has been
designated.
Stolar: Because I'm not against our recommending to City Council that they review that plan and
reduce the expenditure.
19
Park and Rec Commission - May 28, 2003
Hoffman: At this time, I mean we can't, it's been let. Contract's been let.
Stolar: Unless you get change orders.
Hoffman: Yeah we can do deducts, which we typically they get back 70 to 80 cents on the dollar
for it so.
Stolar: Has the City Council seen this?
Hoffman: The City Council receives this in their packet. I also emailed it directly to their
desktop letting them know the importance of the document and that it is in their packet but I
wanted to make sure that they saw it. I know there was some comments from council members to
the city manager specifically revolving around the fact that they did not want to see a deficit
budget and so that's where the additional $81,000 was brought to my attention. That that transfer
will be coming to the library project into Fund 410 so.
Franks: From library referendum dollars or from the general fund expenditures?
Hoffman: Library referendum dollars which were designated for landscaping for the library,
which were deducted from the library project and picked up by the City Center Park project for
coordination reasons. Instead of having two contractors out there, one doing a very small
landscaping project on the library, we just crossed it over and did it as one project.
Stolar: The other question I have is, where did the one million dollars last year go? What were
the major things, because I see some of them still here.
Hoffman: Highway 101.
Stolar: Was how much of that? About 700.
Hoffman: Something like that, yeah. I can actually run upstairs and grab those. Between that
and the 101 south project, those were the, that's where the cash went.
Stolar: Both projects because you have the 101 north here at 500, the south would have probably
been another couple hundred.
Hoffman: Yeah it was 250-270. Both with 101 south and the connection projects of Bluff Creek.
Stolar: Is it, I mean and I can give you those, there's a sheet that we had at Eden Prairie that
basically just went through each year. It was your balance. Here's what we took in. Here's what
we, could we have one of these for like since 2000 so for the years you mentioned.
Hoffman: Sure. You bet.
Stolar: Then we could just keep this on an ongoing basis because it would show, I would ideally
start with the referendum. Show what we got for that money because that would be helpful if we
ever choose to do another one, to show this is what we got for it. A lot of things out there. We'd
just like to project that type of return to the citizens.
2O
Park and Rec Commission - May 28, 2003
Hoffman: Prior to the referendum a couple hundred thousand came in and a couple hundred
thousand went out every year. That's just basically how it operated. And we'll maybe be back to
that for a while until that funding can be...
Stolar: I still would like to know what the 700,000 might be savable reasonably savable if any.
Because there was, I saw the architecture drawings, what they were doing. It's going to be very
nice. When you have a zero budget you can't afford very nice. You can afford nice.
Hoffman: That discussion did play out. The original project was a million 1, million 2 and.
Stolar: Yeah, I saw some of the reduction.
Hoffman: Then there was the $300,000 project is for bare to nothing and so I think it was seen by
the commission and the council and the Planning Commission that this was middle of the road.
Franks: And the library board.
Stolar: Okay, thank you.
Franks: Glenn, I hear what you're saying about kind of the philosophy behind the 410 and
making our statement. In some sense I think we were pretty clear beforehand about being, what
our philosophy was about how those dollars should be spent and for what types of projects and
the City Council has decided with that information to go forward and take the information that
they have.
Stolar: The former City Council correct. Some overlay but not, some new ones too.
Franks: Correct. Correct, yeah. The former City Council that set the budget for this year. And
in our joint meeting we again talked about that type of philosophy so I'm really hoping that at
least for the future that message is going to be clear. Without necessarily coming across as being
antagonistic so. But we are going to have to keep the message coming I think so it doesn't get
lost.
Hoffman: The important message to continue is that maintenance versus new capital. Right now
there's really no big debate.
Franks: Well in some sense I'm glad that it's being spent down to nothing because it forces
people to start making the choices that we've been saying need to have been made long ago, and
when there's resources available you know why make them. But we're at the point now where a
plan is going to have to be developed for maintenance and replacement.
Hoffman: Ten wood playgrounds. We had 5 of them in this year's CIP. We almost bulldozed
those playgrounds in January. We made the call we'd better wait and see how this entire budget
plays out. The $500,000 for the library and so we held off and we would have had 5 parks with
no playgrounds.
Franks: But in some sense you know those wood playgrounds, they've got to go. And it may be
this is the point where we say look you know, we have to take them down.
