CC Minutes 2001 09 24CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 24, 2001
Mayor Jansen called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to
the Flag.
COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Jansen, Councilman Labatt, Councilman Ayotte,
Councilman Boyle, and Councilman Peterson
STAFF PRESENT: Roger Knutson, Teresa Burgess, Todd Hoffman, Kate Aanenson, Bob Generous,
and Bruce DeJong
PUBLIC PRESENT FOR ALL ITEMS:
Janet Paulsen
Debbie Lloyd
7305 Laredo Drive
7302 Laredo Drive
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS:
Mayor Jansen: Good evening and thank you for joining us. I have to comment, this is the first meeting that
we have had since the tragedy of last Tuesday and I have to tell you that I have thought frequently about
how significant I now feel it is that we do say the Pledge of Allegiance before every meeting. I've thought
about our school kids and just how much this is driving home that sense of patriotism and the nation and
I'm sure all of us are feeling that sense this evening as we say the Pledge and we realize the significance of
what we're all doing here. It really brings things to light and brings things home and I certainly hope and
want to communicate to the community that Chanhassen does have an emergency management plan. We
have an emergency command center. We have a wonderful personnel in our volunteer fire department.
Always on call. Here to serve our needs. In the event of an emergency, there's a plan in place coordinated
with the County. We are in good hands. There have been steps and measures taken to make sure that our
resources are well protected and the community is in touch with FEMA and the State and we are certainly
in good hands. So I do want the community to be aware that there is a plan like that in place and ready to
be implemented at the first sign of any sort of an emergency. Whether it be a local emergency or national
like what we are experiencing currently and certainly our hearts go out to all those that were touched by
this event. We'll go ahead with the agenda.
CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Labatt moved, Councilman Boyle seconded to approve the
following consent agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations:
Resolution #2001-60: Approve Consultant Work Order and Authorize Preparation of Feasibility
Study for 2002 Residential Street Improvement, Project 01-10.
Approve Consultant Work Order and Authorize Preparation of Feasibility for Lift Station # 10
Improvements, Project 01-11.
c. Approve Variance Requests for Sump Pump Ordinance, Project 96-21.
Resolution #2001-61: Approve Change Order No. 1 to Century Boulevard Street and Utility
Improvements, Project 97-1C.
City Council Meeting - September 24, 2001
e. Approve Contract for Sewer Televising.
Approve Conditional Use Permit Request for Development with the Bluff Creek Overlay District
and Variances to Allow Construction of a 1,640 sq. ft. Garage/Pole Barn; 9201 Audubon Road,
Eric Theship-Rosales.
Approve Interim Use Permit and Conditional Use Permit to Grade Property in the Bluff Creek
Overlay District within Arboretum Business Park; Located in the Southeast Quadrant of TH 41
and TH 5, Steiner Development.
h. Approve Settlement Agreement, Frank Fox Property.
j. Approval of Bills.
Approval of Minutes:
- City Council Work Session Minutes dated September 10, 2001
- City Council Minutes dated September 10, 2001
Receive Commission Minutes:
- Planning Commission Minutes dated August 21,2001
- Planning Commission Minutes dated September 4, 2001
- Park & Recreation Commission Minutes dated July 24, 2001
Approve Amendment to Development Contract for Powers Ridge Apartment Homes, Project 00-
04.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 5 to 0.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS:
Robb Vaules: Good evening Mayor Jansen and council members. My name is Robb Vaules at 8796 North
Bay Drive in Chanhassen. I'm the Treasurer and spokesman for the North Bay Homeowners Association.
