CC 2009 11 23
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
NOVEMBER 23, 2009
Mayor Furlong called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. The meeting was opened with the
Pledge to the Flag.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT:
Mayor Furlong, Councilman Litsey, Councilwoman
Ernst, Councilwoman Tjornhom, and Councilman McDonald
STAFF PRESENT:
Todd Gerhardt, Roger Knutson, Laurie Hokkanen, Kate Aanenson, Paul
Oehme, and Todd Hoffman
PUBLIC PRESENT:
Anna Ewen Student
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS:
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Good evening everyone and welcome for joining us. Thank you
for coming and joining us this evening. To those in the council chambers as well as those
watching at home, we’re glad that you’re here. I’d like to start and ask if there are any changes
or modifications to the agenda by any members of the council. If not we’ll proceed with the
council, or with the agenda as distributed. I’d like to start this evening by making an
announcement, an invitation to our annual tree and city park lighting ceremony. With the
holiday seasons approaching, I’m happy to invite everyone to this wonderful city event. The
City of Chanhassen, the Chanhassen Business Council are pleased to announce the 2009 Tree
th
Lighting Ceremony. The event will be held next Saturday, December 5 and at this time I’d like
to invite all area residents and their families and friends to join my family and me at City Center
Park for this event. People of all ages are invited to participate. The event will begin at 5:00 and
end around 6:00. Activities include the official lighting of the City Center Park, refreshments,
caroling, ginger bread displays, live reindeer and a visit from Santa and some of his helpers. The
event is free. There’s no registration required so please come and join us on Saturday, December
th
5 at 5:00 p.m. at City Center Park. I’d like to move now to items under our consent agenda.
CONSENT AGENDA:
Mayor Furlong: Mr. Gerhardt, Item (i), or Mr. Oehme, did we want to table that item, is that
correct?
Paul Oehme: Yes.
Todd Gerhardt: That’s correct.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, so the action on item (i), or item (i) will be, the action on item (i) will be
to table. Are there any other items (a) through (h)? Sir, if you’d like to come to the podium.
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
Mike Casanova: Yes, thank you Mayor Furlong. My name is Mike Casanova and I’m with the
watershed district and we have one item here on the consent agenda and I believe you’re going to
move to approve it.
Mayor Furlong: Okay.
Mike Casanova: That’s the Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek, we want a variance for horsepower
restrictions on Lake Ann so that our engineering firm can get in. We’re going to use a 6
horsepower motor to get in and do sampling on Lake Ann.
Mayor Furlong: Is there, are you, do you want that removed for separate discussion?
Mike Casanova: No, no. We just, I just wanted to comment on that and see if you had any other
questions. Also kind of give you, I can also give you an update on where we are in just a few
moments on the watershed or I can do it with visitors in attendance.
Mayor Furlong: I guess I would say if you want to do that at visitors, if you think that’s
necessary. That’s fine.
Mike Casanova: Okay.
Mayor Furlong: Any other items, items 1(a) through (h) that anyone would like removed for
separate discussion? Seeing none, is there a motion to adopt items 1(a) through (h) and to table
item (i)?
Councilwoman Ernst: So moved.
Mayor Furlong: Is there a second?
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Second.
Councilwoman Ernst moved, Councilwoman Tjornhom seconded to approve the following
consent agenda items pursuant to the City Manager’s recommendations:
a. Approval of Minutes:
-City Council Work Session Minutes dated November 9, 2009
-City Council Verbatim and Summary Minutes dated November 9, 2009
Receive Commission Minutes:
-Planning Commission Verbatim and Summary Minutes dated November 3, 2009
-Planning Commission Verbatim and Summary Minutes dated November 17, 2009
-Park & Recreation Commission Verbatim & Summary Minutes dated October 27, 2009
b. St. Hubert Church, 8201 Main Street: Approve Request for Temporary On-Sale Liquor
License for Events on January 8 and February 13, 2010.
2
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
c. Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District: Approve Variance from the
Horsepower Restrictions on Lake Ann.
Resolution #2009-83:
d. Well No. 4 Raw Watermain, Project 09-02: Award Construction
Contract.
f. Environmental Excellence Awards: Approve List of Winners.
Resolution #2009-84:
h. Approve Agreement with MnDOT and TCW Railroad for
th
Replacement of Railroad Crossings at West 78 Street and TH 101.
i. Table Grant from the MnDNR for the Purchase of Property Tributary to Bluff Creek.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS:
Mike Casanova: Just wanted to let, let you folks know that, this is Mark Annex, the engineer
with CH2M Hill which is the watershed engineer consultant. We are doing a lot of work in our
watershed right now, as you well know, starting at, we have a one water concept and we’re
starting at the top of the, of all of our, of our sub watersheds which would be Bluff Creek, Riley
Creek and Purgatory Creek but most importantly to you folks would be the Riley chain of lakes
and the creek, as well as Purgatory, but all the work that we’re doing is under a one water
concept. What we found is that we’ve been fairly successful and found out some very, very
interesting things about some of the internal components of our lakes around here. We’ve had
some great surprises and very, very important, significant surprises in favor of cleaning up some
st
of our lakes. And what I’d like to say is, we’re having a presentation on December 1. On
Tuesday evening at the Chan Legion for the watershed and at that point we’ll be talking about
some of the things that we’ve come up with but we’ve found that, this carp study that we’ve been
doing has turned into a real, a real good thing for us in that we have been able to manage these
carp but what we’ve found is that you have to start at the top of the watershed, and that means
that we’re going to have to go into Lake Lucy, Ann and down to Susan, Rice Marsh and Riley in
order to protect all of our waters. Also in a like manner, in Purgatory Creek we’re going to be
starting at the top of the watershed there so we’ll begin working at Lotus, which we’ve done in
some modeling right now, but we intend to work a lot more during the coming year or two in
Lotus to take care of the bounce issue we’ve got there, but also to study the invasive plants and
animals that exist in that lake too. So I’m real happy to report that we will be starting at the top
of the watershed which means that we’ll be doing a lot of work here in the city of Chanhassen.
And that’s our goal and we’re very excited about some of the things that are taking place in the
st
waters so with that I’d just invite you to come to our meeting on December 1 and, at 7:00 at the
American Legion and you can see, we’ll have Dr. Sorenson with the University of Minnesota as
well as Dr. Ray Newman. Dr. Sorenson and Dr. Chizinski, they are both involved in this carp
study and management program here in this watershed and Dr. Ray Newman is involved with
the, with native plant regeneration in our waters and he’s been working with Drs. Behr and
3
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
st
Sorensen, so they’ll be giving presentations on December 1 so I invite you to that and thank you
for your approving our variance.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Anyone else that would like to present this evening under
visitor presentations to the council? Or any matters of interest. No? Okay. Very good, thank
you. We’ll move now to items under our new business. The first is a request for a variance at
2111, oh I’m sorry. I jumped ahead. Before we get to that, we have our monthly updates from
law enforcement and our fire department. So let’s start, Lieutenant Olson is here. Good evening
Lieutenant. Thought you were getting away with it huh. Get to go home early.
LAW ENFORCEMENT/FIRE DEPARTMENT UPDATE.
Lt. Jim Olson: Thank you and good evening.
Mayor Furlong: Good evening.
Lt. Jim Olson: This evening I, in the packet I have the sheriff’s office area report for the month
of October, along with the citation list and the Community Service Officer report. All for the
month of October. Any questions on the packet at all? And I’ve got a couple other items of
interest that I’d like to talk about.
Mayor Furlong: Any questions on the Lieutenant’s report this month? Okay, good.
Lt. Jim Olson: Just a reminder for everybody, the weather has been beautiful. However, as of
st
November 1 winter parking rules went into effect in the city. Winter parking rules are no
parking on city streets from 0100 or 1:00 in the morning to 7:00 in the morning. And then
there’s no parking anytime after a 2 inch snowfall until the street’s been plowed curb to curb.
We’ve been giving out warnings so far for everybody. However at a certain point we will start
issuing citations. I’m breaking the podium here. We will start issuing citations. We want to
make sure that those streets are clear for when we do get that first snowfall so that the plows
have an easy time plowing the city streets. And on that note of the first snowfall, we certainly
hope that that doesn’t come until January or February but whenever we do get that, we would
encourage people to slow down and be careful on that first snowfall. Everybody says yeah we
know, we know. But there’s also an awful lot of accidents that come involved on that first
snowfall so just be careful and drive safely when we do get that. About a month or so ago we
had two thefts from vehicle that occurred from a business here in Chanhassen. Through some
pretty hard work through Detective Ryan Thiel as well as some very good video surveillance that
we got, we were able to make an arrest on that case. And the person that we arrested did agree to
talk to us and we got a real interesting confession out of her. She talked about that she had hit
approximately 100 cars in the metro area over this past summer and what she would really target
was fitness centers and daycare centers is what she would target and she would sit there and
watch as people would go in and out. With daycare centers people run in real quick you know
and just want to run in and get their kids. Leave purses and laptops and so on in locked cars that
are out in the parking lot. Grab it real quick. Run real fast to a, you know another retail
establishment. Buy gift cards or electronics and then they’d go down and trade those for drugs.
Same with fitness centers. She would target fitness centers and you know watch for people that
4
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
get. That go into fitness centers. Don’t have purses with them or don’t have, you know can see
that they don’t have a wallet or something with them. They would then go and hit that car. Look
in. The purse you know is sitting there. Either, you know you can see the straps under the seat
or you can see a wallet sitting on top of the seat. Break the window real quick. They know
they’ve got about an hour so while the person’s working out, again they go and hit some other
establishments. Buy gift cards or go to electronics retailer and buy merchandise there, and again
go down and trade that for drugs. You know I would just ask that people try to protect
themselves with that and make sure that if they do go to fitness centers, you know they don’t
leave their purses, laptops, wallets on the car or inside the car where it’s visible, or when they get
there, you know don’t, you know open up your trunk and take your out and then put it in the
trunk. You know that’s very visible for, you know people can see that and everybody has inside
trunk releases now as well so just something to think about with that. Any other questions or
anything for the sheriff’s office?
Mayor Furlong: Any questions for the Lieutenant this evening?
Councilman Litsey: I have a comment.
Mayor Furlong: Councilman Litsey.
Councilman Litsey: With all due respect Lieutenant Olson, I feel that your budget presentation
at our work session in October was completely inadequate. In my opinion you were seemingly
unprepared. Catered to what the majority of the City Council members wanted to hear rather
than what they needed to hear and you abandoned the plan put forth by the current sheriff for
addressing staffing deficiencies in Chanhassen. Next year the City of Chanhassen will be paying
the County about 1 1/2 million dollars for police services and I think we deserve better than that
in terms of a budget presentation that’s only a few minutes with no handout materials and no
discussion about the 2007 work plan that the sheriff put forth to the council which called for
some additional staffing between 2008 and 2010. Your comments I think we’ll be okay not
hiring an additional deputy in 2010 is based on crime numbers that have decreased. Number one
I’d say the fact that we’ve been adding some additional staffing probably plays into the fact that
those crime numbers are decreasing and abandoning that plan now would be ill advised in my
opinion. Second, that’s just one of three factors that the sheriff’s department has presented to us
in determining staffing levels and I thought maybe you could talk about those three factors and
how you came up with the recommendation of that work plan originally.
Lt. Jim Olson: Well with the work plan, and I’m sorry to hear that Councilman Litsey that you
do feel that way. You know the work plan that was, for 2010 the sheriff’s office said that we
wanted to remain stable for 2010 and not add people. There was also in the 2008 council, or
with the sheriff’s office contract there was a caveat in there with, that they could opt out of
replacing that position with the SRO went to the schools. So as far as abandoning the work plan,
I would question that.
Councilman Litsey: Okay, maybe this would help. In 2007, I have a memorandum here from
May 21, 2007. It’s entitled discussion of future staff and benchmarking police services. The
sheriff’s department determines staffing levels based on three factors. Those are policing
5
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
factors, community factors and average law enforcement officers per 100,000 inhabitants. For
you to say that we’ll be okay in 2010 because crime numbers have decreased, that’s only one
factor of three and I would have expected you would have at least addressed all three of those
factors because we aren’t meeting the mark when it comes to average officers per 1,000
residents. The sheriff’s department recommends .8 and we haven’t achieved that yet. What
we’re trying to do through this plan that we’ve adopted as a council was to work towards
achieving that level of staffing so when I say abandoning, the sheriff’s department put forth this
plan in 2007 that we as a council subscribed to. Thought it was a good deal. I know we’ve
reconsidered now for 2010 but we’re adding additional staffing in 8, 9 and 10 and we’ve done
the 8. 08. Part of 09 but we haven’t completely done the 09 because phasing in an additional
officer in 09 carries over into 10. We put on hold now. But I guess I question how you can say
that we don’t need the additional deputy in 2010 since you’re only taking into account one of
three factors. And even that factor you’re taking into account was probably affected by the fact
that we have increased staffing so why would we want to abandon that plan now?
Lt. Jim Olson: Well the, you know the per 1,000 or per 100,000 rate, per 1,000 rate, that is an
optimal goal that we would like to reach at some point. You know the County itself is still
working towards their goal of .6 with that as well.
Councilman Litsey: I think it’s .4 actually.
Lt. Jim Olson: Or .4, I’m sorry. Point 4. I don’t have the memo that’s in front of me right now
for 2007. So you know there was a number of things that we looked at. Policing being one as
well as you know I look at, and talk to the deputies that are on the street every day. I take a look
at the reports and calls for service that we get and you know we, it would certainly be a nice to
replace that position but we can get by without, we’ll be okay without it Bryan, or excuse me
Councilman Litsey.
Councilman Litsey: I guess I don’t know how you can say that. We’re not reaching the
benchmarks that your organization has set up is the you know, minimum staffing levels that they
would like us to reach. The fact that they not only take into account officers per 1,000 but they
also take into account the ICP formula which is the International Chiefs of Police formula for
work load and staffing and what’s ideal there. We’re not meeting the mark there. So we’re not,
we’re playing catch up you know. The fact that the growth rate slowed down, that’s one factor
to take into account but we haven’t even reached where we need to be. We’re still playing catch
up and to abandon that plan that your own sheriff’s department put forth, and my understanding
is the sheriff still supports this plan. He just doesn’t think that it’ll probably in this economic
times, and he can speak for himself but my understanding at least in these economic times it’s
probably not highly likely that it will receive the funding that you’d like to see, but that doesn’t
mean you abandon the plan. What I expect is you tell us what we need, in your opinion as a
professional. Not what we want to hear and then we’ll make the decision as to whether or not we
can afford it. But what I heard you do at that work session was rely on one of three factors. Go
right to the fact that we can decrease numbers, or we can decrease our cost by not adding that
deputy without taking into account all these other factors and I just think that was irresponsible.
That’s my opinion. And I guess I would hope in the future that a more senior, higher level
6
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
administrative official would come and address us that has worked with this plan and can talk
more specific to it.
Lt. Jim Olson: And I’m sorry to hear that you feel that way.
Councilman Litsey: Thank you.
Lt. Jim Olson: Thank you sir.
Mayor Furlong: Any other questions for the Lieutenant this evening?
Councilman McDonald: Yeah I guess I’ve got a question.
Mayor Furlong: Mr. McDonald.
Councilman McDonald: Since we brought it up and we opened it all up and everything. Is the
community any safer or less safer today than it was you know 2, 3, 4 years ago when we started
putting these plans together?
Lt. Jim Olson: No. You know, and I think one clear signal of that was Money Magazine ranking
the city number 2 for, as one of the best places to live in the country and part of that was based
on public safety. This is a safe community and will continue to be a safe community.
Councilman McDonald: Okay, thank you. No more questions for me.
Councilman Litsey: But isn’t it a fact that as we add additional staffing that’s what contributes
to making a safe community? I mean one of the goals we’ve had is to make it even a safer
community. The other thing that needs to be taken into account is we need to protect those that
protect us and if staffing levels are inadequate we’re also putting officers out there that don’t
have adequate back up and things like that too so there’s a whole host of things that need to take
into account. The fact that the crime rate’s dropped a little, that’s great. That shows that the plan
we put in place, the recommendation of the sheriff’s department in 2007 was the appropriate
approach. That it’s having the positive affect that we hope and now to discontinue that is just
sending the signal that we’re not committed to this plan anymore. We’re not committed to
increasing our staffing levels in Chanhassen. It would cost, and correct me if I’m wrong but I
got the figures today. To add an additional deputy in 2010, the average valued home would have
to pay an additional, if we levied for that and didn’t make other cuts to accommodate for that, the
average valued homeowner or home in Chanhassen would be paying about 50 cents more a
month for that. I think if you went to most residents here and said are you willing to pay 50
cents more a month for an additional deputy to help fill in some gaps in staffing deficiencies that
we’ve identified? Would say gladly. I’ll give up a Caribou coffee once a month to do that.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Do you have additional questions for Lieutenant?
Councilman Litsey: Well I’m just countering that you’re saying it’s a safer community. What’s
the factors behind that because we’ve followed a plan.
7
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
Mayor Furlong: Alright, thank you.
Lt. Jim Olson: Just real quick. If I thought in any way Mr. Councilman that not adding this
deputy or not replacing this deputy would have an impact on the safety of the officers that work
this city, my opinion on that would have certainly been different.
Councilman Litsey: Have you done a study to, I want to ask this question Mayor. Have you
done a study to show how many times officers or have you done an analysis, go to calls alone or
other officers are unavailable because of staffing levels?
Lt. Jim Olson: You know I talk to these officers on a daily basis and there isn’t anybody that
feels like they do not have adequate back up when they’re working. I mean regardless of how
many officers you have, there are times where you will not have, I mean you could have 15
officers and the right call comes along, you’re not going to have enough officers. But we do
have resources that we can call in from the county. We do have resources that we call in from
surrounding agencies that can assist us like we assist other agencies when they need extra people.