Hoffman: Read this month's magazines. That's it.
21
Park and Rec Commission - May 28, 2003
Franks: And when people start seeing that they have no playground and they begin to understand
why they don't have a replacement, then we can start working to figure out these things are going
to happen in a realistic way.
Hoffman: Probably a work session item for the commission here this summer. We'll take a good
park tour which really sets you up for a capital discussion, and then come back and have a
brainstorming session.
Franks: Any other comments or questions regarding this issue? Susan you're getting an
education here.
Robinson: It's very wonderful.
4TM OF JULY TRADE FAIR.
Ruegemer: The trade fair is currently now called the Business Expo with that.
Hoffman: We're just checking to see if you want a booth.
Franks: Yes we do.
Hoffman: Okay. Alright, and then I'll work with the commission, well we'd better get
something planned so do you want to talk about it tonight? What we would like to have as far as
displays.
Franks: We want these nice maps available. Do we have extras?
Hoffman: Absolutely.
Franks: Okay. And those little coloring kits, if you've got those laying around. Or if there's any
money left in the budget, but something child oriented to hand out as opposed to a button or
something, would be really nice.
Atkins: The chip clips were pretty popular.
Franks: The chip clips were popular actually.
O'Shea: Good point.
Franks: You know I think that almost works better than trying to do any of the contests that
we've done. And I would like to try the suggestion box thing again.
Stolar: Thought that was good.
O'Shea: That's because you got a couple compliments in there. That's why you liked it.
Franks: People love me. Is there anything else that you'd like to see at the booth?
Atkins: Is there any kind of mini survey we could do? Like what do you think about a dog park?
Yes? No? Silly?
22
Park and Rec Commission - May 28, 2003
O'Shea: I know the rec/aquatic center had fallen out of talking about it. Something like that to
get the interest back. Or knowing I should say.
Atkins: School issue too, I mean just to make people aware it might be coming up.
Hoffman: We could do a top ten list. Here are items. What are you top ten?
Franks: You know let's do that. Just rank them. If we have like the ten and people could just
rank them and turn it in.
Stolar: If we end up where we have more than ten, maybe just ask them to mark their top seven
or...paint ball.
Atkins: Great feedback.
Franks: And tallying those up sounds like a good intern project.
Stolar: How many weeks do we have this intern?
Ruegemer: 15 more.
Hoffman: Okay, thanks.
4TM OF JULY PARADE.
Ruegemer: The parade, did everybody get a copy of that in their packet? Application form. If
there's anybody that'd like to participate in the parade, either being in a float or a car or whatever,
the deadline on the application that is all included with that is June 13th. For the parade
application deadlines so the parade's going to be the same route again this year. 2:30 start. Start
from the Chapel Hill area and work it's way back down through town up to Santa Vera, back
over.
O'Shea: Is there an application for the booth at the Business Expo too?
Hoffman: We can take care of that.
Franks: I just have a comment about the parade, just from my experience last year. You know
there was the theme last year, and I'm just wondering if the political participants would have
some small requirement to embrace the theme in some fashion up to them.
Hoffman: Let's bring it up to the parade committee.
Franks: I mean it's just like a thought because it, you know I don't know. It just was my thought
sitting there watching the parade and kind of hearing the people around me and paying attention.
Hoffman: Well it is a political parade.
Franks: Yeah, and that's okay. But I think that should be part of it. But to have the participants
in some way, whether it's in their decorations or it's in what they're handing out, or their stickers
or whatever, that some way more embrace the theme of the parade for that particular year.
23
Park and Rec Commission - May 28, 2003
Hoffman: I don't know that that's been talked about. Probably a good discussion topic.
O'Shea: I think one of the criteria that the judges uses how well the entry represents the them.
That year's theme.
Franks: Right, and I'm just thinking for like the political participants, where the ones that just
didn't seem to be embracing the theme. Of course they have an agenda which is f'me, but you
know they can maybe find some way to embrace the theme.
Hoffman: Anything else with the parade?
O'Shea: I've got a question. I know Boy Scouts are out selling, has the city ever tried to sell
things around the route? You know pops and, as a fund, I mean a revenue source.
Ruegemer: We have and the parade committee's kind of taken the stance that they want to kind
of keep it more to the younger service organizations. Like the Girl Scouts, the Boy Scouts, more
so than opening it up to the Rotary and the Lions to do that sort of thing. That's the stance that
they' ve taken.