Tonight I'm accompanied by my fellow board members and residents of North Bay. Once again we come
before the council to voice our concerns about safety in regards to our neighbors in the Lakeview
Apartments. While there have been some improvement in the situation, we're still concerned with the long
term situation with this property. We know that there are good tenants in Lakeview and we believe that a
stronger stance on safety will not only benefit the North Bay owners, but those good law abiding tenants in
Lakeview and in the city of Chanhassen as a whole. It is not fair to the residents of Chanhassen, all
residents of Chanhassen, that the city has to crack down on the Lakeview ownership for violations that
those owners know are violations. It is a privilege to do business in Chanhassen, not necessarily a right. In
fact we believe that most tenants of the Lakeview Apartments are fearful of repercussions from ownership
if they make any complaints in the first place. The amount of low cost housing is so scarce in the metro
area that some residents would rather look the other way than instead of risk their status of residency. In
addressing these issues we realize this is the beginning of the process of city actions and ordinances. I have
read most of the report that Kate Aanenson prepared for the City Council, Housing Maintenance and
Licensing of Rental Property and I will limit my comments to a few issues. The North Bay Homeowners
Association is well aware that the Lakeview Apartments are not going anywhere anytime soon. We are
City Council Meeting - September 24, 2001
taking the position that this is a safety issue and we are here not just representing the interests of North Bay
Homeowners Association but we feel the safety concerns of all Chanhassen residents, including those of the
residents at the Lakeview Apartments. To that point we ask that you focus in the near term on developing
codes related to multi unit rental housing market. In reading Kate Aanenson's executive summary within
the memo to council she asks an excellent question. Should a maintenance ordinance include all property
or just rental property? We strongly support a broad line of codes protecting all types of property owners,
including rental, business and homeowners. Specifically in regards to issues related to rental properties, the
North Bay Homeowners Association supports implementation of a program similar to one that Woodbury,
Minnesota has enacted. Finally on a personal note, I was born and raised in Phoenix, Arizona and at one
time managed a 212 unit apartment complex there. I'm well aware of the difficulties managing a multi unit
housing complex poses. If any ordinances are enacted I ask you give the managers and the tenants of these
properties the teeth to get the owners to adhere to the city code and not have to depend on the will of the
ownership to get things done. I would also like to mention to the council and Ms. Aanenson that Phoenix
has an excellent set of ordinances that speak broadly to the issues Chanhassen has started to address. I
would recommend you to check out Chapter 39 of the Phoenix City Code entitled Neighborhood
Preservation Ordinance that's available on multicode.com. While I fully realize the differences between
Phoenix and Chanhassen, having been a resident of both, I do believe it provides an excellent framework
for developing ordinances for Chanhassen. Mayor Jansen, councilmen, thank you for your time and if we
can offer any assistance please feel free to contact us. Thank you.
Mayor Jansen: Thank you very much. We are addressing that issue under the unfinished business section
of our agenda. Number 4. The discussion of the issue paper that was put together by Kate Aanenson so if
you don't mind we'll address some of the things that you brought up at that time. Appreciate your
speaking. Anyone else who would like to address the council at this time? Seeing no one, we'll move on on
the agenda.
LAW ENFORCEMENT UPDATE: JOHN WOLFF, FIRE CHIEF.
John Wolff: Good evening Mayor Jansen and council members. It's been a few months since I've
addressed the group and it's my pleasure to be here tonight. I'd like to just make a few remarks about the
business of the fire department and then comment a little bit about the September 11th tragedy and our
response to that. I just want to report that our staffing is at full capacity, and that's a pretty positive
comment to make in light of the fact that we continue to experience between 10 and 15% turnover on an
annual basis. We've got a recruiting program and a hiring program and a training program in place to
respond to those important issues. We've been very busy this year. On a year to date basis we're at a
historical record high. About 10% higher from a call volume perspective than any prior year. Been busy
both in our town with a variety of different types of calls ranging from near drowning incidents, drowning
incidents, numerous medical and car accidents and structure fires. But also very, very busy with
supporting our neighbors. We've been working with the council and our city manager over the years are
pleased to announce that we've been working closely with the Ridgeview Paramedics and they for years
have been located out at our west station, which is about a 10 minute response time to 80 to 90% of our
population and working closely with City Council put together a program last year and a proposal and the
city agreed to add on a bay to the new parks department building out at Lake Ann. And we now have our
Ridgeview paramedics as of last week located in the downtown area which I think will be a real benefit to
our citizens in terms of getting advance life support paramedics on scene much, much quicker than
historical. Been also involved with the county doing some planning work around the new radio system
that's rolling out and the police are going to get this system late 2002 and the fire departments are
scheduled to get them in 2003. The impact on us is going to be training impact and a financial impact and
City Council Meeting - September 24, 2001
we've talked to that through our capital planning and so forth but just kind of a reminder for this group and
maybe some new information for some of the newer council folks. Looking at somewhere around 80 to
$100,000 in fiscal 2003, at the latest early 2004 and something just to keep our eye on. September 11th
was a tragic day for us all and appreciate your comments Mayor. It certainly hit the fire service across the
country very dramatically and within a couple of days there was a lot of discussion about sending fire
fighters to New York to help and the official response from New York and FEMA was we don't need fire
fighters here. We've got a lot of volunteers and New York has 13,000 fire fighters. Granted we lost 300.