Councilman Litsey: Yeah but you need a staff for most events. There are those extraordinary
situations where you need to call in mutual aid or so forth but the bottom line is you need to staff
in an adequate level and you also need some discretionary time to also allow those officers to
follow up on investigations they might have or to work traffic enforcement and some of those
things too, which we see the traffic numbers are down too. So I mean it’s, you’ve got to look at
the whole thing and I guess what upset me about that budget presentation was, you took one little
slice of the pie and based your opinion that we don’t need to add an officer in 2010. And I also
fault staff a little bit, the city manager for not including the 2007 work plan. I don’t know why
that wasn’t included in our budget packet. Why we didn’t have more discussion about that and
the implications and the fact that we’re not making the mark in terms of officers per 1,000 or the
ICP formula for officer staffing. We also have a lot of other issues that we could deal with and I
think it’s working so I’ll leave it at that. I’m just very disappointed.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Any other questions or comments? Okay. Lieutenant, thank you.
Lt. Jim Olson: Thank you. Have a good evening.
Mayor Furlong: Chief Geske, good evening.
Chief Gregg Geske: Good evening. In the council packet you will see that as we finish up 2009
here, our calls are still down from last year by 10 so going to one last time attribute that to our
tremendous fire education which we had here in October. Also in the council update we did a
great job of going to all the schools and stuff and our open houses are really successful time so.
Call numbers continue to be down but I did want to bring up a couple issues with the cold
weather that will eventually show up. One thing is ice. We are, tonight we’re actually doing ice
rescue training. Little trouble finding some ice out there so it’s a little harder. I did see some
skim ice on one of these mornings here but that’s not enough to support us fire fighters so we are
out doing some training even though it’s tough. Usually it’s too thick by this time when we try
8
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
to do our ice rescue training so we’re doing some of that and it brings up, as the ice does form
that we watch our kids that are close to lakes and everything else because we definitely don’t
want to go into action with our ice rescue, even though we do train it. The other thing that I
wanted to bring up, so it’s fresh in people’s mind is cleaning out fireplaces. Every few years or
every year we have a structure fire that’s due to cleaning out the fireplace. Even though we
haven’t used it in a day or so, they take the ashes out and put it in a cardboard box. We put it in
our plastic garbage can out in the garage or next to the garage and in the middle of the night then
we have a structure fire so make sure if you do clean out your fireplace, wood stove or anything
like that, you do put it in a non-combustible metal 5 gallon pail and take it outside. Wet it down.
Whatever but keep from putting it in the garbage because we do have, it seems we do have,
whether it be us or neighboring departments, do have a fire it seems every year due to that so we
want to keep that fresh in people’s mind as we clean out the fireplaces. I want to bring to
attention of, it is my last, I think, there probably isn’t a council meeting that I’ll have an update
for next month.
Mayor Furlong: Oh we could schedule one if you’d like.
Chief Gregg Geske: So this is my last council update so you don’t have to put up with my poor
jokes any longer but I want to thank you for the time that you’ve put up with me for the last 6
years. I also want to publicly thank my firefights for making me look good for the last 6 years
and stuff and this will be my last council update since I’m stepping down as Chief so thank you
for that.
Mayor Furlong: You’re welcome. Any questions for the Chief at this point?
Councilman Litsey: I just want to thank you for your service to the community. Six years is a
long time to serve in that role with other responsibilities as well. I know when I talk to other fire
departments they always talk positively about Chanhassen so it means you’re doing a good job
and we’re going to miss you in that role but thanks for the time you put in.
Chief Gregg Geske: Thank you.
Mayor Furlong: Yeah, I didn’t realize that this was your last meeting so I said it jokingly that we
may have to reschedule and we might have to because I wasn’t prepared to say anything but to
follow up on Councilman Litsey’s comments, on behalf of the council and the city, all the
residents, thank you for your service. I know you’re not stepping down from the fire department
but the role of chief is a little bit different than the average fire fighter in terms of time
commitment and demands on you and your family and we do appreciate that and all the service
that you provide to the city so Chief for everybody, thank you for your service.
Chief Gregg Geske: Thank you.
Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, council members, I think we should give him a hand.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: And where’s the cake?
9
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
Councilman Litsey: It’s probably against fire code.
Todd Gerhardt: No candles.
GLEASON VARIANCE, 2111 PINEHURST DRIVE (LOT 22, BLOCK 1, PINEHURST
ND
2 ADDITION): REQUEST FOR AN AFTER-THE-FACT HARD SURFACE
COVERAGE VARIANCE. APPLICANT: US HOME CORPORATION.
Kate Aanenson: Thank you Mayor, members of the City Council. The item before you, 2111
Pinehurst Drive is part of a subdivision where we’ve had a couple other requests for variance.
rd
This item did appear before the Planning Commission on November 3 and I’ll circle back and
talk about that in a minute. Located in the Pinehurst neighborhood just off of Galpin. 1.38%
hard coverage is being requested from the 25% for additional hard coverage. All site plans go
through the, as they’re gone through the different departments we do look at the hard cover
requirements of this permit as it was issued did meet the hard surface requirements. You can see
the site plan itself and then the calculation on the right. After they’re built they are requested to
show an as-built survey. So at the time that the as-built survey was submitted back to the city, so
th
the permit was issued on August 27 and then back when the, on December of ’08 when the
survey was submitted, you can see the difference in the site plan or the layout itself which
included the driveway configuration increasing and the sidewalk itself. So staff did inform the
builder that it was in error and the builder did inform the homeowner that it did not meet that so
they were in non-compliance with that. Again as a part of the city’s ordinance we do require a
back patio on all lots. A 10 by 10. We found that, that was one way that some of the builders
were finding a way to meet the requirements by leaving that off and we felt it was important
when there is a patio door that at a minimum we provide that 10 by 10 and that was left off. In
reviewing the calculations where you can see what the building permit showed and then how it
went up for the percentage of square foot. The owner is requesting that they leave the driveway
and they would forego the patio in the back. The Planning Commission struggled a lot with this.
I think some of the confusion came in and we put two motions in place for you on your
recommendation. The applicant, or someone representing the builder has stated that they didn’t
feel that that driveway worked as itself. Now if you went through the neighborhood, most the
homes are built that way with the neck down and we’ve had two other requests in this
neighborhood. If I was to go back to the first one. The homes immediately to the, two houses to
the east there also have applied for variances and the addresses are in your staff report had also
applied for variances and those were turned down by the City Council. Those addresses were
2101 Pinehurst, and that was a 3.3% and 2081 Pinehurst and that was a 2.6% hard cover so
they’re approximately 650 square feet and another 530 square feet, or 40 square feet and both of
those were also denied so being consistent with that. I think where the Planning Commission
struggled and why we put the additional recommendation in is the Planning Commission was
struggling with all or nothing kind of thing. Obviously the builder’s reluctant to pull the
driveway out now that the homeowner’s been in there. It’s been in there for a while so they were
struggling so we tried to give you a couple different options in looking at that, and I’ll go to the
recommendation here. So certainly within that, excuse me. I’ll show these are the two that had
the variances on there. 2101 and the 2081. Actually the one at 2081 actually bought the
additional property there to make that lot larger. So we did put in an additional recommendation
in there but we’re still left struggling. The staff’s recommendation was for denial. The staff’s
10
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
recommendation struggling with not having a patio. Whether it’s this homeowner or homeowner
in the future, that’s kind of makes it desirable when you come out of that back patio door.
Certainly there’s a deck above that but what that does to the livability and the desirability of the
property in the long term. So with that we did provide Findings of Fact. If you wanted to do
some motion inbetween there and then we would recommend that we come back with Findings
of Fact at your next meeting but with that I’d be happy to answer any questions that you have.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Questions for staff.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: I have a couple questions.
Mayor Furlong: Councilwoman Tjornhom.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: The two variances you spoke about, I think you showed a picture of
them earlier. Were they denied after the fact? You know what I’m saying?
Kate Aanenson: I’m not sure. I’m sorry.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Okay. But you do you understand my question?
Kate Aanenson: Yes.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Okay. And.
Kate Aanenson: If your question is were they given relief based on that, I don’t believe so.
They were denied so they would have had to remove it. If there was anything there.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: That’s what I was asking. If this happened before or after there was
something already existing there.
Kate Aanenson: That I can’t comment on but.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: And if that happened before it was built or purchased the way it’s
happening now. Second question I have is when we do put a driveway in there’s a permit pulled
and the plans are submitted and the driveway’s completed. Do we send an inspector out to
inspect the driveway?
Kate Aanenson: No. We look at the survey when it’s put in place and it’s the obligation of the
contractor to follow the survey and we’ve worked, long education curve over the years to stop
this problem that’s occurred and we’ve actually gone back and done as-builts for this particular
reason where we’ve had changes in grading and drainage where it may cause problems too so it’s
the builder’s responsibility to submit those surveys. Often times you have weather conditions
that make it impossible to get the survey in a timely manner, or the driveway in in a timely
manner also so sometimes those things play into consideration too so the survey does lag behind
someone trying to moving in and getting the as-built done or finishing grading. They may want
to move in before some of that. Things that are not life safety issues are done. But it’s our intent
11
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
that when they submit the survey that that’s what they’re going to follow and if there’s a problem
or if they want to change it up, they would come meet with somebody. Make modifications,
which does happen. Someone may want to change something.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Yeah, I’m surprised about that because even when you put a new
deck on, you know they’ll come out and inspect the footings and do everything else as a process.
Kate Aanenson: Yeah but a driveway is kind of like a patio. As long as that is put in place and
follows those sort of things. We try to catch it with the as-built. Not every you know would be
similar to a patio if it’s not shown on the plan and someone calls on something like that but we
don’t stand out there and follow up on all of those. Those would be complaint driven.
Mayor Furlong: Other questions for staff at this time? At the Planning Commission there were
comments made. How did this occur?
Kate Aanenson: Well again the staff’s, reviews the, I’ll go back to the one that shows the survey
here. Sorry. So the survey would be submitted with the application. Now lots of times when
these come through there’s a conversation that’s being held with the builder because it doesn’t
meet the requirements so it’s a negotiation of how do we make it work.
Mayor Furlong: At the time that they request the permit?
Kate Aanenson: At the time the permit’s being issued.
Mayor Furlong: Okay.
Kate Aanenson: While the building inspectors are reviewing the plans, the engineering and the
planning department’s reviewing, looking at making sure that it follows the grading plan which
is very important. Engineering reviews that part of it and then the planning department’s looking
at the hard cover portion of it, so those are the other two departments that are all working
together to get the permit issued. If it’s not, if it meets all the hard surface coverage and we still
make sure that, if it’s supposed to be a look out or walk out that it follows the grading plan so
engineering department would follow that process to make sure. So often times it’s a simple
phone call to talk about. It looks like there’s some additional, you know they sometimes show a
future pool or something like that, or a tennis court or a sport court. We would inform them that
you’re getting close to the maximum. Let’s talk about some ways that we can meet your goals.
We try to be you know advocating for them to make sure that they can meet their needs. They
can provide that and when this house did come in it did provide for that 10 foot back patio,
which is a requirement because there is doors going out. But that was, so the permit did meet the
ordinance. And somewhere in the process the contractor it appears, and it was stated in the
Planning Commission, the contractor decided that that didn’t seem to make a lot of sense. The
way the driveway was laid in place, nor the sidewalks so they chose to deviate from the plan. So
that’s how it happened. And it wasn’t caught until the survey, done at a later time requirement,
the as-built was submitted back to the city. And then the planning department did notify the
builder that they didn’t follow the plan and they were in violation. Now the homeowner’s
burdened with the problem of non-compliance.
12
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
Mayor Furlong: Sure. Yeah. Was there anything at the Planning Commission, and that was,
well it turned coming through as a recommendation because of the vote. Anything expressed in
terms of the hardship that’s created?
Kate Aanenson: Well I think, I think that you know the vote was 4 to 2. I think there was some
concern that again the homeowner got, it’s not a good welcome to the city which we don’t want
to have happen. We want everybody to you know have those choices that they can make later
with their property. That they’ve got some of that additional hard cover so I think there was the
two votes that were, didn’t support the denial had some concerns regarding that. But I think the
rest of it felt like, it was a little bit of where we spent a lot of time with the builder has done work
in this city. A little bit of disregard for the following the requirement.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Thank you. Any other questions at this time for staff? Councilwoman
Tjornhom.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: I have another one. This neighborhood seems to have a lot of these
problems and I guess I’m confused. I mean we’ve set ordinances and building codes in place
before this was, before this development was even built and I’m wondering why we’re having so
many problems with this particular.
Kate Aanenson: We’d love to talk about that for a minute. When this project came in, and we
noticed, the lots came in at the minimum and we were concerned because they were larger
homes. Now we’re at the top end of the building cycle when there was a big desire to move to
this area and actually the builder came back to us and said we’d like to put a 4 car garage on
there. It was like, there’s no way we can get a 4 car garage in there because they realize the
houses at that time are moving up towards the top end. The different builders in there and at that
time they did drop some of the lots to make them work so actually some of these lots, there were
2 lots that were dropped on the bottom part to actually make some of these lots bigger. Our
normal lot size is 15. If you look in the staff report, we put the average in there which I believe
was closer to 18 or 20,000 so we’re bigger than most of the lots so these are large homes, and
people do want to have those additional amenities. Whether it’s the third car garage and the
patio out the back. The fire pit in the future. Some of them want the sport court. Some of those
things which we want to build in that flexibility but we do have a large footprint on these. On
some of the lots are small. That’s why I think you’re seeing some of the lots up there, people
have combined, actually bought two lots to make it work. To meet their needs.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Any other questions at this time? Okay, is the applicant here this
evening? Good evening.
Carol Toohey: Good evening Mayor, council members.
Mayor Furlong: Good evening.
Carol Toohey: My name is Carol Toohey with Lennar Corporation, also known as US Home.
We’re here on behalf of the homeowner in regards to the hardship difference on the home site.
13
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
There is, was obviously you can see the discrepancy between the building permit driveway and
the as-built survey. Ms. Aanenson did a good job of describing basically what happened and the
contractor decided to install a driveway they felt was more appropriate given the type of
driveway, or the garages and the use of those garages and unfortunately our builder didn’t,
wasn’t there the day that they installed it and now obviously we didn’t catch it until the as-built
survey was completed and unfortunately that was also after Mr. Gleason had purchased his
home. So we’re here on behalf of the homeowner to try and help him to allow him to have the
new driveway that he did purchase from us. We have modified the original application which
did include both a larger driveway and a patio to just the driveway as it is today. We do
understand that is an increase above the maximum surface but the, we believe the difference
between this hard surface and for example the patio hard surface is where the water goes. This
additional surface does flow to the street and into the storm sewer in the street whereas the back
yard would flow into the grass and the ponds and there were some issues there so we believe
there is also a difference in that kind of request so we’re here to respectfully request that the
council consider the new Findings of Fact that the staff is presenting where they do accept the
driveway as it is today.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Alright. Any questions?
Carol Toohey: Any questions?
Councilman McDonald: Yeah I’ve got a question.
Mayor Furlong: Councilman McDonald.
Councilman McDonald: I understand a lot of this was probably a mistake or something along
those lines. Why haven’t you offered to fix the driveway back to the way it should be as built?
Carol Toohey: Because the homeowner did buy this home as it with the driveway in and had an
understanding that this is what he was purchasing through no fault of his own. He didn’t know
that we had a mistake, made a mistake and at that time we had not known so we’re doing all that
we can for the homeowner to try and let him keep what he purchased.
Councilman McDonald: Okay. When I was on the Planning Commission there were at least 2
or 3 homes in this development that came through because again as Kate had stated, you wanted
to maximize the size of the house that went onto the lot and based upon that no one could put in
retaining walls. They could not put in any landscaping. We went through a lot of iterations with
people coming through trying to convince us that we could dig holes in the ground and do
basically little sump pumps or water gardens or something along those lines. And at the same
time 3 years ago when there was a flood a lot of water ran off from this area down below here.
Flooded out homes. We had those homeowners coming in up in arms because basements had
been flooded out. Property had been flooded. To me the solution is you fix the driveway. He
may have bought what is there but that is not what was approved. The solution is fix the
driveway. Either the homeowner can do it or you can do it. I’m not going to vote for a variance
because again too many people have come through here. This has been an ongoing problem and
14
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
I’m just not going to tolerate it. You’re not going to get my vote to allow for this variance.
You’re going to have to fix this problem.
Mayor Furlong: Any other questions or comments for Mrs. Toohey?
Todd Gleason: Can I make a, or I’m not sure what the process is.
Mayor Furlong: Certainly. Nope, that’s fine. Please, Mr. Gleason. Good evening.
Todd Gleason: Thank you. Good evening. I’m not probably prepared with comments other
than I did submit some written statements and I appreciate if you had a chance to take a look at
that. I travel a lot for my job and wasn’t sure I was going to be here this evening. That said, I do
you know sort of ask you know for a couple comments. One is, I know our neighbors of course.
You know you know the people in your neighborhood and when you’re faced with an issue you
share certain frustrations with your other fellow neighbors and often times they share their
experiences and so this has been one, as you can imagine, for people like myself, this is a new
neighborhood. You know this is one of the topics. You know I guess I would, you’re asking for
an answer. I don’t know if I can say the exact answer regarding the two neighbors that applied
for a variance but my understanding, because one is our next door neighbor. They applied
because they wanted a larger patio to be put in. It had nothing to do with their driveway and I
believe the other one on the corner, they were looking to put in something in their back yard as
well. That why they purchased the lot next to them, so they now have a larger lot for them to do
what they want to do in their back yard. Again my understanding is, it had nothing to do with
their driveway. You know as my letter I think outlined, if you had a chance to read it, I would
just sort of share my frustration with the entire process here. I’m not going to argue the facts or
the technical aspect or the, you know the erosion ratios. That’s really not what I do. I know that
we moved here from New Jersey. We found this house. We were attracted to the community
and frankly you know since that time we’ve struggled with a lot of processes associated with the
purchase of this home and some of the things that my family and I are dealing with, now
including this driveway which was there when we bought the house and we did actually call the
city regarding hardscape to understand what limit we were up against. While I’m sensitive to
you know Councilman McDonald’s frustration with the you know the history of this. I guess I
would just remind the council that, my family and I didn’t create the history. When we called
the city, specifically for hardscape. Specifically for other reasons. When we weren’t given a
permit to move in until we got windows fixed. You know to find out 8, 7 months later that there
was this issue, I struggle with understanding how now we’re the ones that are going to have to
fix something that hopefully I believe is a minor variance but that’s my comment because you’ve
read my written statements. I don’t want to go over that again. If you’ve had a chance to read
that, I appreciate it.