O'Shea: Okay, because I know last year I know it was so weather dependent, but last year a ton
of pop and water's could have been sold. There weren't enough crews along the, you know
people, it's a great money generator for either the city or a group. Okay, so you don't want the
city to look at a revenue producing.
Ruegemer: The parade committee makes those policies and decisions.
Hoffman: Just so everyone's aware, the parade committee is separate from the city. They're not
associated with the city except that they are a committee that does an event at the 4th of July for
the benefit of the city. And so they're political decisions, their agenda decisions are decided by
their committee and we participate obviously in planning and scheduling of those events but.
Franks: Is the city contributing financially to the parade?
Ruegemer: We will if there are shortfalls. They're in charge of doing their own fund raising for
the parade.
Hoffman: To date we haven't... And then there is a second event after the parade this year when
the, what are they calling it officially? The band jam or putting on a concert. It's going to be
back under the tent so the tent is here on the 4t~ so the Rotary will continue to sell their
refreshments and the bands will play on and so people who want to leave the parade and come up
to another event can come right back up to the big top...
Spizale: Good idea.
Hoffman: And that's Joe Scott, a citizen who's gearing that effort on behalf of the community.
Ruegemer: It's a fundraiser for the good shelf?.
Robinson: He's my neighbor. He does local things too right in our neighborhood. We hear him.
He gets everything approved through the city through but we do hear him.
24
Park and Rec Commission - May 28, 2003
Hoffman: And the one thing we forgot to mention is remember during the Business Expo we'll
need volunteers from the commission to man that booth.
Franks: Oh absolutely.
Stolar: Can you send us an e-mail with the times?
Hoffman: You bet.
Franks: And how about the prize...
Ruegemer: ...would you like some artistic involvement with that?
Franks: I have no artistic ability at all whatsoever so you would not want my involvement. Just
curious. Thank you Jerry.
RECOGNITION FOR BOKOO BIKES FOR TRAIL MAP PARTNERSHIP.
Franks: Thanks Todd for giving us that letter.
Hoffman: You're welcome. I'll let the memo speak for itself. It's a $5,000 contribution to
produce, or help produce this map. At Monday, June 9th Bokoo Bikes and their representatives
will be presented with this plaque. This framed edition of the map as the Bokoo Bikes...and the
map has been very well received. We hope, we believe that they're getting the value out of the
product and they're sold...sponsor of the map. It was their idea. They contacted us.. Initially we
started out at about a 50/50. It was their artistic folks, their consultant that we worked with at the
time. Got a great bargain and a good product too.
O'Shea: When did you say you're recognizing that? When are they getting that?
Hoffman: City Council meeting June 9th. Right here in from of the City Council. Mayor Furlong
will present to Bokoo Bikes, their representative.
COMMISSION MEMBER COMMITTEE REPORTS. None.
COMMISSION MEMBER PRESENTATIONS.
Stolar: Just a quick update on the City Council meeting. Two relevant points. One was, they
did, there was on the consent agenda the future change orders for the additional work on Highway
101 north trail. Some of it, and it was pulled by Councilperson Lundquist to discuss separately
because his concern was if it's repair for work done poorly, we shouldn't be paying for it. And
he, I don't know, I think her name was Teresa.
Hoffman: Teresa Burgess, City Engineer.
Stolar: The City Engineer is going to work with them. They're going to review each change
order and say whether it's something that they should pay for, or if it is a true change order that
we need to pay for. And then any changes will come out of the 410 fund, so it would come out of
park dedication fees. But it was good that he brought it up to make sure that we aren't being
charged for things that they had to correct. The only other thing, which I'll just provide my two
points that I wanted to talk about. When John Wolff made his presentation he did, and also
25
Park and Rec Commission - May 28, 2003
Lieutenant Widmer because of the new conceal and carry law, they just brought up that for the
sheriff' s office obviously it's going to be a bit of work, and then on the fire chief, he mentioned
that his policy will be that people, the volunteer fire department people will not carry and
questions were brought up are other fire departments doing that? What are they doing and it
varied. But my question is, is this something that we should start thinking about looking into to
see if there's going to be a need for any policies with regard to the Rec Center or fields or things
like that. We just did the tobacco policy. So I'm just wondering, has that come up at the State
level yet? And maybe I will defer, given the late hour for a future meeting but if we can at some
point bring that up. What park districts are thinking about.