We don't need anybody to come out and help and although the media and the press certainly like to make a
story out of folks that ran out there to help, kind of within the chiefs association nationally and within some
FEMA information we were receiving directly from the New York City web site, the information we got
was they didn't need our help from a manpower perspective but the fire department was very much
interested in doing something and we came up with the concept or the idea of raising money so on a
volunteer basis the members of the fire department have been collecting money for the families. For the
surviving family members of the New York fire fighters and other rescue workers and police folks that lost
their lives in the tragic incident. It's been an amazing response on the part of our community. In 8 short
days we've been averaging about $5,000 a day. It's really incredible. We've never seen anything like it.
The process of collecting these funds has been I think very therapeutic for the people involved because
people in the community have come up and they've extended themselves in a very positive way. But I also
see that it's been very therapeutic for the community too. Giving them a hands on opportunity to reach out
to New York and to really just talk to some people that maybe can understand that so I guess I've been
very pleased with the fire department response, the community response. Just so you're on board with
where we're coming from. Fire Prevention Week ends October 14th with our Open House and we will
collect funds through that date and then at that point we will, you know collect the money and send a check
out to the folks in New York City so that's sort of our plan for that. If there are any questions on that I'd
be happy to take that.
Mayor Jansen: Thank you for your efforts and for your actions, pulling together and putting an effort
forward like that. I was receiving feedback on your efforts as early as the Monday and Tuesday after you
had begun to, I believe you were out at Byerly's and was it Festival?
John Wolff: Correct.
Mayor Jansen: I didn't know exactly how many locations but the fact that your group so instantly wanted
to respond and react to the needs of your fellow fire fighters certainly didn't surprise me but it certainly
made me proud of the members of Chanhassen and our volunteers. That they stepped up just so quickly
and jumped in to be of help. And I know how close you are to all of your comrades and of course on a
national basis and how touched you've been so I commend you and I'm sure the rest of council commends
you for taking that action. Also then on a more administrative level, coordinating with our finance director
and the city manager to be sure that we're handling that appropriately.
John Wolff: Thank you for your comments and I think our emotional kind of energy maybe got a little
ahead of some planning that we needed to do but fortunately we did have our ducks lined up relative to
making sure the funds would remain tax deductible and when we connected with the city folks on Monday,
they seemed to be comfortable with how we had set the accounting up for that. You made some comments
early in your opening remarks about preparedness and you know back when '93 when the first incident
occurred at the World Trade Center, it obviously caught some folks attention at FEMA and over the years
there's been some quiet but really aggressive training in the area of terrorism training around the fire
service and we've done a number of exercises with a local military group called the 55th Civil Support
City Council Meeting - September 24, 2001
Group. Throughout the country at every major metropolitan area the army has a group of folks there that
are available to assist if there's any kind of terrorism event. And there's the classic events that they're
preparing us for are the ones around chemical and biological hazards and Chanhassen has the training to
act as first responders in that event with those folks. Our scheduled training for last Monday was
something different than what we ended up doing, but what we ended up doing was just doing a 2 hour
refresher of some work that we had done earlier in the year. We just thought it was timely and appropriate
given somewhat relative uncertainty of the environment we're in. So Chanhassen Fire is definitely prepared
to respond to an incident like that. I'm sure if Sergeant Potts was here he could comment about the
prevention work that they're doing around managing that because I know there's a number of new shifts
going on in that vein so, if there's any questions I'd be happy to field those relative to my presentation
tonight. Otherwise thanks for the opportunity.