Mayor Furlong: No, I appreciate that and thank you for providing those comments and realizing
that it’s pretty clear from what you said, what we’ve heard tonight and what was said at the
Planning Commission, this wasn’t something you created. But unfortunately you’re dealing with
it and the process is sometimes one that isn’t designed for efficiency but for clarity and making
sure that everybody gets heard in a timely manner so I appreciate you putting up with the process
15
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
as it’s been. Any other questions for the applicant or for Mr. Toohey? Councilwoman Ernst, did
you want to ask a question?
Councilwoman Ernst: Yeah, I have a question for Kate. Can you tell me, after reading the staff
report, the patio seemed to be the bigger issue for water runoff, is that correct? And is there
really a concern with this driveway?
Kate Aanenson: I don’t think either issue was more important. We just brought up the patio
because we think it’s, it makes the house, it’s like not having a front sidewalk. Sometimes it’s
just one of those things that will make a house more livable. The Planning Commission didn’t
talk on that nor we. I think they’re both hard cover and just the viability and livability.
Councilwoman Ernst: But I mean is there a bigger, was there, is there an issue with the driveway
being in there for a while?
Kate Aanenson: Well it’s just hard cover.
Councilwoman Ernst: Zero point percent.
Kate Aanenson: Yeah.
Mayor Furlong: Alright, maybe that’s a question Councilwoman Ernst for our city engineer.
Councilwoman Ernst: Okay, sorry.
Mayor Furlong: Mr. Oehme, does it matter if the water runs off in the front of the house or the
back of the house or, in terms of storm water management?
Paul Oehme: Well, not really. I mean it either goes through their yard into the wetland and
through those ponds out in back or it ends up in the street and eventually ends up in the pond so
there may be some, maybe some water quality benefit if it goes through surface drainage to the
back yard and into the wetland but it still should be treated and consistent with other properties
in the area.
Councilwoman Ernst: Is there anything that they can do to help that situation with the current
situation that they’re in right now?
Paul Oehme: I mean it all comes back to hard surface coverage. We’ve talked to the council
about you know storm water improvements that could potentially help the situation. We’re not
you know there yet I guess in terms of who’s, what type of improvements potentially could be
added to address these type of conditions but.
Councilwoman Ernst: Well I know in the past we’ve talked about additional landscaping and
that sort of thing that might help the situation. I’m wondering if there’s anything that they could
do that is similar to that that would.
16
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
Kate Aanenson: I would just point out, we did spend a lot of time talking at one of the other
applications up here. They brought in a long, kind of expansive drawings of what different
alternatives they could use and at that time we chose not to accept that as a path because we
didn’t have you know a policy or plan in place to make that happen. The one that actually
bought the other lot. They were looking at some, kind of some creative alternatives to reduce
their hard cover.
Councilwoman Ernst: Yeah and I don’t, I’m not getting the feeling that we’re looking at
comparable situations here when we’re talking about, for example 2101 and 2801. We don’t
know if they had a driveway. If they were dealing with an existing condition or if it was after the
fact. And then.
Kate Aanenson: I think Mr. Gleason stated the facts pretty much, pretty clearly that they both
want to do additional coverage to their property. I think we’re all in agreement that Mr. Gleason
didn’t cause the problem but the contractor didn’t follow the plan. Yeah. So it’s just the
additional hard cover. We’re not saying you know we’ll leave that up to you to decide the merits
of that. Whether or not there was, one’s more egregious than the other.
Councilwoman Ernst: Well and so because I don’t feel that we’re dealing with comparable
situations. I’m just asking if there’s something that he can do with additional landscaping or
something to help remedy the situation.
Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, council members. We did look at, there’s an empty lot to the west and
we looked at you know replatting the area and buying additional land, but now we’ve just pushed
the problem kind of downstream again. You’re going to have to see a smaller home that’s next
door that’s not the tradition in this neighborhood so, this is a tough one. I mean one of the things
that we’ve talked about when we have situations like this that if we could bank property
somewhere in the area and people buying into that situation is the only thing that staff has come
up with. With the tight clay soils in Chanhassen, it’s very difficult to use some of the products
that are out there today. So you know we just haven’t gotten to that point of trying to find a
piece of land in this watershed district where property owners could come in and buy some open
space and that would have to remain open now and into the future is really the point that we’re
at.
Councilwoman Ernst: Yep, and I see that as being a potential long term solution whereas the
situation that we’re dealing with today is right in front of us and we need to figure out how we
can help this homeowner when he was not, he’s really not responsible for what happened here.
Mayor Furlong: Any other questions for the applicant? Oh I’m sorry, Councilman Litsey.
Councilman Litsey: Well, Mr. Gleason in your letter you stated that prior to moving in there,
were there actually building inspectors out there on the site to deal with the window issue? It
says in here prior to moving in the city inspectors notified, there’s an issue with windows
apparently. How did that come about or was that, were they actually on site to look at that or was
it just?
17
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
Todd Gleason: Well I believe they were.
Councilman Litsey: Okay.
Todd Gleason: I certainly didn’t, you know I mean my recollection of 2 years ago now it seems
like, but was that we did receive a call from Lennar that the inspector had come in. Verified that
certain windows didn’t pass I believe it was efficiency ratings and that they needed to be
replaced.
Councilman Litsey: Okay.
Todd Gleason: You know and so.
Councilman Litsey: Okay. And is your assertion then that the city inspector should have caught
the other issue at that time?
Todd Gleason: Well I guess my assertion might not be that necessarily. My assertion is that you
know 7-8 months after moving into the home, receiving a letter from the city that we were over
the hardscape was a surprise, not only based on that fact but also based on the history that we had
that it seemed to us that a process had occurred and again I’m not professing to be an expert in
the area of permits, inspections and the like, but that certain people had come into our home from
the city to approve it’s you know, it being a habit you know. I mean us being able to move into
the home. It’s occupancy. That coupled with the phone call that we had made because we were
exploring what we could do in our back yard and finding out that we were already was you know
that we’re at 24.88 percent of hardscape, which apparently was on the as-built. All of this is my
point is, you know we had had a couple of conversations with the city about the hardscape. We
then obviously you know, I wouldn’t say delayed our move in but we were sensitive to maybe
delaying our move in. That somebody had come and inspected our home. The windows needed
to be replaced. We were fine with that process because we were renting a home in the area. You
know all of that, you know the bottom line equation is that it certainly felt like a lot of people, a
few people had looked at our home. Inspected it. We moved in and now we’re here.
Kate Aanenson: Can I just make one point of clarification. We do not do the as-built. That’s up
to the builder so that was Lennar’s responsibility to check to make sure it was built, the driveway
was built correctly. And the rest of the survey, the hard cover, that’s their job to do and that
includes the elevations for the drainage and that sort of thing so there’s a time line, and I think I
pointed that out. The permit was issued in 2007. These take a few months to build but the as-
built wasn’t submitted until our records show 12-1-08 so it was over a year before we got the as-
built back so.
Councilman Litsey: That was my next question. Because I mean you normally wouldn’t pick
that up on an inspection anyway because that’s not something…
Kate Aanenson: Not the driveway stuff, nor would they pick up, yeah. The measure the
setbacks from the street and that sort of thing but not the as-builts. That’s up to the builder.
18
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
Councilman Litsey: Okay, thank you.
Mayor Furlong: I asked Ms. Aanenson hardship and that’s one of the factors that comes into
play with a variance. The hardship of, you know but for. You dealt with this I’m sure as a
builder and looking for variances more than Mr. Gleason has. He’s an unfortunate participant I
think here which is pretty clear from his statements. Where is, is there a hardship here? Or not
allowing, you know if the variance is not allowed.
Carol Toohey: Well, in our application Mayor we explained the hardship as this gentleman you
know bought the home as you see it today. Had expectations of use. As you can see you know
the driveway. Just looking at the two different driveways, there’s two completely different
potential uses. The width in front of the third stall, or the single stall, the depth of the pavement
is only about 16 to 18 feet deep. Typically the third stall is used for recreational vehicles. Extra
cars. That is not an appropriate depth to use in that stall in that way. My understanding of why
the contractor built the driveway as you see it today so that they could actually properly use that
stall for it’s use. That homeowner has lived there for 2 years now so has bought what the
understanding of the use of the driveway and was using it and so that hardship would be you
know taking away the enjoyment of the driveway as you see it today.
Mayor Furlong: Is the building permit survey, the one on the left there, is that, that driveway
configuration, is that a normal configuration for other homes in this neighborhood or throughout
that you build or was it abnormal?
Carol Toohey: You know I don’t know. My assumption is that is just the standard template that
the engineer uses. Doesn’t actually look at the garage or the use before they lay it on there.
They have a little…plop in their CAD.
Mayor Furlong: So it’s a pretty typical layout and I guess that’s been my experience just not
only in this neighborhood but throughout the city is with a third car garage, while it may have a
driveway with the width of 3 cars at the house. By the time you get to the access off the street
it’s down to a 2 car width.
Carol Toohey: That is standard but if you do look though, you know depending on the home,
and there was an aerial. The car is parked there. You know say someone had a truck or a boat,
it would be at an angle and then cutting into the 2 car portion of the driveway, which…
Todd Gleason: And maybe if I could make a comment Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Furlong: Certainly Mr. Gleason.
Todd Gleason: If I legitimately, and maybe that’s already… If I really thought that that
driveway that is, that was proposed in the permit would be functional for us, given, I wouldn’t be
here today. I mean I really wouldn’t try to be wasting your time over, it’s not like I’m dying to
have a larger driveway. I mean that’s not my goal in life. Frankly I think a gray box on the
screen is interesting but you know for me to pull out of my third car stall there, because I give
my wife the other, for me to pull out of that and weave around the way to that, I know my
19
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
driveway, would be very difficult for me to believe that it would be anywhere close to the same
level of you know use in my current driveway which is, doesn’t feel that excessive when I’m on
it I would state.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Alright. Very good. Any other questions or comments? Very good,
thank you. Appreciate you being here for your comments. Let’s bring it to council for
discussion and comments. Thoughts. Unless there are any follow up questions for staff at this
point.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: I have one more question for Kate.
Mayor Furlong: Councilwoman Tjornhom.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: The two variances that were denied that you discussed earlier in your
presentation, what was the percentage or what was the overage of hard surface coverage?
Kate Aanenson: The first one at 2101 was requested a 3.3% or about 650 square feet. And the
second one was.
Councilwoman Ernst: 2.6.
Kate Aanenson: The first one was 3.3.
Councilwoman Ernst: Yeah.
Kate Aanenson: Yeah. About 250 square feet. The second one at 2081 was 2.6. About 540
square feet.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Thank you.
Mayor Furlong: And the results of those were?
Kate Aanenson: Both, they were both denied.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Any thoughts or discussion?
Councilman McDonald: Well I guess the only comments I’d come back to is again is, you know
I feel very strongly about my position in this and part of it goes back to again I remember when
this whole development came up for platting and staff did point out a few problems as far as lot
sizes and types of houses and there was a reduction in lots as I recall you know just to
accommodate that. This has been a problem from day one and it was brought up when I was on
the Planning Commission. We made it known to the builder then that you know they were
creating a ticking time bomb because people wanted to do things with their homes and the
builder wanted to go ahead and go forward with the type of homes they wanted to put on there
and that was fine. I remember one of the comments I made at the time was that whoever buys
the home should be made aware of some of these limitations to these homes. I know that never
20
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
happens and it probably didn’t happen in this case either but it’s not as though no one knew
going in what the rules were and what the problems were. If this were a total surprise to
everybody I might feel differently but because from day one knowing what had happened with
this, I’m not surprised and it’s, I understand from the owner’s standpoint. I wouldn’t want to be
in your position either. There’s a few of your neighbors that I know that one came in from
California and before they even got moved in they were being told they couldn’t do what they
wanted to do with the property. But I cannot support a variance in this case.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Other comments. Councilwoman Ernst.
Councilwoman Ernst: Well I believe that the owner didn’t know in this situation and as we
talked about previously we don’t, the other two residents in the same neighborhood, we don’t
know if that situation was similar to this one or not at this point. We do know that the overage
was more than what we’re talking about today. Today we’re talking about 0.8%, which is not a
huge percentage of square feet. Percentage over but you know really with the situation that, and
the details that we’ve talked about here today, I would support Option B on this because I feel
that it would be the right way to go. The homeowner’s willing to forego the patio and live with
that if we give him the driveway and I would be okay with that.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Thank you. Other comments. Councilwoman Tjornhom.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Yeah. When I look at variances I often you know, I guess the key
word for me or a flag is a hardship and I think another key word that I’ve made up for this is
probably self inflicted and I just feel that as a homeowner this was not self inflicted. This was
obviously a lack of communication between the builder and the contractor, or whoever was
putting in the driveway and they made a huge mistake that now the new proud homeowner has to
deal with and I’m sorry for that. Welcome to Chanhassen. We used to be called Chanhassle and
we’ve worked very hard to not be called that anymore and so I’m hoping that from now on you’ll
find it a pleasant place to live. I just, you know I, I feel that this was not an intentional overage
of hard surface coverage by the homeowner and Councilman McDonald I totally understand
your frustration with this development and how as a council and planning commissioners we
work with staff to, to protect our water. We watch where the surface water flows and where it
goes and how it’s treated and so I understand your frustration and I’m with you on that but
because this I don’t feel was, this was not something that was intended by the homeowner. It
was a miscommunication way before he even probably came to Minnesota, I’m going to have to
support staff’s option of allowing the driveway to exist but denying the patio.
Mayor Furlong: So you’re supporting Option B?
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Yes I am.
Mayor Furlong: Is that Option B?
Kate Aanenson: Yes.
Mayor Furlong: So, okay. Thank you. Councilman Litsey, your thoughts.
21
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
Councilman Litsey: Well I certainly sympathize with Mr. Gleason’s situation so what I’m about
to say isn’t from lack of sympathy for what your situation is but I agree with what Mr.
McDonald said in terms of, well let me back up. What I think this is more of is the City’s getting
pulled into a situation they really shouldn’t be in in the first place. It’s a builder/owner issue and
that’s really where it should remain in my opinion. We’re being asked now to help out a
situation that clearly does not meet our ordinance or code so I just think that we have to, we have
these in place. We have to be consistent in it’s application. A lot of these variances that come
in, it is oversights or whatever. I don’t know that this could really be classified as an oversight.
This was just the builder didn’t do what they should have done and I think Mr. Gleason has, you
know is an aggrieved party in that, and the builder has to make good on that. That’s what the
issue really is and that’s where I think it should stay.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Obviously a challenging issue based upon the different
thoughts and opinions and one that is, as much as this council continues to try to accommodate
and be flexible, this is a challenging one. I reckon back to, I think back to other after the fact
variances where the building or property improvements have occurred and it exceeds the hard
surface allowance and these are the toughest ones that we do. Especially in this case where the
homeowner wasn’t the one that created it. We’ve got other ones with sport courts and other
things that have come in and at least there you can say you know they may not have known but
you know we make adjustments there. My concern here is, the biggest concern, I think the
driveway design that was in the, in the permit survey is very typical design. That many, many,
many homeowners have throughout the city and it’s designed specifically because it minimizes
the overall surface area of the driveway. Could the other design, the existing design be
preferable? Perhaps and I think if my, you know the concern is, this was a mistake. It was a
mistake according to the Planning Commission minutes that it was done by the contractor who
was working for the home builder. How many mistakes are going to occur? I’d like to find a
way to accommodate the homeowner and try to find out something that can occur but I have
difficulty here doing that from the standpoint that you know, to come in after the fact a mistake
was made and Councilman Litsey I think you know, the issues shouldn’t even be in front of the
council here. It’s a, if a mistake was made that was, if another mistake was made that didn’t,
wasn’t because of a restriction that the city had put in place long before the permit was ever
requested back at the time that the, you know these ordinances have been in place for years and
years and at the time of platting, you know we wouldn’t be here and I think this was an issue. I
struggle even with item B, though I’d like to find and we have found in the past some
accommodation, someway to try to come up with something that helps and find some flexibility
from, with the staff and I don’t know if anything exists there. I’d like to think it would. We’ve
got, I guess Option B is a partial but you know my concern there is the next homeowner’s going
to come in and want a patio, you know and whether they knew or not. Or there are a number of
homes yet to be built in this neighborhood and the fact that we’ve already seen on, with 4
neighboring lots, 3 requests for variances on the exact same issue, this is a problem that’s been
identified and with more open lots there, now how do we respond to the other, to the other 2
neighbors that said, you know we said stay within the 25. What if we had given them .8 or 1
percent more than that as well? I mean that was an issue we were dealing with at the time. So
I’m really struggling with trying to find the justification to go forward. The desire here is
different functionality, and I appreciate that. I mean I’ve got a driveway that’s like the, you
22
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
know with the two and the third stall and I appreciate what you’re speaking to but I have trouble
saying that functionality or use is now a hardship. So I would certainly, if there’s some other
options that might be available I’d certainly be willing to table this to let staff work with the
applicant to try to find a way to come within the 25. To try to find a way to avoid a variance
here because I think that’s the issue is, it has more effects than just on Mr. Gleason. I feel for
Mr. Gleason. I mean he’s been caught in the middle here but I think that there needs to be a way
to try to find, try to find something else if we can so I prefer to try to table this this evening. See
if the applicant can work with the staff and come up with some alternatives that might work. I
don’t know if they’re out there and if they’re not they’re not but we’re going to have issues going
forward in this neighborhood and I’d like to find a way not to start providing variances because
of mistakes. You know, so that’s my thought and I’d be open to other ideas from the council.
Or further thoughts and comments if there’d be, if other members of council would be willing to
let staff take a little bit of time and see if they can come up with an alternative to find a way to fit
it within the ordinance. And maybe that’s not the case and if that’s not the case we may get it
back with the same proposal but that would be my proposal at this point in time. Councilwoman
Tjornhom.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: And I’m willing to give staff more time to work with it but Mayor I
think you bring up a good point that this seems to be a pattern that’s developing. A serious
pattern that’s developing and staff and council or someone needs to come up with a solution to
where we’re not meeting our every new neighbor in this neighborhood on these terms and I’m
not sure how that is done but you know the good news is we’re probably catching it now before
we get 10 homes in this neighborhood and they all have problems. But I think that something
needs to be done to ensure that this doesn’t happen to another homeowner.