Hoffman: There's a lot of discussion. Just about any event that you go to in the past few days
and we'll see where it kind of falls out. City Hall will have a policy. Employees will have
policy. As an employee of the City of Chanhassen, you will not be able to carry a weapon on
duty during your employment. But municipal buildings are not exempt. You can carry it right
into this building so.
Stolar: And I think the other question would be, since there are many other states that already
have these laws in effect, not to overload your intern but it's another question. What are park
districts doing in those states? Since that would be precedent that would be out there.
Hoffman: You bet.
Franks: Well you jumped the gun. I was going to pick this up in the administrative packet
reading some of the tobacco articles and such but thought too is, what is the policy at, on city
owned recreation property while there's city sponsored programming occurring. I mean is that
something that we need to take a look at. Having some type of a policy during soccer games and
parents packing some heat so. I mean I don't know. I have no idea.
Hoffman: It's something that again everybody's talking about. Let's see where it shakes out and
see what the changes are down at the legislature with the law.
Stolar: Because right now if we did anything we'd have to tell each individual. I think there's all
sorts of, but I mean I think it' s worth, before too long to actually have just that informational item
for us to kind of say here's what other park districts have done. Here's what the city has done.
So we understand what already is occurring.
Hoffman: There's a variety of fronts to this. There's obviously a very emotional and very hyped
up front, and then there's also a group who say this law really doesn't change much. If an
individual wanted to carry a gun anywhere before yesterday or today, is going to carry a gun
wherever they want to if they want to do that. So the law changes the environment but doesn't
change the likelihood that something bad will happen.
Stolar: And really the law changed, if I understand correctly, just the process to get permits.
Permits have already been allowed out there, but it also did change some of the processes for
excluding and that's what they're really debating potentially.
Hoffman: Yep.
Franks: Great. Any other commission member presentations?
26
Park and Rec Commission - May 28, 2003
Atkins: I just have a little item that you guys might think is interesting. I attended a Planning
Commission meeting regarding the rezoning of the St. Hubert's cemetery property directly across
from my house. Did they approve that?
Stolar: Yes, I'msorry.
Atkins: And St. Hubert's is going to put in a park there. It will be years before the cemetery
extends all the way down to 101. They're planning walking paths, a fountain, gardens. It will be
just.
Stolar: They're going to extend the sidewalk all the way down. They're going to put in a street
light. Street lighting to, and there was discussion also about the old church. About the re, starting
the discussions about maybe having it go back to St. Hubert's and so they agreed. They said that
they would be willing to talk with Todd about it. Todd Gerhardt about it.
Hoffman: It's owned by the city now.
Stolar: Because I think the Councilperson Peterson said, I'm not sure the city should be in the
business of running a church or owning a church.
Hoffman: There's also on the plan a future overpass by others. By others which goes over the
railroad tracks. So the pedestrian bridge drops fight down on the south side of the tracks. It's
going to be this skinny little trail system in public corridor on the north side, and so there's
always been this conversation should we build an overpass so people can get from downtown in a
more convenient route, up and down the pedestrian overpass.
Franks: Thank you.
ADMINISTRATIVE PACKET.
Franks: Any comments regarding the administrative packet? Thanks for including the memo
from Lori regarding the pond reconstruction.
Hoffman: You're welcome. One update on the tobacco issue. Council, Jerry attended a work
session last night with the City Council. Council took up this issue and acted to take no action on
a tobacco use policy for the city of Chanhassen. One area that I still have concerns about is the
skate park, so if the commission would like to talk about that in the future. I approach kids there
all the time. I do not have the ability to tell them not to smoke a cigarette if they're, what's the
legal age, 197 18 for cigarettes. 18 years old at the skate park. I think that's an environment
where modeling good life style choices should be, but then again I think the council may have a
position on it. They're doing it at the beaches, so 19, 18 year olds can smoke at the beach and
little kids can watch that, why can't little kids watch people smoke when they're at the skate park.
Franks: But it was not a recommendation not to allow right on the beach was it?
Hoffman: Yes.
Ruegemer: Aquatic areas.
Hoffman: Aquatic areas, beaches, skate park.