Mayor Jansen: Council, comments? Questions?
Councilman Peterson: John, you may want to take this opportunity to walk through the mechanics of how
people here or out in the viewing audience may want to offer support too financially. Who do you write the
check out to and who do you get it to?
John Wolff: Thank you. Appreciate that. We have set up an account with the Americana Bank. It's the
NYFD Survivors Relief Fund and you can direct that in care of Americana Bank, Box 790, and that's
Chanhassen Zip Code 55317. Fire fighters will be at Byerly's and Festival lunches and dinners, pretty
much through the first week of October and weekends during the day. And we also have collection cans in
about 15 to 20 businesses that are locally owned, locally managed for the most part so appreciate that.
Appreciate really all the support we've gotten from the community.
Mayor Jansen: Well thank you. I just have to tell you that there's a great deal of peace of mind, being a
community leader and I'm sure everyone got a few phone calls from concerned residents as to you know,
what would the city do if and it's reassuring to be able to say that we have a fire fighting force as well as
the Carver County Sheriff's Department ready to respond and that we do have that plan in place. It
probably could receive a little bit more exposure right now as far as maybe letting the community know and
I believe Mark Littfin in fact has been invited to speak at the Rotary Club for one of their meetings to share
that plan and that preparedness. But I think you should be quite proud of how ready and prepared you are,
and especially your personnel and we appreciate them.
John Wolff: Well thank you for your comments.
Mayor Jansen: Thanks for being here tonight.
AWARD OF BIDS: AWARD CONTRACT FOR OUINN ROAD SEWER PROJECT.
Teresa Burgess: Thank you Madam Mayor. I apologize for the lateness of getting this bid tabulation out
to you that's coming around right now. Unfortunately this project was previously bid and rejected. It was
rejected on August 21st and in order to get this back on as soon as possible, we did choose to open bids on
Thursday knowing that that would mean that the council would not see bid tabs until tonight. If you look
at the bid tab that was just handed around, the low bid was Design Excavation at $22,427.00. That's 4.5%
higher than the adjusted engineers estimate. The engineer's estimate was adjusted based on the bids we
received previously. It is common for bids to be higher the second time around. Bidders do that for a
couple of reasons. There's an added concern about the project being bid. It also makes them nervous that
City Council Meeting - September 24, 2001
there must be something wrong with the plans, so it is common for projects to be higher the second time
around. Also there was a missing bid item on the first time around which also accounts for some increase
in the bid prices. WSB has reviewing the bids and have tabulated it and checked the accuracy of the
mathematics and they are recommending award to Design Excavation. We have checked their references
and concur with WSB's recommendation and are requesting that the council award the project this evening
so we can begin construction as soon as possible. If there's any questions I'll be happy to answer those.
Mayor Jansen: Thank you Teresa. This project you had noted is 100% assessed, correct?
Teresa Burgess: Correct.
Mayor Jansen: And you also noted it's necessary to address the failing septic system which is why you're
moving it ahead so quickly.
Teresa Burgess: Correct. The other option, if the council chooses not to award this project would be to
cancel the project and authorize a variance to the property that has a failing septic system to install a
revised mound system. They currently have space but they are too close to the existing city system to be
allowed by ordinance to build a new septic system. They have to connect to city sewer.
Mayor Jansen: Okay. Any questions for staff'? Seeing none, if I could have a motion please.
Councilman Boyle: I'll make a motion we approve as indicated. As recommended by staff.
Mayor Jansen: And a second?
Councilman Labatt: Second.
Resolution #2001-62: Councilman Boyle moved, Councilman Labatt seconded to award the bid for
Quinn Road Sanitary Sewer Improvement Project No. 01-02 to Design Excavation in the amount of
$22,427.00. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 5 to 0.