Mayor Furlong: Councilwoman Tjornhom I appreciate those comments because that’s exactly
the case. This is the third one now out of 4 homes on this street, but there are other homes in this
area too and you know the rules I think were pretty clear at the beginning. When the plat was
designed and the size of the lots that were created and the size of the homes that they were
planning to put on there and we’re seeing, you know Councilman McDonald talked to that.
That’s why I think this is just another one and I hate to extend the process. I can appreciate Mr.
Gleason’s frustration but that’s what I would prefer at this point is that we, let’s see what we can
do from a creativity standpoint. See if there’s someway to get them into compliance at the 25%.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: And Kate, I don’t mean to go, become a planning commissioner
again or go back to the plat but when these were platted, were patios in the back included?
Kate Aanenson: Yeah, we do require a 10 by 10.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Yeah. That’s what I thought.
Kate Aanenson: This did meet that. We’ve also required in all these types of projects, now that
they show typical home plans that are going in. Different projects have different styles of homes
so on all projects now we ask that the, kind of the illustrative plans that these are the types of
homes that we’d be building on these lots. Now again, these were kind of the last of the ones
23
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
that we’ve done with the larger footprints home styles up there in a highly desirable, beautiful
area. Again we don’t want to make this our meet and greet either with our residents either so.
Mayor Furlong: No. And I think that’s why part of the meeting, part of the look for flexibility
would be to work with, work with the other builders in that area and try to find ways to avoid
meeting all of our new residents in this way. Okay, so I would certainly entertain a motion to
table if somebody would like to make it, or I could make it myself.
Councilman McDonald: I’ll make the motion to table it. I can support that. All I want to do is
see the problem solved and again like I say I’m tired of seeing this particular development come
up before us and causing problems and so I’d like to see a solution. So I will make a motion to
table it.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Is there a second?
Councilman Litsey: Second.
Mayor Furlong: Made and seconded. Any other discussion on that?
Roger Knutson: Mayor?
Mayor Furlong: Yes.
Roger Knutson: We’ll need an extension. We’re out of time before your next meeting.
Mayor Furlong: Okay.
Kate Aanenson: So you’d have to get something from the applicant.
Roger Knutson: In writing granting us an extension until the end of December.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Is that something that the applicant would be interested in doing at this
point? Are you officially the applicant or is Mr. Gleason or who’s the applicant here?
Carol Toohey: We filled out the application on behalf of the homeowner.
Roger Knutson: Maybe both could sign them on behalf of.
Mayor Furlong: Alright. Can you write up something quick while we play the Jeopardy jingle.
Kate Aanenson: Let’s see if they want to grant it first.
Mayor Furlong: I’m sorry, did you have another comment?
Carol Toohey: I have a question Mayor, council members.
24
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
Mayor Furlong: Certainly.
Carol Toohey: Just a clarification. What do you mean alternatives to meet the 25%? Are you
talking about what Councilmember Ernst was doing like you know maybe some alternative
landscape that helps stormwater so they can keep the driveway or alternative materials or, just
some clarification on what you’re looking for.
Mayor Furlong: I mean currently within our ordinance I don’t think those options are available.
Kate Aanenson: That’s correct.
Mayor Furlong: Correct, so we need to find something that meets within the ordinance would be
my thought.
Carol Toohey: Okay. So you’re talking more like materials.
Kate Aanenson: Hard cover.
Councilman Litsey: Hard cover.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: I think staff would probably answer that.
Mayor Furlong: I’m sorry? Yeah, work with, I think working with staff to try to find a way to
find, to get into compliance.
Councilwoman Ernst: Well I guess I’d like to get a better idea of what that is. Does that mean
that potentially he might have to remove some of that hard surface?
Kate Aanenson: Potentially…
Mayor Furlong: Well, I’m looking to alternatives but I want to you know, for reasons I stated
earlier, without going back and repeating what I said, I think that I’d like to take some time for
you and especially as the builder as Lennar, not only here but with the other ones. Work with
staff and let’s figure out how we can avoid these situations for the benefit of Mr. Gleason and all
his to be neighbors as well. And keeping it consistent with our ordinance and what the
expectations are.
Carol Toohey: Well we are interested in looking at working with the City so that he can keep the
use of his driveway but also being in compliance with the ordinance.
Mayor Furlong: That’d be great. That’s be great. While we play the Jeopardy song here for a
little bit longer, Mr. Knutson is working on.
Roger Knutson: One more word. It’s hard enough to read Mayor when I write slow.
25
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
Mayor Furlong: Make sure, Mr. Knutson, if you could make sure, we only have one meeting in
th
December so, which is the 14, so if we could extend this to perhaps January, or whatever time
would be sufficient. Otherwise we’re effectively just doing a 3 week. Maybe we can come back
at our December meeting, that’d be great to try to finish it out.
Kate Aanenson: That’s what we were just talking about.
Mayor Furlong: But I want to make sure there’s sufficient time that we don’t have to get to
another extension.
Kate Aanenson: Correct, because we only have one meeting in December. We were just talking
about that so we may have to ask for another extension.
th
Todd Gerhardt: January 20 works.
Kate Aanenson: When?
th
Todd Gerhardt: January 20.
Kate Aanenson: That’s better. Signed.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. A motion’s been made to table and it’s been seconded.
Councilman McDonald moved, Councilman Litsey seconded that the City Council approve
a motion to table the after the fact hard surface coverage variance request for 2111
nd
Pinehurst Drive (Lot 22, Block 1, Pinehurst 2 Addition). All voted in favor and the
motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
CITY CODE AMENDMENTS: APPROVE AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 20,
ZONING CONCERNING COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL AND
REGIONAL/LIFESTYLE COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS.
Kate Aanenson: Thank you Mayor, members of the City Council. We’ve discussed with the
completion of the City’s comprehensive plan, the implementation of two new commercial zoning
districts. What we have for you tonight, after the review by the Planning Commission, numerous
meetings and work sessions with the City Council, the draft of that, of those two ordinances.
One being the community commercial and the other being the lifestyle or the regional
commercial zoning district. The Planning Commission held their public hearing on November
rd
3 to review these and they did recommend 6 to 0 to approve. What I’ll do is circle back to their
comments as kind of we walk through the two zoning districts themselves. Specifically the
comments that were received were on the regional commercial zoning district so. The
community commercial zoning district is, in the staff report we went through, we gave you a lot
of background information regarding the retail study that McComb’s did recommending that we
do need some additional property in the downtown. That was the impetus for both commercial
zoning districts, that based on the market analysis the city could support additional acreage in the
core of downtown as we were running out and again this would extend and compliment that
26
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
community gathering place we have in the downtown core. As you recall in the comprehensive
plan we did leave this guided either office industrial park or community commercial so if
someone wanted to leave a building the way it is, they would be in compliance. This would
allow somebody that wanted to go to a retail commercial zoning district, the opportunity to do
that. So again there’s a lot of background in the retail study. I’m not going to go through all of
that but certainly there’s the potential in this area then, in the lifestyle center, which I’ll talk
about too, for additional commercial development and land demand. Now having said that, that
commercial study was done in June of 2006. Certainly the economic forces that were in place in
the city have changed dramatically and have slowed down, but we still believe in the long run for
the viability of the core of the downtown, we do want to provide that additional opportunities for
infill development and change of opportunity. So with the community commercial district we
did want to provide an opportunity for our uses that we don’t have in the core of downtown, so
this wouldn’t be necessarily small strip uses but we want to set a minimum size and a maximum
size that compliment some of those uses we have downtown. Some of those we like to call the
two trippers. You’re going down to maybe go to the library and you can also go to another use,
so this is a unique zoning district we haven’t had in the past. Again it’s kind of that paradigm
shift moving from meeting the daily needs. Providing those opportunities for maybe less
frequency in the downtown and then also with the lifestyle center which would create a larger
market area. So the standards that we’d be looking at for this district would be at a minimum
square footage of 15,000 and maximum of 65,000. It’s again not intended to do a multi-tenant
strip center. We have plenty of opportunities for those types of uses to go in, in some of those
neighborhood uses that we’ve recently approved on Highway 5 and down at the Lyman and 212
zoning district. So these again are some of the things we talked about in the Minnetonka, the
Best Buy. This would be an 18,000. We’ve had some requests for specialty retail, whether it be
furniture or whether it be sporting goods. Again these are more the boutique style sort of things.
Again these are kind of compliment or change up the façade, the existing office industrial. We
have had interest from some additional home improvement. This would be too big to go into that
site. We looked at some of the boutiques, again some of these are going to be a little bit too big
of a footprint, if you look at the 65,000. Some of the parcels we have down there probably
wouldn’t meet those standards but they wanted more of the boutique one, those potentially could,
could fit within the zoning district itself. So the zoning we have in place recommended zoning
district. We have reviewed those. That zoning district. Both of these actually with the city
attorney going through those. The standards that were put in place. Again we would not be
rezoning any property in the community is zoning right now. The zoning will be put in place but
it will be up to the applicant to come in and request that zoning change and then you would make
that decision at that time, whether or not that made sense on how the use would work so this just
provides the opportunity for the community commercial. And at the Planning Commission
meeting we didn’t hear many comments. Again the Planning Commission did spend some time
on this. The staff did meet with the downtown. We had a downtown business meeting
explaining these changes and we got some good support on that. Again increasing that daytime
traffic in the core of the downtown so there was a lot of support for that. Any questions on the
community commercial before I go to the regional commercial?
Mayor Furlong: Any questions on community commercial? So this would not, is this change in
zoning, is it, these changes are consistent with the comprehensive plan?
27
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
Kate Aanenson: Correct.
Mayor Furlong: That we passed in 2008.
Kate Aanenson: That’s correct.
Mayor Furlong: And did that place the, that essentially creates a dual potential zoning for these
properties, correct?
Kate Aanenson: That’s correct.
Mayor Furlong: As they currently as well as the opportunity…
Kate Aanenson: Right, so someone would not be, they would not be non-conforming by creating
this zoning district.
Mayor Furlong: By remaining, okay.
Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. And if we had a mix between the two, we felt like this type of
use is, again going through, if you remember we had SRF help us with this land use study and
we felt that there was enough complimentary. The one caveat we did have, we talked about the
improvements potentially to Powers Boulevard and traffic so those are some of the decisions as
we make, if a use went in, we would look at how’s the traffic functioning on Powers Boulevard
coming out at that intersection and how those, so those are some of the things we put in place in
looking at the zoning district. Whether or not that use fit in there and traffic demands and those
sort of things so we look at those on a case by case basis as they would ask for that zone change,
but it would be, and that’s a legal threshold they have to meet. It would be consistent with the
comprehensive plan if they did want to come in. They’d still have to meet all the other
thresholds.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you.
Kate Aanenson: Okay. Then the regional commercial. That was the one that we did spend a
little bit more time on, and that would be the area that would be, we guided this one also dual
guided. Either could be an office park or it could be a regional commercial so this is a zoning
district we need to create for the regional commercial. Having said that, if someone was to come
in and do an office park zoning, we have all of those standards in place. They could come in
today and not have to ask for the PUD. Or the regional commercial zoning which we’re going to
make a PUD. So there isn’t a process to go through right now to get entitlement on a piece of
property that would be consistent with the comprehensive plan. They could come in with an
office park on that and proceed. The reason we put the regional commercial zoning district
together is we want to see this in a more careful planned environment and that being that we
want to again set some minimum acreage, and some mix of uses. This is another zoning
ordinance that we spent a lot of time in workshop and looking at how that would work regarding
three separate property owners working together to get the infrastructure of Bluff Creek
Boulevard going through, access points and that sort of thing so with that we put together a
28
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
concept plan that would, these are also some of the items. Sorry I’m jumping around a little bit
here, that we talked about with the open houses and we got feedback during the comprehensive
plan. If we were to do a regional lifestyle center. Again we don’t know where that market is
today but if we were to do one, it would be different than downtown in the fact that we just
talked about, the big box would still drive some of the traffic to downtown. Maybe not daily
needs but more frequent. This is going to service a larger trade area. Much larger trade area and
it might not be a, kind of less frequent, kind of more of the comparison shopping. So the driving
force behind that would be the entertainment. The larger department stores providing the
opportunity or the platform for some of the specialty retail to go in. So could that also be part of
a mixed use, which would also have office and residential? Yes but we want to be careful that if
we’re doing retail, that it really is a planned center and that it makes sense and so that’s why we,
in working with the city attorney, put together the PUD zoning district which again is the
framework for this to happen. So in order to come in and get the regional lifestyle center zoning,
we’re going to propose that you actually have to go through this PUD process. Again it’s the
framework. There were some questions that were raised by the developer regarding, I mean
excuse me, the two underlying property owners regarding, and that’s in a letter that was attached
in your packet, and that was regarding the height and setbacks. I think there was some
inconsistencies and we did respond to that building setbacks and transitional uses. There was
also a concern about residential going first or second. We’re really careful about letting
residential go in first without a planned process because we have plenty of opportunities in this
city to do residential development. Again I think a lot of the feedback that we got from maybe
when the collective, the City Council and the Planning Commission, the staff, during that open
house process and the comprehensive plan is that this is a unique opportunity, something
different. Taking the opportunity of the infrastructure and investment that’s been made in that
area with 212 to create something highly visible. One of the issues that the underlying property
also brought up was height and there was some discussion again through that process of not
going higher than 4 feet. That’s not to say when we come in through the PUD process that, 4
stories I’m sorry. Not 4 feet. Four stories that if something was unique that we wanted to see
and it seemed to fit in well and met some of the other desired goals, that doesn’t mean that we
can’t amend that PUD, as we’ve done in other unique PUD’s to say, you know we look at what’s
the intent. What are we preserving? How are we achieving that, that we could look at that and
change that as that project came in. But again this provides kind of that, just the general
framework for that process to take place. So again the PUD is a guidance. It’s the best, for
information we have today based on what we know from the retail study, some of the desires.
Some of the things that we’re looking at, so it provides those controls and standards. We
establish some setbacks. Some heights. Orientation of buildings. And we put together a process
and really that’s our intent is to establish that process. Similar to what we did on Villages on the
Pond. That’s a PUD. We’ve tweaked it over time if things, uses that have wanted to go in there
that we hadn’t thought of. We made modifications to that so it’s actually a dynamic document
too but really establishes that guidance for development is what the goal of this is, and I think it
makes a lot of sense from the planner staff side. So this is just an illustrative drawing. This in
no way represents any development on the property but kind of what we did is we looked at what
if we did retail office, so this would be a true mix of, and of development. So if you put
residential up against the residential, which is the, The Preserve property. What would be some
of those setbacks? If you had office up against Lyman or the commercial along the Powers
Boulevard/212 exposure, how could it look? Again the goal is not to do any one of those
29
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
individually but to look at it as a whole as they put together that process. We did put a minimum
acreage for any one development to go, so they don’t have to be dependent on each other and
that would be that 30 acre minimum for a PUD. And again you can decide that because it is dual
guided. If it doesn’t meet what you believe is the intent criteria of that, then you again under
your discretion could say you don’t want to approve that process. So we think, while the
Planning Commission did vote on. I’ll circle back to some of their comments and I think they
felt like some of the flexibility that the property owners wanted was too flexible. They liked the
framework that we established and I think we do have a history that’s worked well for us with
the Villages on the Pond project was really a horizontal vertical mix which was very, very
different and the shared parking so I think we know how to do all that and I think this framework
is going to work really well for us and somewhere along the line there needs to be the trust factor
that none of us know what’s going to happen in the future and we have to be respond, as we have
in any other project and look at. See how it makes sense. How’s it fit into our development
plans and represent the property and access and transportation and all those sort of things so I
think this PUD that we’re proposing is well founded and I think the Planning Commission
concurred by their vote of 6-0 with that, and we did address a couple of the questions that the
property owners had. So with that, I think I just had a couple other illustratives that this is
Centennial Lakes. It could be something like that. Again looking at that through the whole
process, what we saw is the architecture. The entrance way. Again that’s some of the things
what we wanted with the PUD and that was one of the things the residents said they want it to
stand out. Something unique. Sense of gathering. A nice sense of place. Again the road and
some of that development patterns itself. Again we don’t know when the market’s going to
come back to support that. Whether it be this or an office park. But with that the Planning
Commission and the staff is recommending, also the adoption of the regional commercial zoning
district and with that I’d be happy to answer any questions you have on that one.
Mayor Furlong: Any questions on the regional lifestyle district? As I understand then, in typical
zoning districts we’ll have specifics sort of guidelines or standards required for under our
ordinance for someone to develop that zoning district. Here with a, the objective is to call it, it’s
a PUD zoning district. Now we have specific guidelines within a PUD but the whole purpose of
a PUD is the flexibility within it.
Kate Aanenson: Correct.
Mayor Furlong: The opportunity for movement of, nothing is as set.
Kate Aanenson: Correct. Right, if you look at our current PUD we have a PUD set up for low
density which we moved away from, but we do have PUD for that. A lot of the PUD that we’re
doing now is for more of the medium density and we also have a PUD for industrial park where
we shared hard cover. Maybe we know of one user who’s going to use a lot, for example like the
National Weather Service. They’ve got a lot of green space so some of the other businesses out
there are able to combine on that. That’s kind of where we came up with the banking for some
of these residentials so we have a lot in the middle that everybody can kind of benefit from. But
this is the same sort of thing. We put together that process. It doesn’t have all the performance
standards in it but it sets together that framework.
30
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Thank you. Any other questions? Mr. McDonald.