27
Park and Rec Commission - May 28, 2003
Franks: And inside the play structures?
Ruegemer: Playgrounds.
Franks: So they settled for the four places we recommended that tobacco use not be allowed.
Hoffman: Correct.
Franks: And on that recommendation they decided to take no action.
Hoffman: Correct.
Stolar: Did they give a reason why?
Hoffman: No reason why. They gave, they talked about specific philosophies I think of each city
council member and I believe there was no consensus that they should take any action. Things
like.
Ruegemer: I think they really felt that it wasn't their place to dictate, for us to decide whether
they smoke or not. They're taxpayers. If they want to smoke during, on the bleachers during a
ball game, that's their prerogative. It's not for us to preach.
Franks: Did they send it back down for any further clarification from the park commission?
Hoffman: No. That's why I'm asking if you still believe strongly in any one of those areas, skate
park, beaches, that you may want to modify your recommendation and re-present that to the City
Council.
Stolar: But how would we modify? What specific thing? See that look confused, because I
would have been happy to show up at a discussion with them to answer questions. Are we going
to the more frequent meetings with them? Working sessions with them or that hasn't been
decided.
Hoffman: The next joint meeting has not been determined. They have one with the Planning
Commission coming up in June, but they have not set the calendar for your next joint meeting.
To change you motion would simply mean okay so now, if you believe the skate park's an area
that they shouldn't be smoking then talk about that one specifically. Or beaches. Or other areas
that you feel very strongly there should not be smoking or tobacco use allowed. The skate park's
directly adjacent to a school. The school property is tobacco free. The rec center is tobacco free,
and so if you're on any property at the rec center, you can't smoke whether you wanted to or not.
In the bleachers or somewhere else so the fact that we have a joint powers agreement with the
school district who does have a policy against tobacco use, mandates that we have no tobacco use
at that location. But any city owned property, the City Council at least last night did not act on
restricting tobacco use at any of those locations.
Robinson: So do we need to make a motion to put that on a future agenda to discuss that or can
we just ask you to put that on?
Hoffman: You could just ask or make a motion. You'd need a consensus among the
commissioners.
28
Park and Rec Commission - May 28, 2003
Robinson: That's what I'm wondering.
Franks: Well, my first thought is that this strikes as micro management of the City Council on
park and recreation issues. And you know this was an issue that we debated significantly.
Secured input and developed what I believe to be a very reasonable recommendation, really
looking out for the welfare and safety of not only the taxpayers but their children as well. And
for no action to be taken without any further direction or questions being directed to park
commission is.
Hoffman: It took what, 3 or 4 months to get it on the agenda.
Franks: Yeah. So I would certainly be in favor of this issue coming up again on a future agenda.
Hoffman: Is there a consensus among the commission?
Robinson: I would agree.
Atkins: I agree.
Spizale: I agree.
Franks: We'll note then that it's unanimous by all commissioners that this be, that the tobacco
use issue be again placed on our agenda at some future time for consideration and potentially
further recommendation directed to the City Council regarding this issue.
Robinson: I just wanted to ask a question Chairman Franks about, I did read the minutes from
that, I think it was the November meeting and read through that whole discussion because that's
something that interested me personally and wanted to find out what happened, but were there
people from the city that came and voiced their opinion on this by anything, or was it just
something that commission looked at?
Franks: Well not that day there wasn't anybody in the audience, but I know you received the
staff, staff had been receiving inquiries into the office and there's a trend certainly at the
administrative packet that kind of outlines the trend, but that had been occurring for some time
that other municipalities and recreation districts had been looking at this issue and creating
policies and such and so we believed it was really time for us to consider it as well.
Robinson: Right, and I'm wondering if the City Council's thinking it's, it can't be enforced
because there's not city people there all the time. That's always an issue but reading in the
packet, yeah it' s not always enforced. If somebody goes there, they can enforce it, but just seeing
the signage put there deters people from it and you know, there's anyway I won't get into it. You
went through it all but.
Hoffman: That was one of the big topics last night is that it's not enforceable.
Robinson: Well it's not but.
Franks: Well we have our dog ordinance that's obviously not enforceable either, but we have that
ordinance as well so I mean it' s.
29
Park and Rec Commission - May 28, 2003
Stolar: Well in our discussion we admitted that, right? We said what we said, I agree with Susan
that the signage at least gives people a chance to notice it and maybe some people will say okay,
I'll go walk somewhere else then. I'm not going to do it here.