DISCUSSION OF ISSUE PAPER- HOUSING MAINTENANCE CODE AND RENTAL
HOUSING LICENSING.
Public Present:
Name Address
Robb Vaules
Judy Severson
Cec Meister
Kent Kersten
8796 North Bay Drive
8736 North Bay Drive
174 Lakeview Road East
8731 North Bay Drive
Kate Aanenson: Thank you. Your cover sheet is an executive summary trying to just kind of frame up
issues as presented to the staff. I also tried to tie back into issues that would relate to the city's goals and
policies, and that would be the capital improvements plan, the comprehensive plan and the like so the issues
that this project relates to, certainly the comprehensive plan and the housing element, the city code and the
strategic plan. I'll just take a minute to go through some of those. In the comprehensive plan, the housing
City Council Meeting - September 24, 2001
section maintenance of existing housing stock is important and is identified as a goal. And then also that
there be code enforcement reinforcing those codes. As we heard tonight again from Decision Resources,
some of the information that was provided that the city did rank high as far as people perceive that there is,
how we are maintaining property. We do get complaints. We follow up on those and that they like the fact
that the city does monitor. The perception was that they appreciate the fact that the city is monitoring those
issues. When there's complaints, that we're on top of them. And then the strategic plan, the 1999
Strategic Plan also talks about in two areas. Preserving the homes and then also maintaining and
strengthening neighborhoods and a way to do that again would be through a maintenance code. So again
the places in the city that's addressed, maintenance would be in the city code and the Chapter 13,
nuisances. This is right now it's run through, it comes through departments in a couple different areas. If
it's weeds or that sort of thing, often it goes to code enforcement, which may be through the sheriff's
department. If it's storage of an outdoor vehicle or something that's a nuisance vehicle, sometimes those
come back over to planning so they are handed to different departments right now. Some of those issues.
Staff did look at kind of framing up some questions because the complaints that we get now certainly
involve, the way it's approached is that we try to get compliance through education. It starts off as a letter
first informing somebody that there is a problem. For example we had a situation last year where someone
built a structure on a property that had no sewer and water, so it takes some time in the process.
Ultimately those often get turned over to the attorney's office where ultimately we were successful without
going to court to get some resolution on that. But those are easier because there's no sewer and water and
it's clearly a violation of city code. Sometimes where it's in the gray area would be, just deterioration.
Maybe a neighbor calls and complains that their neighbors shingles, maybe some are missing. Maybe
there's some siding off. Now that falls into the gray area of maintenance. It's not identified in the building
code. What they have adopted right now. Nor is it in about nuisance ordinance or something that the city
staff could, so some of those issues is maybe an irritant to the neighbor. Those aren't necessarily
something that we would definitely follow up on. And also adding to that, generally most of the complaints
that are handled are issues that are resolved. On a complaint basis. A neighbor complaints that there's a
problem and that's how they're picked up on. So the question that the staff looked at is, in looking at
property and maintenance, should it include just rental property or should it be a broader scope in looking
at property city wide. And certainly there's some merit to going city wide when we've got again going
back to Decision Resource, investment in the community and maintaining that investment. Not only in the
residential section but certainly in the business section too. That people, when they come in and we require
a landscape escrow and they have to maintain it for 2 years. What happens after that point? Again, we do
send letters when we know there's significant deterioration. Maybe there's been a problem with additional
salt put on in parking lots and they've lost a lot of trees. Generally we've had pretty good compliance when
we follow up on that but I think some of these, if it's more strength or teeth in the ordinance would be
helpful for the staff to follow through on. So the applicant city wide, not just for housing certainly is
something I think may be appropriate. The other issue is licensing of rental properties, so there's really
kind of two prongs. One is maintenance, and within that how should that maintenance ordinance be applied
city wide or just on housing? And then that second one would be licensing. Right now there's a voluntary
program that Beth Hoiseth, the city's Crime Prevention Specialist runs and that's for multi-family housing.