Councilman McDonald: Yeah, I guess as I was reading through this and I read what the
commissioners had said and the process. I guess what I struggled with is, I understand what the
owner wants and I understand where the Planning Commission was coming from. Right now we
have nothing. It’s kind of a blank slate and so at this point by putting in these minimums, you
know I understand the owner wants flexibility and I think the comments were made that the PUD
would give them that but again we need something I think first of all to look at and that maybe is
what’s causing the problem. And I was a little confused in reading through that too but I think
that the PUD does give the flexibility. I asked the question of the city manager. What if
Centennial Lakes was to come here, could we build it? And the answer comes back well, what
we’d do is look at it. You know…work here. Is it something we want to bring in and if it is, we
could build it on this lot because of the PUD so that says we have flexibility as to what we’re
willing to put in there. I mean I read through it and I got very confused by the whole discussion
and I understand what the owner wants and I understand what the City’s trying to do. I think that
actually we’re at parallel, or we’re complimentary purposes here, that we are trying to achieve
the same thing. But it was confusing and I guess are my comments correct Kate from all this that
you know, if you were to bring in a Centennial Lakes type project, because it’s got a higher than
a 40 story building as part of that, if that would fit we could look at something such as that and
probably find a way to.
Kate Aanenson: We can always look at something. We make a recommendation and then we
look at the performance standards. Can it meet the parking threshold? Can it meet the storm
water? We look at all those performance standards and that’s what we’d have to look at. Look
at the marketing study. Who’s it servicing? What kind of jobs? Those are things we look at on
every project. Right now because we have the zoning in place, we don’t have any, the zoning
ordinance. After you adopt your comprehensive plan you have to adopt the zoning ordinance, so
what this does is put that in place, and we have the two guidings. If it doesn’t meet those, then
you can say does it meet the standard and you wouldn’t rezone it to that. Again the other thing
we wanted to make sure was clear was what that mix is going to be. That we don’t want
somebody to come in and say it’s a lifestyle center with all residential. That wasn’t our goal.
Councilman McDonald: Right.
Kate Aanenson: Because we want to get some framework, and part of it is for a developer that’s
looking at this piece of property, they wanted to have indication as to what’s the City’s vision, so
this is kind of the beginning of our vision statement and it’s going to be dynamic, just like
Villages on the Pond was. Things we hadn’t even thought of maybe 3, 4, 5 years down the road
that would allow us to amend this to provide that mechanism.
Councilman McDonald: Okay and so as a city we have greater flexibility within a PUD to make
changes and accommodate things.
Kate Aanenson: I’ll let the city attorney speak. I think he’d like to say something.
31
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
Roger Knutson: I was just going to, I couldn’t resist commenting on Centennial Lakes.
Centennial Lakes came in, this project. They wrote an ordinance around it. You don’t have an
ordinance in place for something like Centennial Lakes that fits all the requirements. When you
have a truly unique project that is that massive in scale, you’re going to need some ordinance
tweaks probably. If you don’t you’re just darn lucky.
Kate Aanenson: Right.
Todd Gerhardt: And it is an upgrade from the gravel pit that was there.
Kate Aanenson: Yeah. So I think what we’re saying is that this communicates to anybody
looking at the property what our vision is to be clear, and then also to say that you know we
always want to listen to somebody that has an interesting proposal. We want to listen to that and
see how it fits within our framework, and I think we have a pretty good understanding of what
the residents’ expectations are and so.
Councilman McDonald: Yeah, that is a problem because you do have to fit it into a residential
boundaries.
Kate Aanenson: Yeah, and some of those that came out, and how do we treat our edges and how
do we treat the existing neighborhoods so we do that with every project. We make it work and
we make it balance and we did with Villages and we’re good at that.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. I know the property owners are here tonight and they asked opportunity
to make some public comments so Mr. Dorsey and Mr. Fox if one or both of you’d like to come
up.
Jeff Fox: Good evening Mayor, council members and staff. My name is Jeff Fox, one of the
landowners.
Mayor Furlong: Good evening.
Jeff Fox: Basically the ordinance drafted and put together is well done. I want to compliment
you on that to begin with. We talk about flexibility. My concern I guess is the height issue. I
mean I look at the McComb’s study that was done for the city. We talked about hotel and there
are hotels under 4 stories but I think most of them exceed the 4 story issue to begin with. And
when you talk about the project Village on the Ponds was done by a local developer. I think a
project we’re talking about here is potentially going to be an outside developer coming into this
market here because we’re going to look at trying to bring some big boxes in because that’s what
makes this development work in the long run. And we’re just I guess looking at the thought of
some verbiage in there so they know that to begin with. You know this is a tough economy. We
all know that. I don’t know how much you guys follow what’s going on with the regional malls
out there but there are a lot of these malls in bankruptcy or tied to developers that are in
bankruptcy that they can buy these for factions of what new development can be so they’re going
to review this stuff and take time to look, probably talk with staff and…because I know Kate has
been real pro oriented to the thought of a regional mall, particularly here and so we’re just
32
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
looking at some thought of that there could be some verbiage in there talking about, if nothing
else is tied to that height point because I think that’s going to be a concern. We’re ones that want
to see vertical. Vertical parking to begin with. Actually we want to stay the landowners. One
of the reasons we want to stay landowners is because we want to see a premiere project here.
We’re not looking for the top dollar. We want to see something that’s going to work here.
We’ve been working with one developer before and didn’t work out but we didn’t really see eye
to eye as far as what they were looking at trying to do versus what we want to see happen here so
we’re excited about the opportunity. I think it’s going to come to fruition but I think it’s going to
be a few years out to begin with so I guess I’d just like to look at the verbiage on that. To have
some thought there. Even though PUD does allow that. Yeah it does but you know I’d like to
just see something with the height verbiage with that.
Kate Aanenson: If I could just comment. In clarification on what we looked at for the height
was the commercial was 2 stories. Again this was some of the feedback. If you look at our little
timeline here. We do have 4 stories in the city, but that’s the tallest we have so that was I think
tougher for some people to kind of, that were moving that way. We may go taller but the
commercial was 2 stories. Services, 2 stories if you had something on top. This is what was in
the PUD and then the office was 5 stories and the residential was 5 stories. Just so we’re clear
with that.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Mr. Dorsey.
Rick Dorsey: My name is Rick Dorsey. I’m also a property owner in the regional center,
commercial center guided property. I concur with Jeff and his family as far as concern that we
have there. Again the only thing we’re suggesting is a competitive marketplace. If you put
something out there saying we want to compete versus having to have them come and ask and
try to change an ordinance. That takes time. Time is money to developers. If we just put
something in there to the effect saying that the City Council has a discretion to look at elevations
greater than that’s showing here. Something as simple as that is something that I think would,
for anybody we talked to we can say that it’s an open minded city. Bring something. Put it in
front of them. Let them look at it. You still have discretion to deny it. It’s not committing you
to anything other than the opportunity to bring something in. Again with the standpoint it’s a
regional type development. If you go around the Twin Cities and you look at all the regional
type developments and what institutional investors are building, they generally have one building
that is greater than 5 stories. It’s just a fact. If you drive around, I put in a letter we submitted
some examples of ones that are around that that’s the case. It’s for us it’s not a make or break
thing. We can leave it the way it is but it will enhance the opportunity is what our point is. We
don’t have a plan. We’re not trying to sell you something. It’s just to go into the marketplace
and try and put us a step above everybody else if we can. If it’s still something that would be
acceptable within the community. The second point that I have a little bit of concern with deals
with the timing issue that was in Section 20-502(a)(3) dealing with the residential element.
There’s a limitation of 20% of the development can be… It’s fine. I don’t have a problem with
it. I’m concerned with the inconsistency with other ordinances the city has. There’s no other
ordinance that I’m aware of that puts a timeframe in to it saying you can build one part of
something and not another, so that’s something new and different. From my standpoint I have
two property lines that are adjacent to residential property. It seems to me that with the intent
33
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
that there be residential development there, that if somebody comes in with again something
that’s of interest to the city, we should look at it. If it can be part of a vision of the whole
development, it makes sense, we should look at it and not say we don’t want to talk to you until
after the retail’s under construction. The likelihood today of the same developer in the past you
might have one developer doing the whole thing. That’s probably not going to be the case as
you go forward. Money is much harder to come by and they’re going to focus on their core
confidences so if you’re in the retail area you’re going to build the retail portion of it. If you’re
not in the retail area and building residential, you’re apt to go and find somebody else to do the
residential. So it’s you know there’s going to be a little bit of a puzzle here to put together to do
what we think is a good project and what we think the city will think is a good project and the
community would find exceptional. So you know we’re just again looking for flexibility from
the standpoint of timing the retail portion maybe a little bit further out. I have a little area that
residential could be a part of to some interest to somebody sooner than later and I’d like to at
least make sure that those opportunities are available and just not constricted. The other
standpoint from the city standpoint is, why take and push something out if it could fit in and
forego the tax revenue that could come into the city. So it’s something else to consider. Any
questions?
Mayor Furlong: Questions or thoughts? Councilman McDonald.
Councilman McDonald: Yeah. I’ve got a question because this is where I’m getting real
confused is this issue about flexibility. Why do you think the City having the right you know to
do the PUD does not give the kind of flexibility that you’re looking for? That’s my confusion
because I can understand about the heights and everything and I understand why we need to put
a baseline something in, but we do say that we’re going to consider a PUD which does say it’s
got to come back before the council, planning commission. It’s got to be approved. We have the
flexibility.
Rick Dorsey: I think it’s making a statement on the part of the city. It’s just saying that we are
open to look at it versus here’s some guidelines and you go out in the peripheral parts of
communities, and you don’t see any taller buildings. There’s perhaps resistance there to looking
at something. It’s just to open the door. I mean that’s all we’re suggesting. If you don’t want to
do it, I guess that’s up to you. You know if it says that and if we’re saying the same thing, it’s
redundant. I guess it doesn’t really matter, but it’s just again from a standpoint of marketing,
trying to encourage people to come in and talk and put something together, that they will do that.
Kate Aanenson: Can I just make a comment on that? Not to…what you said.
Mayor Furlong: Ms. Aanenson.
Kate Aanenson: You know we never even contemplated a regional lifestyle center 3-4 years
ago. That kind of came up right at the comp plan so I think we’ve shown a lot of movement to
say while our dreams are bigger than we thought of so I think we still have that in place.
Whether or not we say we may consider, come meet with us. You’d have to do that anyways
and because you have the authority to change the code so I think it’s implied that we’re willing
to do that. I think the problem with the residential piece is we have a lot of interest in some,
34
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
maybe some master plan, senior communities. Some significant sized senior communities and I
think you just want to be really careful that we have this unique opportunity to do something
very different on this property that we don’t want to forego that by getting a residential in there
and then they become the roadblock for some other development also. Which we are also
experienced in that sort of thing too. We have a lot of experience with multiple builders on a
project. Villages on the Pond. Presbyterian Homes. St. Hubert’s. All different developers. All
different needs and I think we’re pretty skilled at working through that process. All those issues
that would go into place on that and I’m confident we’d take that same skill set and apply it here
and we want to listen and, I don’t think any of us can think of the possibilities, I mean can think
far enough that all the possibilities that have happened here.
Rick Dorsey: That’s the whole thing is planning. You have to plan for the unknown and if this
goes further than expected, for my perspective there is a large structure on my property. At some
point something would have to be done with it. You know I’m holding onto it now with the
intent of the big picture and I’d like to continue to try and do that and to tie that into a part of a
bigger development that makes sense and can fit in is what our goal and objective is. The other
alternative is, when the property comes out of the ag preserve and be it then or a year or two after
that and things are still slow, I have to look at selling it perhaps and splitting it off. Now you
have another party involved. You have different interests involved and we’re trying to just avoid
that and when that party could perhaps be a developer who would utilize the structure that’s there
as something bigger. Small condominium project perhaps attached to that structure. Something
to that effect. Would it make sense you know, we’re just looking at it to look at it to be able to
continue to wait to get the right project for it.
Mayor Furlong: Okay.
Kate Aanenson: And I’m just saying we’re projecting a lot down there because that’s the access
coming off of Lyman. There’s just a lot of other complications in that whole issue too, yeah.
Rick Dorsey: What I’m just saying the other, an option is that I have to split it off and sell it to
somebody as a residential home and I don’t want to do that.
Kate Aanenson: Right, because that would screw up the development of the entire piece.
Rick Dorsey: Correct. And that’s why.
Kate Aanenson: Well that’s something you have to consider…
Rick Dorsey: And that’s why I’m asking for some language just to say the timing issue that if
the retail is not there yet that we would at least look at residential and not have to wait til the
retail plan is fully in place or under construction. Okay?
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Alright, very good. Thank you. Any other questions for staff at this
point? Otherwise thoughts and comments on either the community commercial or the regional
commercial. Councilman Litsey.
35
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
Councilman Litsey: I think it makes sense. I’m not sure adding that language is that much of a
benefit. I mean I think that’s more in the marketing of the property. You can showcase that and
put them in contact with Kate or whatever if they need validation of that but I like it the way it is
personally. I think it makes sense. I think it’s going to open up some opportunities, exciting
opportunities for the city perhaps.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Thank you. Councilwoman Ernst.
Councilwoman Ernst: I think it allows us more flexibility and allows more opportunities in the
community and I think of course taking Mr. Fox and Mr. Dorsey’s comments into consideration,
but I mean really I have no problem supporting this motion.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Councilwoman Tjornhom.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Um yeah, I think this motion is a long time coming. There’s been
conversations and meetings for years regarding this motion and I think it’s a step in the right
direction and shows that we are optimistic about our future in town and the possibilities that can
and will come when that time allows so I too will be able to support this motion.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Mr. McDonald. Thoughts. Comments.
Councilman McDonald: Well I’m also concerned about the flexibility because you know I do
want to see us get a good project in there. One that’s going to benefit the community from all
sides but what I wrestle with is, I’ve been involved in a number of projects that the City’s gotten
into and we’ve always shown a lot of flexibility. I mean people have come to us with a lot of
different things and I’ve seen us work with people to make something happen. I think all we can
do as a city is we provide a vision that says we want to see something like this at this area and
yeah, maybe that’s not exactly it and someone that’s a little brighter in those areas will come in
and sell us on something. Part of this, it is going to be a sales job. Whoever wants to develop
this property is going to have to come in and woo us. Let’s face it, that’s the way it is because
there’s going to have to be some give and take. That’s a given. I think that at least as a baseline,
that should be enough to get someone interested in this property. You know it does have some
unique problems and it does have some great problems so I think that we’re doing everything we
can as a city to help you market the property and we have stated in both Planning Commission
and here at the council that we’re open to a lot of different suggestions. I think there are benefits
to vertical integration of property but yeah, it’s got to be right. I mean there is a reason why you
don’t see tall buildings in this area just because of the nature of the properties that are here but
that doesn’t mean that we wouldn’t consider it. So I think the flexibility is there. Yeah, without
something to look at, you’re not going to get exactly what it is you’re wanting because maybe we
don’t share your vision and you don’t share our’s but I think we’re both on the same track as to
what it is that we want to do and I think it’s here to provide you the tools you need to go out and
market the property so I could support the way it is also.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. And my thoughts are going to be similar. On the community
commercial, certainly I think that’s a, came out of the comprehensive planning process that we
just went through. It’s something that was identified by our residents as another need in terms of
36
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
business and shopping opportunities, as was the regional commercial situation. Regional center
and so I think both of those are, are an expansion of the city’s long term vision in terms of
property development. Obviously the development that’s occurred historically will occur going
forward. There’s always been a partnership and a cooperation between the property owners and
the developers and the city and I see that continuing, and it doesn’t necessarily mean that
everybody gets everything that they want but usually I think history has shown that everybody
working together does result in some pretty good stuff and so that’s my technical term Kate on
all the developments you’ve worked on is good stuff. The results speak for themselves and I
think I understand the request from property owners for some added language. I mean there’s
always the City Council to the Planning Commission and staff always have the opportunity to be
flexible going forward and a lot of it’s going to be dependent on what’s being asked at the time
so. We’re in different times here from an economic development. I think we all realize that and
so I think there will be some flexibility there in recognition of that but the, what’s being
proposed by staff and recommended by the Planning Commission I think makes a lot of sense to
move forward at this time and to create the opportunities that some day we all know will be there
so I’m comfortable going forward. Are there any other comments on this? If not is there a
motion to approve the recommended changes to the ordinance.
Councilwoman Ernst: I’ll make a motion.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you.
Councilwoman Ernst: Make a motion that we adopt the ordinances amending the Chanhassen
City Code creating a Community Commercial Zoning District and Planned Unit Development
Standards for Regional/Lifestyle Center Commercial Districts.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Is there a second?
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Second.
Mayor Furlong: Made and seconded. Any further discussion?
Councilwoman Ernst moved, Councilwoman Tjornhom seconded that the City Council
adopt the ordinances amending the Chanhassen City Code creating a Community
Commercial Zoning District and Planned Unit Development Standards for
Regional/Lifestyle Center Commercial Districts. All voted in favor and the motion carried
unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Appreciate all the hard work. Looking at the time, and I apologize
to everybody that’s been sitting through this meeting but I’d like to ask everybody to allow us to
take about a 5 minute recess just so we can stand up and stretch our legs. I would like to limit it
to 5 minutes though. We’ve got applicants here that have been waiting and I’d like to get to
them as soon as we can. So let’s come back at the call of the Chair but no more than 5 minutes
everyone. Thank you.
37
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
TH
CHANHASSEN TRANSIT STATION, 500 WEST 78 STREET:
A. PUBLIC HEARING ON AUTHORIZING PREPARATION OF PLANS AND
SPECIFICATIONS.
B. APPROVAL OF SITE PLAN WITH VARIANCES AND PRELIMINARY PLAT.
C. APPROVAL OF PURCHASE AGREEMENT WITH BLOOMBERG
COMPANIES; COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH SOUTHWEST TRANSIT;
REDEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH BLOOMBERG COMPANIES;
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT WITH BLOOMBERG COMPANIES;
RESOLUTION WAIVING APPROVAL BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION
AND ACCEPTING THE DEED FROM THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY; RELOCATION AGREEMENT WITH EXCELSIOR
ENTERTAINMENT, LLC.