Robinson: Well I guess my point is too is that there's a lot of smokers that don't agree with
smoking around children and I'm wondering if we can, I don't know, have an open microphone
for that issue at some point. I don't know if that's what you do for a particular issue or if
somehow we can get some residents to come. Maybe the City Council needs to see that it's not
just the commission that's looking seriously at this but other people in the city also see it as
something that's important.
Franks: If it' s on the agenda people are certainly invited to offer public comment so.
Stolar: Put it on our survey at the booth.
Robinson: I was just thinking that.
Franks: Add it in.
Stolar: You've got to word it appropriately though. But that's a possibility. Maybe we are out of
touch. If we are, then we'll know. I mean it's not scientific but it's, we're gauging.
Robinson: No, but it gives you an idea.
Hoffman: We received a letter a couple weeks ago. A gentleman didn't appreciate standing on
the side lines at soccer games when smoking was going on so he pulled his child out of the
program.
Robinson: Well there' s plenty of research out there that states second hand smoke even outside is
very injurious to people, so the research is there.
Hoffman: Anything else in the Admin packet? Geese? Mosquitoes?
Stolar: Why can't the mosquitoes go after the geese?
Franks: Will we be spraying?
Hoffman: We will. We won't.
Franks: No, but I mean they will be spraying in Chanhassen this summer.
Hoffman: They're allowed to. Whether they will or won't is up to them.
Franks: Okay. They've already started dropping their granular stuff so we've seen it now
already, but I'm still concerned about the lack of publication of the times when that is occurring.
That has bothered me for years. I don't know if there's any way to communicate that to them that
we would really I think appreciate some notification it will be occurring this week or we plan on
doing our granular drop.
Hoffman: And when you say communication, do you mean on the news media or at your
doorstep?
30
Park and Rec Commission - May 28, 2003
Franks: You know news media would be fine. The Villager or something. Just some attempt to
be made.
Hoffman: I'll drop them an e-mail. That organization I think for a long time enjoyed a big
honeymoon where they weren't, they didn't have to answer to a lot of people. Now there's some
public scrutiny but still the mechanics of having that large of an organization contact people in
neighborhoods across the 7 county metropolitan area, is just, I don't know how.
Franks: No, even if it was something just in the paper that this week or in such a week we plan
on doing our.
Hoffman: We' 11 see what they say. I know they try to stimulate a lot of media coverage of their
programs and they're fairly successful for an organization of their size. You see them on the
news channels all the time.
Franks: Sure. And I want them to do it. Yeah, go ahead.
Hoffman: Last item of discussion, the school issue. We've had a meeting with the district. The
staff has stated that we are in support of a school, either a high school or a middle school being
constructed in this community. We've identified locations south of Lyman Boulevard in that
2005 MUSA area. District 112 will likely have a referendum this fall. There will be likely a
question on there that says shall the district sell bonds to purchase school for, land for future
schools. How they identify those sites is up to the district. They probably will not be identified
on the actual ballot but it will be identified through publicity and other types of promotion and
information. Information, not promotion, for the referendum. The City Council will likely send
out a letter of intent to the school board stating, in the administration, stating that this is what we
would like to see happen. This is what we are willing to commit to such a process. Just so you're
aware of that. If that's an area that interests you as, either personally or as a commission, you
want to keep on top of that because that referendum's going to happen this fall. The district will
most likely decide that, or they have to decide that language right around the first of July. For
that question.
Franks: Middle school with a pool.
Hoffman: Oh sure. We talked about a pool. We talked about a theater. We talked about outdoor
sporting venue. We talked about bubbles so, we talked about a lot of nice facilities that could
occur at such a location. The current philosophy is that 80 acres be purchased by the school
board. 40 acres of that will be paid for by the city through park dedication dollars over a period
of time. So you would, as the development comes in through an agreement with the school
district. You would pay back those dollars for the 40 acres of the city owned property with park
dedication generated in that park service area.
Franks: It's a deal. Any other questions or comments regarding the administrative packet?
Seeing none then I'll entertain a motion to adjourn.
Robinson moved, O'Shea seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the
motion carried. The Park and Recreation Commission meeting was adjourned.
Submitted by Todd Hoffman
Park and Rec Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim
31