There are two projects currently enlisted in that program. And as I pointed out in this issue paper, it's up
to the management to create the environment as Beth stated and it's a voluntary program and as far as the
teeth, that was the first approach. And as we've learned through some of the creative approaches that
we've tried in the planning department, the first approach you try to get at some of the issues. If crime or
conduct on premises and what they've been finding is this. There's some problems with that so now there's
a different approach and that would be more conduct on premise tied to a license. And some other
communities have tried that and I included that in your packet. Plymouth and the Woodbury one. Again
they're very cutting edge. New, but that may be something that you may want to try. The issue that the
City Council Meeting - September 24, 2001
staff would have with both of these programs, it's going to take a significant amount of staffing time and as
I put in here, some of the other communities that are doing this have the staff to do, to maintain that
program because it's not only a significant start up. If we're going to go through and try to get, if we're
looking at maintenance and if you're looking at maybe a little bit higher level on rental property and what's
going to be acceptable standards. It's going to require a significant time of inspection and follow through
and ultimately may even need some additional time over to the attorney's office for their level of
involvement. So I guess we're saying somewhere along the lines we're looking at that level but certainly
you have to put licensing in place to cover the cost of administration, and that would be kind of a separate
prong. So it would have to be some dedicated staff and some finance, some sort of licensing fee again to
cover that cost. The other issue would be in developing these ordinances, in looking at the city currently, if
you go to the building code there's a level that we haven't adopted of the building code that covers
specifically maintenance which we can certainly adopt. Depending on where it goes in the code, it may not
require a public hearing but certainly if you're going to do the licensing part, which is significant impact to
those property owners, I think that level of discussion would take some time to develop that portion of the
ordinance and spend some time with those owners to get input, feedback because again there's only a few
communities that are doing the conduct on premise type licensing as was included in here and from what I
heard from the North Bay, it seems to be that they're receptive of kind of going that way and I think in
talking to Beth Hoiseth again, the Crime Prevention person.
Councilman Ayotte: I didn't hear that last part Kate.
Kate Aanenson: Well I think that's the direct Beth would like to go too. The conduct on premise. If that's
the approach you want to go, instead of the crime free, you kind of need an additional level and that would
be, but again the point there would be that you'd have to spend some time with the people that own
property that are renting them and get some feedback. I included in here, I did talk to Julie Frick, Carver
County HRA does own some rental property in the community. That they would support that level in the
fact that they feel it's something that when they're buying a piece of property that it's a positive thing to
say that the city will also be maintaining this. That there's another level of control. That they can contact
someone at the local level to say there's a problem, and that does benefit her. So again going back to kind
of frame this, there's two kind of prongs. One is the maintenance and how you're going to administer that,
and then tying back kind of a conduct which would kind of be an umbrella tying back to the maintenance
and then the licensing fee which would go with that .... that approach, taking it that way and then spending,
we can come back with this fairly quickly. There may be some elements in the building code that the
building inspectors, there's some things on elevators, some other little nuances that they may not want to
put in there. We'll show you what those would be, but that could be adopted fairly quickly. The other one
I'm anticipating would take a few more months because I guess I would leave that over to Dave Potts with
Carver County and to Beth to work on. Working with the, there's some good models out there for the
conduct on premise and the licensing and work with the property owners on that. Spending a little more
time to get some by, and understanding what that means. Setting up the program and getting some
feedback. So with that, if you have questions on some of the things I had looked at in here, I'd be happy to
answer any questions that you may have.
Mayor Jansen: I guess the only one Kate that maybe you can reiterate a little bit here. I had called today,
since there was so much detail in here with some of the other ordinances, and asked if in fact all of the
detail that the other communities had, do we get all of that if we adopt this uniform building code? And if
you want to maybe go ahead and share your answer.
City Council Meeting - September 24, 2001
Kate Aanenson: Sure. Sure, I can maybe have the city attorney help too. I believe that's where Bumsville
kind of started with that, as he's indicated, and kind of moved from that. I think instead of re-creating the
wheel, again the exterior maintenance is something that we certainly want. The part that goes to the
conduct on premise and that licensing, you may want to increase that level a bit. It gets very specific and
I'm not sure at what level you want to get to as far as fixtures on the inside of rental apartments and some
of that sort of thing so I mean the exterior one will be very easy to come forward. I don't know if you have
anything you wanted to add to that Roger.