Paul Oehme: Thank you Mayor, City Council members. We’ll start off tonight with the public
rd
improvements portion of the project. As you may recall on March 23 of this year the council
received a feasibility study for this project and reviewed the scope of the project as well. But
since then the changes to the feasibility study were necessary as a result of continued
coordination with Southwest Transit and Bloomberg Companies as the plans for this
development have taken place. Attached to this background is the feasibility study amendment
and identifies the details for the project as well. So tonight staff would like to review this
feasibility study and amendments that go along with it and hold a public hearing. Since a large
portion of the improvements are proposed to be assessed back to the benefitting property owners
so with that I’d like to invite Jon Horn with Kimley-Horn Associates who has drafted the
feasibility study to give a brief summary of the public improvement project and the associated
plans for it.
Mayor Furlong: Very good, thank you. Good evening.
Jon Horn: Good evening Mayor, members of City Council. As Mr. Oehme mentioned my name
is Jon Horn from Kimley-Horn and Associates and we’ve been working with city staff as well as
the other project partners, Southwest Transit and Bloomberg Companies on the downtown transit
station improvement project, specifically the public improvements that are required for the
downtown transit station. Wanted to briefly tonight just kind of run through the project for you.
Give you a little more information on the project background with costs and the financing plan.
The public improvements are the site improvements necessary to support the development of a
420 vehicle parking ramp and transit station to be built by Southwest Transit. The site is located
th
south of the Chanhassen Dinner Theater, just west of West 78 Street. The project has required
significant coordination with Southwest Transit in terms of trying to make sure that the public
infrastructure matched in with the ramp improvements themselves. There’s a number of land
acquisition pieces that I’ll touch briefly on, and then the project does require agreements with
both Southwest and Bloomberg and those are included later on in your agenda tonight. In terms
of the project location, the project is again just south of the Chanhassen Dinner Theater. Just
th
west of West 78 Street. There are city improvements as well as private improvements that are
being constructed as a part of this project. The public or the city improvements include the
demolition of an existing scene shop in the area that’s being used by the Dinner Theater. Some
38
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
grading and site preparation work. Relocation of the existing sanitary sewer and watermain in
the project area, and some street and storm drainage improvements as necessary to provide
access into the ramp facility. The portions of the project that Southwest are building is the ramp
itself. They will build a parking ramp. There are some parking lot modifications and
connections to public street improvements that Southwest will be doing, as well as some private
utility relocation. The project is proposed to be phased really for coordination purposes. The
first phase is a city contract. This will be a project that the city will let and includes the
demolition of the scene shop. It includes the utility relocation. Some site grading and site
improvements basically to prepare the site for the construction of the parking ramp. Once that’s
complete the parking lot will come in and build all the remaining improvements. There are a
portion of the public improvements that will be built as a part of that parking ramp project
primarily for coordination purposes so that city street and city storm sewer and sidewalks will be
built as a part of the parking ramp construction project. Land acquisition, the current project, the
project will be built on land currently owned by Bloomberg Companies. As a part of this project
there’s a number of land acquisition things that will happen. The City will acquire land as
necessary for the existing depot station that’s in the area, as well as the public street right-of-way
necessary to build the improvements. In addition there’s acquisition and a relocation cost for
that Dinner Theater scene shop that I mentioned. There’s a temporary construction easement
necessary to build all the improvements and then Southwest will be acquiring the property for
the parking ramp directly from the Bloomberg Companies. This exhibit shows the land
acquisition. In purple you can kind of see the purple corridor is the city right-of-way that the city
will be acquiring. The triangular piece just south of that purple right-of-way is the land that
Chanhassen will be acquiring for the depot station and Chanhassen also owns a small chunk of
th
property and existing monument is just west of West 78 Street, north of the right-of-way. The
yellow parcel is the parcel Southwest will be acquiring with the construction of the parking ramp
itself. There’s also a small utility easement, roadway easement just to the west of the roadway
right-of-way that Chanhassen will also be acquiring as a part of some of the improvements that
are included as part of the project. So that’s various, all the various land acquisition things that
are happening as a part of the project. There’s been a plat that’s been prepared to basically
facilitate all these land transfers. Watermain and sanitary sewer, I mentioned those are public
improvements that Chanhassen will be funding. There’s currently watermain and sanitary sewer
that runs right through the footprint of the existing ramp. As a part of this project we’ll be
shifting those utilities south of the ramp to prepare the ramp site for the rail construction. Street
and storm sewer. Everything’s shown in yellow and red on this exhibit. As a part of the public
improvements Chanhassen will be constructing a street that provides access to the ramp as well
as a continuous sidewalk along the north side of the street system that can provide a connection
between the existing pedestrian facilities in the area. In terms of estimated cost, total project cost
is a little over $1.8 million dollars, of which about 974 is for the various improvement costs and
about $827,000 is associated with all the various right-of-way pieces. As you can see on the
slide there’s a couple of components that are the City’s responsibility. The City will be paying
the cost for the sanitary sewer and watermain relocation, and the acquisition of the land parcels
that are necessary for the roadway as well as for the depot station site. The financing plan is
really a partnership project. Southwest Transit’s paying for part of the project as well as
Bloomberg and then the City of Chanhassen’s got a component. The agreements between
Southwest and Bloomberg is that Southwest would pay for 49% of the proposed improvements
that would be assessed. Bloomberg will pay 51% and the City’s paying for the sanitary sewer
39
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
and watermain as well as the land acquisition parcels that I mentioned. Chanhassen’s total
contribution is a little over $307,000 of which a portion would come from the sanitary sewer
utility fund, a portion from the water utility fund and a portion from the revolving assessment
fund. In terms of the portion that says Southwest and Bloomberg are paying for, there are a
number of agreements that have been established, prepared to identify that and again those are
included later on in your agenda but I just wanted to mention them as a part of this presentation.
In terms of the project schedule, Mr. Oehme mentioned that there was previously a feasibility
th
report that was done and received by the council back in March. On November 9 council
received an amendment basically which was necessary as a result of continuing coordination
with the project partners. Tonight’s the public hearing. If the council elects to proceed this
evening, the project will continue on to the completion of final plans and specifications with the
intention that those plans and specs would be done in January and be brought back to the council
th
on January 11 for review and approval. Assuming that happens at that time, we then go
through the bidding process and again the Chanhassen, the Chanhassen piece, Chanhassen would
bid the utility relocations and some of the site prep as a part of the city, as a city project. The
roadway and storm sewer work would be included as a part of the project that Southwest Transit
would build but again the bidding process would be very concurrent. The site improvements that
Chanhassen, the City of Chanhassen would build would be done early in 2010. Between April
and June which would allow the ramp construction improvements to occur after that. Likely
starting in late June or early July and continuing on til August of 2011. That’s just a brief
overview. With that I guess I’d be open to any questions or comments from the council.
Mayor Furlong: Any questions for Mr. Horn? At this point. Okay. Councilwoman Tjornhom,
nothing? Okay. Very good. We may have some in the future. Let’s go, I know we have
representatives from Southwest Transit here, the applicant. We’d like to, anything you’d like to
present at this time?
Todd Gerhardt: Len had a power point to show some of the demands for ridership at this point.
Why this project.
Mayor Furlong: Little bit about the project. Thank you. Good evening.
Len Simich: Good evening Mayor and members of the council. My name is Len Simich. I’m
CEO of Southwest Transit. I’m here with members of our team. If you have any specific
questions related to the site itself or the ramp or station that we will hopefully be starting
construction on sometime in early 2010. Prior to the meeting I was informed that there was a
few questions related to the project in terms of what is the future or anticipated use at this site.
How we generated that information and so forth so I just wanted to kind of walk you through a
little bit of that information. How do I control this? Okay, just a little bit of background. This
project actually began for us back in 2005. We submitted for a federal grant, which we did
receive. At that time the total was a request for federal dollars of $5.5 million and $1.3 would be
coming through the State that we would access through the Metropolitan Council. This project
did rank number 11 out of 21 applicants that year. It was the final project that was selected for
funding. In terms of how it was selected, there were a number of factors. One included the
growth of our system. The park and ride usage that we were experiencing. The projected
population increases for this area. Corridor congestion and then there was a whole 5 step
40
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
modeling process that the Metropolitan Council looked at as well as a number of other studies
that really kind of got to this specific use, and I’ll talk about each real briefly. In terms of the
system growth, what you can see here is the entire metropolitan region from 2003 actually up
through 2007. As you can see most of the transit systems across the metro area did see some
significant growth during that time. None quite the same extent as Southwest Transit. We were
the fastest growing system, not only here in the metro area but in the entire state. Here’s a shot
of the capacity. The usage. I’ll draw your attention to the third column. That really looks at, or
the fourth column. The number of stalls that are, were used at the time versus the number that
we had in our system. Again Southwest Transit had the highest utilization at 99%. That has
improved in terms of we have additional stalls now since the construction of the Southwest
Village as well as the East Creek Station in Chaska, but this is a snapshot back in ’07 and in ’05
when the application was put in, it was looking pretty much the same. You’ve probably seen
these. I’m not going to go through these. This came through the County but you can see that
this county is growing and will continue to grow out through 2030. The demand for our services
will be growing along with it. This is just a map again, this is a 2008 but as you can image back
prior to even the 212 improvements the miles of congested freeway corridors that we travel on a
daily was pretty severe so again that helped in terms of our overall application of why this
project was funded over others. The five step model that I talked about, I won’t go through all
the various factors that they look at, but this is very specific to this site. The Metropolitan
Council through their modeling had a demand estimation of 450 by 2010. All the way up to 750,
and this is in terms of stalls, by 2030. The County, Carver County and Southwest Transit
partnered with the IBI Group, which is a national consulting firm to kind of look at transit
ridership in our whole service area. Again from this specific site these were the numbers that
they had come up with in terms of what they anticipated our demand would be all the way up
through 2020. Both if we were putting in additional improvements and like when we talk about
improvements really frequency of service to actually leaving it as it was back in ’06 so you can
kind of see some of the demand estimations that were driven at that time. And this is another
one that we kind of look at through our park and ride study that we had done. We really look at
the entire corridor. The number of the workers commuting to downtown Minneapolis because
again that’s pretty much our bread and butter in terms of our system. And then looking at
estimated transit users and park and ride users. I should mention this chart doesn’t show but low
is about 15% of all those commuters using transit to a high of 40. How we got to that, right now
in the Minneapolis area about 40% of the workers access their jobs daily using public transit.
We feel just that the make-up of our area and the type of jobs we probably would never read to
that 40 but the medium is a 30 so it kind of gives you an example from a low of 15 to a medium
of 30 there. So what’s changed since the application? Well, again we have, like all transit
systems across the country for the most part, have seen less people using our system this year.
Less people working. Less people using the bus. For systems like Southwest that really rely on
that work force commuter, we’ve been hit pretty hard so we are down right now 10 to 12 percent
over what has been consistently double digit increase growth up to this point. The fuel prices
have stabilized. I think we’re all happy about that because we buy fuel but it does drive less
people to the bus and more to their automobiles when the fuel prices are down or stabilized. The
level of freeway congestion has improved. Again 212 has done a lot for us. Again unfortunately
less people working. Less people driving so I think the peak hour commute has been better for
many folks. Parking has become more available and affordable in the downtown core. Not that
a lot of additional lots have been built but again, less people working has opened up those
41
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
additional stalls. Again driving some people more to using their automobile than using public
transit. Our funding levels, and this is something I think the City Council should take notice of.
Our funding levels have reduced. The MVST base, the motor vehicle sales tax is the primary
source of funding outside of the fare box that we use to fund all of our services. Again less
people buying cars. Less money coming into the system. But there’s also some other things that
have happened and some of the other fundings that’s controlled by the Metropolitan Council.
They have pretty much shut off the spigot to us and that’s the MVST. We call it discretioning,
discretionary or I should say they call it discretionary. This is what transpired a few years ago
when there was a Constitutional amendment putting more money into transit. They’re holding
us pretty much to our base right now. We have in the past received additional dollars. We are
hopeful we’re going to receive some of those dollars in the future but they’re becoming harder
and harder to access. Same thing with some of the State supplemental funding. Some of the
federal formula funding. Even homeland security funding has been cut off from our use so this
is something that we’re very concerned about as we move into the future. As I mentioned our
ridership did drop for the first time since 1996. This kind of gives you an indication. The last
line there is where we think we’re going to come in at the year’s end. The one just before that is
the actual ridership that we’ve had through October. So why should we move forward with this
project now? I think you know like any of the, any transit, major transit project, we have to
really be looking out into the future. Not just the what has transpired here recently, but the three
big we have for our type of system. We have to be able to find stalls or park people that use our
services. We have to have capacity to carry the people and we have to have the operating fund.
Number 1 and number 2 take an incredible amount of time to line up. Not that number 3 doesn’t
but number 1 and 2. Right now if I’m going to build a ramp like this, we started in 2004-2005 so
again this isn’t the typical one but these things take time. Same thing with vehicles. Over a year
just to bring a vehicle into your system so it takes time and again we know this area is going to
rebound. It’s positioned very well for additional growth and additional use of our system.
Completion of this project will open up some different development opportunities for this area so
it’s not only just about us but it really helps complete I believe your downtown vision. We’re
relocating this site. I think we’ll position ourselves well for some potential future commuter rail
should that ever come about. Today we have a motivated partner. Again something we’ve been
working on a long time. This is 3 agencies coming together to make this thing happen. And
then last but not least the project execution deadline. It’s approaching quick. It’s going to be in
March so this could be the only chance that we have to access federal funds. Like I said the last
time we were on the bubble and to get dollars lined up for the project of this magnitude in the
future is going to be difficult so. With that I would be happy to answer any questions about what
I gave or if you have any specifics on the facility itself, members of my team are here.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Questions Mr. McDonald.
Councilman McDonald: Yeah I have one question. You talk about future you know use and
stalls and all those kind of things. We’re building this one now for about 425-50 stalls. Do you
have the ability in the future to add on vertically to this? Is it built so that it could support that
or?
Len Simich: This one is not. Again because of some of the height that it’s going to be at right
now, and how the rest of the downtown is going to build out. We also kind of look at again as
42
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
you’ve seen some of the demand estimations. We think more and more of our demand as we go
on will happen further to the west. And so our next steps we’ll be really looking at some
additional sites. You know it could be the Victoria’s, the Waconia’s. We’re already working on
one right now in the city of Carver so I think again we’ll have that 4 to 6 to 700 stall ramps in the
future. What we have in Eden Prairie at 1,000, it’s nice but it also causes a lot of headaches in
terms of additional traffic generation and congestion and things like that so our model is a little
more scaled down now.
Councilman McDonald: Okay.
Mayor Furlong: I guess to clarify though within the city of Chanhassen obviously there’s
Southwest Village down at 101 and 212 and that does have the ability to, or that was designed
for an additional level, was it not?
Len Simich: Good point. That is. That is designed to go up to 800. Right now from a transit
perspective we’re, we have about 550 at that location but we will be able to expand that to 800 in
the future.
Councilman McDonald: Okay.
Mayor Furlong: Other questions? Councilwoman Ernst.
Councilwoman Ernst: So Len I notice in 2030 the growth is expected to be 750. 750 cars?
Len Simich: That was one of the model growth, yes. That they said a demand at this location.
Now again there are other things that aren’t taken into consideration when those were put forth
such as some of the other locations that we are looking at expanding in because right now it’s not
just Chanhassen residents that will park at this location. You know you look at the travelsheds
and where people are coming and if we intercept them earlier they wouldn’t come to this location
so we feel 400 is, or 425 is adequate at this location.
Councilwoman Ernst: So today you talked about the 550 stalls right now being used at the
Southwest Village.
Len Simich: No, we are not. We are probably parking out about 275 a day at that location.
Councilwoman Ernst: But capacity is 800? Or roughly.
Len Simich: Could be. Right now we have about 550.
Councilwoman Ernst: So potentially some of the overflow from Chanhassen Station could go to
Southwest Village, right? I mean if we were up to that.
Len Simich: Yeah, and that’s kind of what the beauty of the timing of this as well was on the
slide but it gives us that advantage where we really, you know we will keep some services
running from here but again during construction and things like that, the level of service will not
43
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
be as great but we have capacity down at the Village so we hope people will go down to that
location at least temporarily until this one gets done.
Councilwoman Ernst: So that’s a segway into my next question then. Do you expect any
express service from Chanhassen to downtown or will it always be Chanhassen Station and
Southwest Village to downtown?
Len Simich: Good question. To make this really work you have to be direct, and we’ve had this
discussion at the commission which is going to cost additional dollars and that’s why that one
where I always said the money is very critical because if we have a number of stops what
happens is people are going to go to that last stop and we’re already at capacity as you’re well
aware of in Eden Prairie so we have to find a way to bring that direct service to this location.
And we’re looking at a lot of different service plans right now that would do that.
Councilwoman Ernst: Okay. And I, just a couple comments that I want to make. You know the
drivers, I just have to say this because the drivers continue to be courteous and respectful and I
think that is just a huge benefit for Southwest Transit. And I have to tell you I love the new quiet
zone policy for cell phones. It’s an awesome policy so. In fact I hear a lot of very positive
comments about that so that was a great program.
Mayor Furlong: Could you explain that or…for those who might not know.
Len Simich: Sure. This actually came about, through our ridership.
Mayor Furlong: Since you bring it up.
Len Simich: Yeah, it came about through our riders. We have a rider committee and it was a
problem and it’s not only in the transit industry. If you’re in a movie theater or wherever, the
cell phone use is a problem and we came up with a plan and we have signs on the bus and we
have a quiet zone. Now is the bus going to pull over and tell you to hang up the phone? No.
What it is, it’s almost self policing because you have the quiet zone. You have the signs up and
it’s really the customers kind of policing each other and it has worked. In the beginning we had
some people call in, they didn’t like the idea but I think overwhelmingly there’s a lot of support
for it. And we’ve gotten a lot of play. Local news media as well as nationally trying to figure
out what did you guys do here? How did this work and other transit programs across the country
are looking at implementing something very similar.
Councilwoman Ernst: Great, thank you.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Any other questions for Mr. Simich at this time? Councilwoman
Tjornhom.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Yeah, I think maybe it’s late and I’m getting, everything’s becoming
to starting to blur for me but at some point isn’t there an agreement that some overflow during
construction will go to Lake Ann? Or has that changed?
44
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
Len Simich: No. Well that’s another good question. No, this was part of the brokered deal.
The other parties that weren’t talked about, because I try to forget. We have the, and I shouldn’t,
yeah I know you’re on the TV. Your advisory committee to the TAB made it somewhat difficult
to get this project completed within the budget that was available and some of the other things
that were at play so we did strike a deal that should there come a time when we did need
additional capacity that we would have the ability of 100 stalls of use during the day at Lake
Ann. We also have property adjacent to Lake Ann so if it ever became an issue down the road
where you know we’re going into that and we don’t have other locations out west, that is
something that we could look at at that time but that was kind of the brokered deal that we have.
Mayor Furlong: Okay.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Is there a time constraint on that?
Len Simich: Yeah. Well we would be again using it, majority of our customers are coming back
anywhere from about 4:00 to 6:00 so again we understand that at certain times of year when the
baseball season and things like that, that 6:00 starts becoming on that envelope where we have
some issues so we’d have to work those type of arrangements out. Really try to get those people
that are either cutting their day short or not having that longer stay, use that location but I really
don’t think we’re going to ever even get to that to be real honest.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Okay.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Any other questions? Very good, thank you.
Len Simich: Thank you.
Mayor Furlong: Appreciate it. What I want to do is try to make sure that we get as much
information out here. I know we have a public hearing we have to go through and obviously
there’s public comment. We appreciate that too. I see we have representatives from Bloomberg
Companies. Anything that you’d like to add this evening or to address the council? Good
evening.
Clayton Johnson: Sure. I’ll be brief. Good evening.
Mayor Furlong: Good evening.
Clayton Johnson: I’m Clayton Johnson with the Bloomberg Companies and I’m here to speak in
support of the ramp obviously after we’ve been working on it since, I think it was since 2002
somebody told me but.
Mayor Furlong: How time flies when you’re having fun. Yes, exactly.
Clayton Johnson: Yeah I’m here tonight, along with our legal counsel John Rice and two of our
major shareholders, Rita Bloomberg and Meta Devine and I’d just like to make a few comments
and then be happy to answer any of your questions but Herb and Carol Bloomberg started the
45
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
Chanhassen Dinner Theater in 1968 and I think their children, and obviously we know they love
the theater and their children have the same kind of emotional ties to the theater. We have seen it
become nationally famous and actually a landmark in Chanhassen and to many it’s how
Chanhassen is identified. Herb always said he spent $500,000 a year advertising Chanhassen.
The Bloomberg family wants to see the dinner theater survive and thrive for another 40 years.
As a part of that commitment to do everything possible to assist various lease concessions have
been made by the Bloomberg Companies to enable the theaters to weather the storm of the
current economic conditions, and I think we all appreciate those issues. Theater ownership has
been exploring, had been exploring a possibility of, as we’ve all heard, of going to the Mall of
America and other locations. With that in mind we agreed to take on the special assessments of
$750,000 which is rather kind of frightening given the current economic conditions and what we
know is the unlikelihood that we’re going to be able to develop anything in 2011. The theater’s
ownership and Bloomberg’s agreed on a lease amendment with concessions, extension of the
lease, assistance on capital improvements and an option to renew and an agreement to work
together on the parking ramp, all of which we felt was necessary to get that, over that hurdle and
get them extended to 2013. The ramp, this is what enabled the ramp transaction to take place
and so you might ask what does a Southwest Metro parking ramp do for the dinner theater? Well
first of all I think we all agree that it’s going to be aesthetically pleasing. In fact we made some
additional land contributions to the project in order to get what we felt was, and we’re very
pleased with the architectural rendering that we’ve seen. The second thing is that it will provide
covered parking in inclement weather and provide access via an elevator and concrete walkway
to the main theater. But beyond that the biggest advantage to the theater is, when we were going
through the discussions with, about the Mall of America and so on we really looked hard at the
economics of the theater and one thing was evident and that is that the success of the theater in
the past has been greatly dependent on developing another source of revenue other than the
theater and for those of you that may remember the Bronco Bar was the hottest attraction in
Carver County back in the early days but it was a very profitable part of the venture. So what we
need today is we need to improve, give them another source of revenue and that source of
revenue is banquet revenue and that means Friday. It means Saturday night, weddings and
events that are going to put a great demand on the parking that we currently have, so that’s where
the ramp will come in and help extend that stream of revenue that they so badly need. So the
question is will the ramp project guarantee the future success of the theaters of Chanhassen?
And much of that is outside of our control and outside of the control of the city. It’s more, it’s
dependent on more than just the ramp project. But building the ramp certainly enhances the
ability for the theater to survive. If the City were to be faced with the absence of the theater in
the city, the ramp would be critical to the development of the 12.5 acres that are there that the
theater occupies. You can illustrate the value of the parking ramp by this measure in that it takes
about, it takes an acre of land to park 120 cars. So what we’re doing when we pick up 440 spots,
we’re really adding 3 acres to this site in terms of it’s potential development. Whether it be retail
or housing or office or what have you. So in conclusion the ramp project and it’s completion is
important to both to the Dinner Theater and the City and we’d hope to have your support.
Mayor Furlong: Very good, thank you. Any questions for Mr. Johnson? No? Very good.
Thank you.
Clayton Johnson: You bet.
46
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
Mayor Furlong: Anyone else in terms of, associated with the project before we go to the general
public hearing. At this point that would like to address the council? Alright at this point we do
need to have a public hearing, is that correct? And the specific issue related to public hearing
that we’d be happy to listen to other comments is what Mr. Oehme?
Paul Oehme: Just in terms of the public improvement themselves. That’s what we need to hold
a public hearing for.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Alright, then at this time I will officially open the public hearing and
invite all, any and all interested parties to come to the podium and address the council. Okay.
Seeing none, without objection we’ll close the public hearing then and bring it back to council
for any additional questions or comments. Any questions for staff? I guess general question for
staff. We have a number of items before us this evening. Site plan approval request with
variances and preliminary and final plat, is that correct?
Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. Just preliminary.
Todd Gerhardt: Just preliminary, not final.
Kate Aanenson: Yes, just preliminary.
Mayor Furlong: Okay because I thought the, I thought I read final somewhere in the staff report.
Kate Aanenson: I believe the final plat is being fine tuned and we’ll also look at the vacation of
th
the utilities on your December 14 with the final plat on that meeting.
Mayor Furlong: Okay so.
th
Kate Aanenson: You’re right, it did say it on the agenda but it will be on the 14.
Mayor Furlong: Just so we’re clear, it’s only the preliminary plat.
Kate Aanenson: That’s correct.
Todd Gerhardt: That’s correct.
Mayor Furlong: This evening. Okay, and then there are a number of agreements as well
between the various parties, including the city and I guess on that regard, do we want to take a
few minutes and talk through those agreements or, I know there’s one Mr. Gerhardt.
Todd Gerhardt: Either or. I think if we go through the site plan approval and the council is
approving of that site plan approval, then I think we can talk about the agreements.
Mayor Furlong: Okay.
47
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
Todd Gerhardt: I hate to get the agreements of the something you may not like.
Mayor Furlong: That’s fine. So we want to go through a site plan at this point?
Kate Aanenson: Do you want to have a motion on the other first?
Roger Knutson: Mayor, council? What I’d suggest is you listen to everything. Have your
discussion and vote on all of it at once.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. So we shouldn’t, okay so that would move us to item B at this point
which would be the site plan.
Todd Gerhardt: Yes.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, let’s go there with the staff report.
Kate Aanenson: Alright, I’m going to skip through a few of these slides because I believe you
kind of have the framework put in place. So the request tonight on, is three actions. One is the
preliminary plat, the site plan approval and then there’s some variances with that. I’m going to
skip through and go to the preliminary plat. I believe you saw this in a little bit different form
but there’s actually we’re creating, it’s 9.64 acres into 4 lots and 2 outlots. Lot 1, Block 2 will be
the proposed parking ramp and will be for 420 cars replacing the current 120 parking spaces that
are being used on surface. Lot 2, Block 1 will contain the Dinner Theater building. Lot 3, Block
1 will contain the, will contain the existing one story building. Lot 2, Block 1 will contain the
historic train depot and Lot, Outlot A will contain the existing sign. And Outlot B, which is
hard to see it from the Outlot A and B on the, maybe is Laurie could use your pointer there on
Great Plains. Nope. Great Plains. Those lots right there. Those existing the Dinner Theater
signs so this plat will clean up this existing area down there with, including the street right-of-
way which I think the Kimley-Horn plan also showed. This shows a little bit clearer. This is the
exact location then of the ramp itself. How it sits on the property and the road access that you
saw before coming off of Great Plains Boulevard. This street will also, this street will tie into the
private drive going through all the way out to Market Boulevard so there’s the two way access.
Access via into the parking ramp will be off of Market Street Station. There’s also access on the
upper level from the Dinner Theater parking lot with the change in grade and those are some of
the modifications that Clayton Johnson spoke about that were made to the site. The Dinner
Theater itself, the architecture, very well designed. Four stories. As I mentioned 420 parking
stalls. This zoning district is Central Business District which has the highest the most uses that
are permitted. Again there’s no hard surface coverage requirement so this use does fit in there
and the height requirement, so it does meet all those standards. I do have material boards here.
Brick, smooth and rough face block. There is a stairwell that was talked about, so this face, the
south elevation that you’re looking at would be where the road is. If I can go back to this. So
this would be the road going in front. That’s that elevation on the top that you’d be seeing if you
were to go down that road on the top slide. Then the east elevation would be, if you are on Great
Plains Boulevard so you can see the entrance where we talked about getting into the Dinner
Theater side and then also how you access into the Dinner, to the parking ramp from the Dinner
Theater property. Again this, the design itself was well suited as we talked about earlier. Taking
48
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
advantage of the grade. Pushing it up against that and also getting some visual interest for the
back of the Dinner Theater. So the other side then facing the north would be facing the Dinner
Theater side, and this is an area where there’d be the snow removal as there would be on the west
end. So the west end would be facing Market Boulevard so as the people coming down Market
Boulevard, which a lot of people do come in that entrance right now, will continue to come into
that entrance there. The variance request then is for the parking stalls itself. To allow the
parking spaces that are 8 1/2 feet wide as opposed to our 9 foot wide. The current station down
in Southwest Village is the 9 foot. We did go visit, city staff and engineering department did go
visit the Southwest Station and Eden Prairie and they have a smaller, smaller width and small
narrow. A narrower drive lane. So our’s is, our standard is 26 and this is actually a little bit
shorter than that. The 24. In reviewing what Eden Prairie has because we kind of had now, kind
of that little bit tighter and then the one that’s at the Southwest Station, kind of the broadest
range of the parking stalls and this is somewhere in the middle. Staff did support this variance,
as did the Planning Commission based on the fact that the cars are sitting there. It’s not, they’re
sitting and stationary all day. They pull in and there’s no backing in and out like you would with
the shopping center where there’s a lot of movement so they felt comfortable allowing that.
Again they gave the ability to reduce the landform and they could go more vertical but they felt
comfortable giving the variances on the parking. Parking lot itself. Again on the architecturally
you can see on this drawing here, the detail on the loading area. Again looking to the south, the
landscaping in the front. That’s where you’d get dropped off. If someone was to drop you off
for the buses, and then you can see the turn around for the busing itself. So the buses will be
coming off Great Plains and making that turn movement there. There was some discussion from
the property owners across the street which I’ll talk about in a second that had some concerns
about access. They also had concerns about access sidewalk crossing in front of the entrance
drive to the park and ride. Maybe you could point to that Laurie. The sidewalk up on the top if
you were coming out of those elevators, crossing in front of the traffic, going into the park and
ride itself. And you wanted to go to the Dinner Theater. If you came out of the elevator and
wanted to cross the drive aisle and they just had some concerns about that so I think we just need
to work that through the design itself just making sure people know that there’s traffic coming in.
If you were to park in the parking ramp and come out to go to the Dinner Theater, are you aware
that that’s a very active parking, a parking access point. That was one of the concerns that came
up. Then on the site itself there was a variance for that. This is an off premise sign that staff
supports this off premise sign. It needs to be 8 feet. The plan showed it 8 1/2 foot. The, we
believe it is important to put on the site. It’s identifying the location of the park and ride itself.
This is, will be the main entrance for the buses and the like. People that are using it now coming
off of Market Street Station, if there is an indicator there but it also provides that visibility.
There is a logo on the building itself but it does identify the entrance so while it’s an off premise
sign, it’s also a directional sign to help find the site itself so the staff does support that variance
too. Jon Horn talked about the sidewalks on this property, the connectivity. I mentioned the
sidewalk on the top. That we just wanted to make sure the, it’s not related. That’s on the
Bloomberg properties and not part of the development of any public improvements but they just
wanted to make sure that there’s consideration for sidewalk there too as I indicated. If you’re
crossing in front of the main entrance to the park and ride. And the other.
Mayor Furlong: And just for clarification. That’s on the.
49
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
Kate Aanenson: Upper level.
Mayor Furlong: Upper level where there surface parking is currently.
Kate Aanenson: Exactly. Yep. Yeah. Just for queuing. Coming out at night. Elderly people.
They just want to make sure that we think that through a little bit more on the safety on that.
You can see the sidewalk going both stretches. There was a concern about crossing the street.
People that may want to go across and I just want to visually kind of walk through that itself.
There is, if you were to come off on the new sidewalk up to Great Plains, there is a crossing just
north of the railroad tracks. That’s marked there existing sidewalk, crosswalk. That does take
you to a sidewalk across the street which would take you through the Remax property, up to the
city’s, the village hall, and then the Goddard School. There’s also a crosswalk as you get up on
th
Great Plains before you get to West 78. Right at that kind of triangle there, which is a good,
safe place to walk. Get you to that median point so there was a request for the staff to look at
that but we believe that’s the best place to cross instead of the middle of the intersection there
where there’s not a sidewalk. If you were to cross coming right out, go straight across on Great
Plains, there’s not a sidewalk on that side of the street so we think it’s in place already the best
place to make those crossing points with the greatest visibility so we believe that is already in
place. And then I did want to mention Mayor, as you pointed out, this will be on for final plat on
thth
December 15. 14, excuse me. In addition to that we need to vacate some utilities that have
been noticed. We talked about the infrastructure improvements that will be taking place.
Relocation of utilities so there is a drainage and utility easement that has been noticed for that
th
December 14 so that would require a public hearing too so those have been noticed.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, and we’ll have that at the same time?
Kate Aanenson: Correct. That’s correct. So with that, the staff is recommending approval of
the three motions for the variance, the preliminary plat and the site plan and all those conditions
are left in the staff report.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Thank you. Any questions for staff on the site plan or any of these
factors? Mr. McDonald.
Councilman McDonald: How do you know I had a question?
Mayor Furlong: I’m getting good at this finally.
Councilman McDonald: Okay. By going to an 8 1/2 foot width, how many additional stalls
does that add to the parking ramp?
Kate Aanenson: That question was asked at the Planning Commission and…
Len Simich: About 30.
Kate Aanenson: Yeah.
50
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
Councilman McDonald: I guess as a consumer of parking ramps, one of the biggest bugaboos I
have are parking ramps that try to you know accommodate additional stalls at the expense of the
patrons. Their cars. I understand that you know the thing we’re looking at here is people are
going to be in transit, but there’s also people going to be using this at other hours and when you
begin to squeeze people into small slots, you create damage to cars. You create you know
people get a little bit upset about this. I mean this just a big thing for me and I know that a lot of
people share the frustration but I’m just, why would you do that for just 30 additional stalls? I
mean I would think.
Len Simich: Mayor, council member. Again very good question and it’s not so much that we’re
trying to just squeeze some additional stalls in for the purpose of just getting additional stalls.
We have to deliver 420 stalls per the agreement we have with MnDOT and given the constraints
we have and the amount of property that we have to deal with, this was the best way that we
could come up to meet that minimum threshold.
Mayor Furlong: Another option would have been to add another partial layer or to go vertical,
which I think is, as I read in the staff report was part of the accommodation that the City was
looking for in terms of the height issue. Is that correct?
Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, council members. I didn’t think we had the option to go to another
level. The reason we reduced it down from the 420 was that we couldn’t meet budget. We had
to building, a structured parking stall like this is anywhere from 6 to $10,000. To still meet the
520 stall requirement we proposed moving 100 of them out to Lake Ann where an asphalt stall is
anywhere around 3 to 4,000 so to stay in budget we went back to the TAC board or the advisory
board at Met Council and requested the change down to 420 and they were very hesitant to do
that. However we were able to replace 100 out at Lake Ann.
Len Simich: And again both are correct. I mean it was a height issue and a budget issue as
well.
Councilman McDonald: Okay, I just wanted to ask the question. I didn’t really figure that we
were going to be adding to the width but it’s just, from the standpoint of someone who uses you
know stalls and everything on cars, there’s nothing worst than trying to squeeze into these small
you know slots and stuff and people will be using this and carrying things back and forth to the
car. I mean if what you know the Bloomberg Companies are wanting to do is to use this as a
jumping board to some kind of retail development, you’re going to have people carrying
packages so that was just, I was wondering why. You’ve got a good reason and you know it’s
not going to 9 feet. I understand that but I just wish it had.
Councilwoman Ernst: Don’t go away Len.
Len Simich: Oh, okay.
Mayor Furlong: Councilwoman Ernst.
51
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
Councilwoman Ernst: I have a couple more questions. So at Southwest Station do they have
lighting and security? I know they have lighting but do they have security cameras in there as
well?
Len Simich: Yes we have both and we have the Code Blue. Kind of the emergency, if you need
to push that and it goes right to someone who is monitoring that.
Councilwoman Ernst: So will that be the same for this?
Len Simich: Yes. Yeah, we have the security consultant on board now that will be working with
our architects in integrating all of that.
Councilwoman Ernst: And then where will the existing customers that right, that take the park
and ride today out of that parking lot, where will they go when this is all under construction?
Len Simich: We’re going to keep some service still in the area that we’re serving today. Again
when the demo occurs for the scene shop and things of that nature, it’s going to be somewhat
disruptive. The level of service isn’t going to be as great. We’re hoping, first we’re hoping
everybody stays with us. Second that they would go down to the Village where we have the
ample space today and a beautiful station.
Councilwoman Ernst: Okay, thank you. And then I have a question for you Kate. Or Paul, I’m
not sure which. So do we anticipate having to put signal lights in?