Roger Knutson: Some communities, if I remember right Burnsville's one of them, adopted the UBC
provisions but what they did.
Mayor Jansen: For the rookies if you would, Uniform Building Code.
Roger Knutson: The black book right there. That black book. But rather than just say we adopt it by
reference subject to the following changes, they've put it all in an ordinance just for the convenience of here
it is rather than trying to find the manual. But there's a price tag to that and that's a decision you can make
as to physically how you want to do it. But there's an awful lot of detail on there.
Kate Aanenson: Correct. And that's why we would, if that was the way to go, we'd come back to you and
say that but I think if we can exempt the parts that may not be their level of detail that we want to include
to expedite that.
Mayor Jansen: Okay. Council, questions for staff. Comments?
Councilman Ayotte: Yes.
Mayor Jansen: Would you like to pull your microphone forward please so that we can catch your
comments. Thank you.
Councilman Ayotte: Yeah I'm sorry. What I have heard the community say specifically North Bay but
others is that there's an issue with conduct and what I haven't seen here, and I've read it just once so I may
have missed some detail on it, the consequences for not adhering to certain conduct. So to me passing an
ordinance can only be positive if there is the ability to enforce an ordinance and deal with the folks who are
not adhering to the ordinance. Right now we have a chronic problem, and have had history where behavior
hasn't changed because the consequences were either nominal, not severe enough, or our inability to
enforce. That's my view so what I'm asking is whether or not there's a way of doing that.
Kate Aanenson: Yes, that's what I said. There's two that they're basically written, one of them by this
city attorney for the City of Plymouth and that is included in your packet and I'll let Roger.
Mayor Jansen: You might want to pull the microphone just a little closer.
Kate Aanenson: And that is the Plymouth one which is conduct on premise. And that specifically says the
two strike rule. And I'll let Roger comment on it since he drafted it.
Roger Knutson: And I pirated it from someone else so. Plymouth and Minneapolis and I'm sure a number
of other communities do have a provision in their ordinances that say certain conduct occurs on a repetitive
basis, we can pull your license. We can suspend your license. We can take action against your license if
City Council Meeting - September 24, 2001
these bad things happen and continue to happen. And what the ordinance does is list the types, it lists
specifically what kind of bad conduct we're interested in and it puts out a process that says first you get, I
believe it's three strikes. We send you a letter to put you on notice. Here is strike one. The we put you on
notice that strike two and the third time you're in front of the City Council fighting for your license or not
successfully or unsuccessfully. And there's real clout there and when Plymouth went through this, they
went through quite a long process taking many, many months and they invited in landlord groups, tenant
groups, and their lobbyists or associations that are affiliated with, and on the night we adopted it I
remember it was remarkable, after going through several drafts and everyone coming to a consensus, only
two people showed up and they were representing the landlords. Landlord groups and they said please
adopt this. This will help us.
Mayor Jansen: That's wonderful feedback. Thank you for sharing that and council so that you're familiar
in your packets with that information, it is the second city ordinance that's included in your packets.