Kate Aanenson: Putting in what?
Councilwoman Ernst: Signal lights.
Kate Aanenson: No.
Councilwoman Ernst: No?
Paul Oehme: No it won’t, I mean if a development would warrant a signal based upon our
traffic study, we would request that the developer participate in the cost for a signal light but
under this development we don’t anticipate the need for a signal either at Great Plains or
anywhere else in this area.
Councilwoman Ernst: Okay. Thank you.
Mayor Furlong: Good, thank you. Any other questions regarding the site plan?
Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, council members. Kind of to just tag off on Paul’s comment there.
We’re hoping with an improved secondary access onto Great Plains to the east, that may
alleviate some of the traffic concerns that you may be seeing already at Market. So having that
secondary access we felt was very important for this area to redevelop.
52
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
Councilwoman Ernst: Okay.
Mayor Furlong: Very good. Anything else on the site plan? Or the plat. Okay. Next item here,
item 6(c) deals with some of the agreements. Hopefully all of the agreements which are so let’s
defer now to Mr. Gerhardt and Mr. Knutson.
Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, council members. For this project to move ahead we’re going to have to
approve approximately 5 agreements. The first agreement is a redevelopment agreement
between Bloomberg Companies and the City of Chanhassen. The intent of this agreement is to
create a tax increment financing district to reimburse Bloomberg Companies for their special
assessments. This is the incentive for Bloomberg to assume these special assessments. It’s
limited to 10 years from the creation of the district and the district would be created later this
year. What that would do is allow Bloomberg to recapture those special assessments against his
property. If he develops the site with retail, apartments, offices, and the new taxes generated
from those new developments would help to write down those special assessments. So we call
that the redevelopment agreement between Bloomberg Companies and the City of Chanhassen.
Bloomberg Companies have signed the attached agreement in here and staff recommends
approval of that agreement. The next agreement is a cooperative agreement between the City of
Chanhassen and Southwest Transit. Now this agreement in your packet we still need to make a
few modifications to this agreement. Southwest was informed today that if they were to take
ownership of any parcel of land or buildings in this area they would have to get a special
appraisal since there are federal dollars involved so they have to justify the acquisition of any
property as a part of their construction of this ramp. A way around this is to move that dollar
amount associated with the scene shop back into an assessment to Southwest Transit so in doing
so the agreement basically would be the same as it is shown to you today but it would not be
Southwest intending to acquire the scene shop but to increase their assessment dollar amount
based on the purchase price of that scene shop. So we need to modify that agreement. Both
attorneys have to review that and make those changes. We are proposing to bring that back to
thth
you at your December 7 budget hearing that we would have on Monday, December 7. The
third agreement is a purchase agreement between Bloomberg Companies and the City of
Chanhassen for several parcels. The first one would be the scene shop. The scene shop is a
9,000 square foot metal building. We would acquire the scene shop for a dollar amount of
$300,000 and that cost would go back against Bloomberg Companies and Southwest Transit.
The other acquisition as the map shows is the blue area for road right-of-way. Because we do
not have a plat here we cannot take road right-of-way so we have to acquire it. And with that
acquisition we’ve agreed to $8.20 a square foot so that’s $286,008 to acquire the road right-of-
way. And the last piece that we would be acquiring is the railroad depot. The railroad depot,
we’ve been squatters here for several years and thanks to Bloomberg Companies and their board,
they’ve allowed us to have the depot there and for as much as Herb thinks I got it backwards on
site, we have come to an agreement again at the $8.20 a square foot to acquire that land so we
can take ownership of the land underneath the railroad depot. And the fourth one is the
assessment agreement between Bloomberg Companies and the City of Chanhassen. Basically
what this assessment agreement is calling for is that Bloomberg Companies are agreeing to be
assessed $726,548. That first payment would be due in 2010 and they would make those
payments over an 8 year period at. 2012, sorry. And would make interest payments starting in
February of 2010. At a rate of 6% until the unpaid balance is paid. Alright. And I have attached
53
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
the amortization schedule in your packet for you to see those payment schedules over the next 10
years. 8 years. 2 years of interest and 8 years of payments. Relocation agreements with
Bloomberg Companies. You have two relocation agreements included in your packet. One for
Bloomberg Companies and another one with International Theaters Corp. The Bloomberg
Companies relocation is included in the land purchase price for the scene shop and the road
right-of-way. The relocation for the scene shop, since they’re a tenant in the building and the
City has actively tried to purchase the building, they have thus qualified for relocation benefits
and our relocation specialist has estimated the cost of that to be around $100,000. So with that,
that covers all the paperwork or the 5 or 6 agreements that I’ve just outlined. I open it up for any
questions that the council may have on any of these agreements. As Roger has indicated he
would like you to make one motion and to include that motion these agreements contingent upon
approval of a cooperative agreement with Southwest Transit that we would bring back at your
th
December 7 meeting.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, any questions? We got through all those agreement summary in a matter
of few minutes. You’re not an attorney Mr. Gerhardt… An attorney would have taken more
detail, right Mr. Knutson.
Roger Knutson: It took more than a few minutes to prepare them all.
Todd Gerhardt: I don’t know. As soon as we gave him my deadline agreements got done.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Any questions on any of the agreements? Obviously it’s a
complex, complex relationship that’s been documented here and I appreciate all the, all the
people that participated. Any questions on the agreements? Okay. Anything else? That
completes the items from presentations, correct? Or is there?
Todd Gerhardt: There is, we did make a modification to the special assessment agreement. That
should be sitting in front of you so the motion should reflect the special assessment agreement
rd
dated November 23 with the changes included in that agreement.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Alright. Is there any other discussion or questions or would somebody
like to proceed with the motion?
Councilman McDonald: Well is it the three motions that are at the beginning of the packet
because now you’re talking about the agreements there and where do you do those? If a, b and c
and I didn’t see anything about the agreements.
Roger Knutson: I would suggest, and you can just divide it up as many times as you want to but
maybe the, if you wanted to approve 6(a) as a motion. You could approve them all in one
motion. You could just read 6(a), 6(b) and then list off the various agreements where 6(c) with
exceptions of cooperative agreement and then you would make your approvals subject to
approval of, subsequent approval of the cooperative agreement.
Mayor Furlong: Mr. McDonald, would you like to?
54
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
Councilman McDonald: So the thing that, I’m just trying to get it all straighten out.
Mayor Furlong: Nope, that’s fine.
Councilman McDonald: Okay, so the thing that we would do is the proposed motions, the three
of those, we would vote on those. Then the agreements we need to read separately?
Roger Knutson: No. You could just read. If you want I can read a motion.
Councilman McDonald: Sure, whatever. Help.
Mayor Furlong: Mr. Knutson.
Roger Knutson: A proposed motion would be City Council adopts the attached resolution
ordering the project and authorizing preparation of plans and specifications for Chanhassen
Transit Station park and ride Project 08-11 as set forth in the attached resolution. Council
approves variance request, Planning Case 09-18, the preliminary plat, the site plan all subject to
the conditions set forth in the resolutions and adoption of the Findings of Fact. Council approves
the redevelopment agreement between Bloomberg Companies and the City of Chanhassen; the
purchase agreement between Bloomberg Companies and the City of Chanhassen; and the
assessment agreement between Bloomberg Companies and the City of Chanhassen; and the
relocation agreements plural, all agreements subject to subsequent approval by the City Council
of the cooperation agreement between the City of Chanhassen and Southwest Transit.
Laurie Hokkanen: Isn’t there a sixth one? Relocation agreement with…
Roger Knutson: That’s in the purchase agreement.
Kate Aanenson: Can I get one clarification then. You mentioned the variance, preliminary plat,
including site plan approval?
Roger Knutson: And site plan approval. Did I forget site plan approval?
Todd Gerhardt: And the special assessment agreement is the new one that was handed out.
Councilwoman Ernst: Well good thing we have Roger.
Councilman McDonald: I’ll give it a shot but.
Mayor Furlong: Would you just like to make that motion?
Councilman McDonald: Okay, I’ll make that motion.
Mayor Furlong: Is that sufficient? Is there a second? We’ll be here til midnight. Is there a
second?
55
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
Councilwoman Ernst: Second.
Mayor Furlong: Made and seconded. Alright. Any discussions on the motion? Any questions
or clarification on any of the motions?
Councilman Litsey: Perfectly clear.
Mayor Furlong: Very good. If there is none, I’m going to add one comment here prior, before
we get going and take a vote. It’s clear which way this is going. It’s the right way to go and
that’s approval of this. But there have been many hours spent by a number of people. Mr.
Simich from Southwest Transit. Mr. Johnson from Bloomberg Companies and certainly Mr.
Gerhardt from the City of Chanhassen. Having received various updates throughout those
negotiations I can tell you that this has been an arms length negotiation process. Clearly there is,
yet the common goal was to try to make, to improve transit opportunities for our residents and
for residents around the area. To promote economic development and to really get a good
project here in our downtown area. Developing and promoting our downtown economy is
something that this council has made a significant commitment to. Continues to make that a
priority and this is one of those steps in that direction so on behalf of the council and residents
and businesses of Chanhassen, thank you to everybody involved and all the hard work and effort
that’s been put forth here. I know that there’s been a lot of, a lot of accommodations on
everyone’s part as well as seeking to make sure that it works for everybody and glad that it does
and we’re here tonight. With that, if there’s no other comments or discussion I would, we’ll
proceed with the vote for the motion as made and seconded.
Resolution #2009-85: Councilman McDonald moved, Councilwoman Ernst seconded that
the City Council order the project and authorizes preparation of plans and specifications
for the Chanhassen Transit Station Park and Ride, Project 08-11. All voted in favor and
the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
Councilman McDonald moved, Councilwoman Ernst seconded thatthe City Council
approves variance request #09-18 to allow parking spaces that are 8½ feet wide and drive
aisles that are 24½ feet wide, as shown in plans dated received October 16, 2009, and
including the attached Findings of Fact and Recommendation with the following condition:
1.Approval of the variance application is contingent upon approval of the final plat and site
plan permit – Planning Case 2009-18.”
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
Councilman McDonald moved, Councilwoman Ernst seconded thatthe City Council
approves the preliminary plat for Chanhassen Transit Station –Planning Case 09-18 as
shown in plans dated received October 16, 2009, subject to the following conditions:
1.Outlot B shall be conveyed to the City.
56
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
2.The preliminary plat must be revised to include the City’s standard drainage and utility
easements.
3.Existing public and private utilities must be encompassed by a ten-foot wide drainage and
utility easement centered over the utility.
4.The main drive aisle dimensions to the parking ramp shown on Sheet C200 must be clarified.
5.The parking ramp and surface parking area shall be privately owned and maintained.
6.The sidewalks within Outlot B shall be maintained by SouthWest Transit.
7.The grading plan is incomplete. It must show the existing two-foot contours on the north and
west side of the proposed construction limits. The proposed contours must tie in to the
existing contours.
8.The proposed concrete spillway that would convey runoff from the western 25 to 50 feet of
the parking lot on Lot 1, Block 1 must be eliminated from the design as it would direct runoff
across a sidewalk.
9.The hydrology calculations must be revised to include the drainage area to the north,
particularly the flared end section that discharges approximately 55 feet north of CB B.
10.The developer’s engineer and the City’s engineering consultant must coordinate their
respective designs to ensure that the rate and volume control requirements are met.
11.Hydraulic calculations must be submitted with the final plat submittals.
12.The developer’s engineer must work with the City’s engineering consultant for the public
street project to ensure that the City’s storm sewer design will be able to accommodate the
runoff from the parking ramp storm sewer.
13.A building permit is required for the proposed retaining wall.
14.It is the developer’s responsibility to coordinate any small utility relocation with the
appropriate utility company.
15.The utility plan must be changed to reflect the following:
a.Show the directional flow arrows on existing and proposed utilities.
b.Adjust the line work so that the proposed storm sewer can be seen on the plan.
c.Show the connection to the existing storm sewer on the southwest corner of the
construction limits.
d.Include a note where the rain leaders connect to the existing storm sewer.
57
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
16.Full park fees shall be paid in lieu of parkland dedication and/or trail construction. The fees
shall be collected for Lot 1 Block 1 (1.45 acres) as a condition of approval for Chanhassen
Transit Station. The park fees shall be collected in full at the rate in force upon final plat
submission and approval. The current park and trail fee charge for commercial property is
$12,500 per acre.
17.All plans must be revised to reflect a continuous sidewalk along the north edge of Market
Street.
18.The plat must be revised to include a 20 foot wide drainage and utility easement centered over
the existing watermain within proposed Lot 1, Block 2.
19.Approval of the subdivision is contingent upon approval of the vacation of the drainage and
utility easement.
20.The executed temporary easement agreement must be submitted before the final plat is
recorded.”
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
Councilman McDonald moved, Councilwoman Ernst seconded thatthe City Council
approves the site plan for the construction of the parking ramp and transit station for
Planning Case 09-18 as shown in plans dated received October 16, 2009, subject to the
following conditions:
1.The monument sign proposed on Lot 2, Block 1, shall not exceed 8 feet in height.
2.Only one logo shall be permitted along the east elevation.
3.A lighting plan that is in keeping with the approved standards shall be submitted to the City.
4.Approval of the Site Plan is contingent upon approval of the final plat and variance –
Planning Case 2009-18.
5.Building Official Conditions:
a.Elevator\office\lobby structure is required to have an automatic fire extinguishing system.
b.The plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the State of
Minnesota.
c.Accessible routes must be provided to commercial buildings, parking facilities and public
transportation stops.
d.All parking areas, including parking structure, must be provided with accessible parking
spaces.
e.The owner and or their representative shall meet with the Inspections Division as soon as
possible to discuss property line issues as well as plan review and permit procedures.
58
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
6.Inlet protection will be required on all conveyance systems – existing and proposed.
7.Concrete washout area needs to be shown on the plan set.
8.A note is to be added to sheet C-600 under the Dandy Bag detail to indicate that the bag must
be cleaned out any time it reaches one-half the capacity.
9.The curb cut inlets to the rain garden should be made as wide as practicable. A minimum of
eight feet is recommended to avoid concentrated flows and subsequent erosion.
10.The concrete spillway should be replaced with a vegetated swale.
11.All exposed soil areas must be stabilized within 7 days after the construction activity in that
portion has temporarily or permanently ceased.
12.If any credits are to be applied to the SWMP fees, the drainage calculations should be revised
to include the rain garden.
13.Total SWMP fees due at the time of final plat are $34,731.48. It is possible that a credit may
apply for the rain garden feature. However, as the drainage calculations do not address what
area is being treated in the rain garden, this credit cannot be calculated.
14.The plans shall show all existing utilities including but not limited to aboveground and
underground electric lines and underground gas lines. Utility companies shall be contacted for
locates.
15.Approval of the site plan is contingent upon approval of the vacation of the drainage and utility
easement and abandonment of the existing utilities within the vacated area.
16.The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement.”
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
Councilman McDonald moved, Councilwoman Ernst seconded thatthe City Council
approve the following agreements contingent upon approval of the Cooperative Agreement
with Southwest Transit:
1. Purchase Agreement between City of Chanhassen and Bloomberg Companies;
2. Redevelopment Agreement between City of Chanhassen and Bloomberg Companies;
3. Special Assessment Agreement between City of Chanhassen and Bloomberg Companies
as amended on November 23, 20909;
Resolution #2009-86:
4. Resolution Waiving Approval by the Planning Commission and
Accepting the Deed from the Economic Development Authority;
5. Relocation Agreements.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
59
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
Mayor Furlong: Thank you everyone. Thank you for sticking around this evening. With that
th
we will see things back as mentioned at our next meeting on the 7. We’ll actually have another
th
item besides the public hearing to deal with the cooperative agreement and then also on the 14.
To keep the process moving forward. Thank you. Let us try to continue here with the next items
on our agenda.
COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS.
Councilman McDonald: I have one.
Mayor Furlong: Councilman McDonald.
Councilman McDonald: I missed the last meeting and it was because of a personal thing with
my wife and everything but what I want to say is we received the flowers and everything from
council and staff and everything the very next day and that really kind of helped to cheer her up
and I really do appreciate you all thinking of us and everything because I was very surprised. All
of this kind of happened rather quickly and I had every intention of being here last week but the
way things kind of worked out, or 2 weeks ago, it just wasn’t possible but I do want to say thank
you for thinking of us and keeping us in your prayers and everything.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Other comments for council presentations?
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS.
Todd Gerhardt: The public works building, I’ll give you an update on that. Things are moving
along really nicely there. We had the floors installed here this last week and hoping to move in
in the next 2 to 3 weeks and start moving some equipment in so we’ll keep you updated as we
get close to that deadline, but it’s looking nice. The parking lot is in. Lights are in and it’s
starting to look like a real building now so. That’s all I have.
Mayor Furlong: One thing else, I did have a chance to make a presentation to Southwest
Chamber at the luncheon last Thursday. It was well attended. They had invited myself along
with mayors of the other cities within the Chamber. Victoria, Chaska and Carver. I think it was
very well attended. Very well received but I wanted to just take a minute and thank our
Assistant City Manager Laurie Hokkanen for all her efforts in helping me, not only in this
presentation but I couldn’t get out there and represent the city the way I do without her help so
thank you and I appreciate the halo around the Kwik Trip. That picture was taken on, I think on
the way in to the office on Thursday morning so, but we made the deadline and I appreciate all
your efforts.
Todd Gerhardt: Didn’t wait for white, fluffy clouds?
Mayor Furlong: She didn’t. Unlike the picture we have of Lifetime Fitness. It was not as well
staged but that’s why she’s the assistant city manager.
60
Chanhassen City Council – November 23, 2009
Laurie Hokkanen: Unlike the Park and Rec Director, I can’t control the weather.
Mayor Furlong: That’s right. So, there are advantages to being third on the agenda instead of
first, which I appreciated that day. With that is there any discussion on the correspondence
packet?
CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION.
None.
Councilwoman Ernst moved, Councilwoman Tjornhom seconded to adjourn the meeting.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. The City
Council meeting was adjourned at 10:10 p.m.
Submitted by Todd Gerhardt
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
61