Minnetonka and then the Plymouth ordinance is right behind that and it's on page 2 of that Plymouth
ordinance that Roger was just quoting the three strike provision. So in tonight's motion and direction to
staff, what Kate was sharing with us is that it's really a two issue direction. One being on the maintenance,
and that would, as Kate's terming it, the external issues. And then the conduct on premises would be the
second direction that we would be giving and that would in fact then more encompass putting teeth in the
crime free multi-housing program that council put into place just a year ago. So we did start trying to
address this on a voluntary basis which is what we've now found to be something that maybe we do need to
add these teeth to as Kate was reflecting the feedback has been from Beth Hoiseth, our Crime Prevention
Officer. So this would be taking that to that second level and looking at an ordinance like Plymouth's,
because it is cutting edge. We would be one of the first communities out there with an ordinance like this
to help maintain our properties and address some of these safety issues. So getting down into the detail of
the issue of what safety issues we're addressing, the recommendation from staff is that there be the public
input as a part of that process. So that all parties involved in that action would have the opportunity to
address and work through all of those issues and make sure that they're being addressed within the
ordinance specifically so there would be a lot of involvement in getting that drafted. But the exterior or the
housing maintenance could come forward more quickly and be put into place. And from what I was noting
of our visitor presentation comments, it is consistent with the recommendation that staff and our manager
have made and that's that our maintenance code address all properties in Chanhassen as well as then
moving forward on these safety issues and making those a part of this conduct on premises. And you
would certainly then have that opportunity to participate in that process as you have been with us all along
and we do appreciate it. And the fact that you are staying in touch and expressing the needs. We also, just
maybe as a side bar, realizing you're addressing the specific issue, we did receive a memo as a part of our
correspondence this evening that shows that the property owner is working very closely with staff trying to
address some of the issues that have been raised on that particular property and it's a 17 bullet point memo
of things that are being addressed. But I realize that some of your key concerns would be more focused on
this conduct on premises, not necessarily maintenance. So we certainly recognize that. Other comments
from council? Gary?
Councilman Boyle: No, I concur with the manager's recommendations. Obviously when it comes down to
adding people in today's environment it would have to look at that pretty close.
Mayor Jansen: Steve?
Councilman Labatt: I have a question for Roger first. On this inspection sheet you gave us, can you help
me, as you look at like Chaska here.
10
City Council Meeting - September 24, 2001
Roger Knutson: I didn't give this to you by the way.
Councilman Labatt: You have Chaska here, they have a fee.., per unit and that's on an annual basis.
Roger Knutson: So you know on inspections, one of the things you can decide is that, and this idea has
been tossed around in various places. Whether for example, and I won't answer the question. I'll just pose
it. Whether buildings constructed prior to a certain date should be inspected annually and certain buildings
constructed after a certain date, the new stuff, only needs to be inspected every other year, whatever
periodic time you think is appropriate. The thought being that the older buildings are more likely to have
problems, maybe. Intuitively that's true. And so you can reduce costs and inspections and you could for
example you could say any building that's constructed, and I'll just make this up, in 19 blank, only gets a 2
year license. Or a 3 year license or whatever and so you would have less staff time invested on inspecting
the buildings where you would expect to see fewer problems.
Mayor Jansen: Okay, thank you. And Kate I would assume that on that sort of detail as we give you
direction to move forward on each of these issues, yourself working with Mr. Gerhardt, would be coming
up with a fee schedule and potential costs as well as the proposed ordinances.
Kate Aanenson: Correct. We have to make the fee appropriate for the work that we would expect, and
Gary asked a good question. I know we've got to make the two match so certainly we're bringing on this
last year 350 more apartment buildings. Is it prudent to be inspecting those on an annual basis? Probably
not. So certainly we would structure that where we're being efficient and putting our resources where they
need to be.
Mayor Jansen: So that would be part of the recommendation that would come forward, thank you.
Councilman Labatt: No, I concur with Mr. Gerhardt's recommendation.
Mayor Jansen: Okay. Any other comments?
Councilman Peterson: I would agree that we would go as far as we absolutely can, both on in focusing on
the exterior, focusing on the conduct, and making this as tight as you could administrate. And do it
aggressively but just do it within proper staffing limits. And I would also do it with existing homes and
commercial properties too as noted earlier.
Mayor Jansen: Okay. Since we do have interested members in the audience, if you would care to make
further comment. I know you shared your comments with us in visitor presentations, is there anything else
you'd care to share? Okay, thank you again for being here. Appreciate it. Okay, with that can I have a,
do you need a motion in order to?
Kate Aanenson: There's not an action item...
Mayor Jansen: Know how you want to move forward?
Kate Aanenson: ... from where you'd like to go and we'll bring back the exterior maintenance as soon as
we can.
11
City Council Meeting - September 24, 2001
Mayor Jansen: Okay. So I'm hearing everyone with a consensus around your recommendations, great.
Alright, thank you.
CONSIDER AMENDMENT TO CITY CODE CHAPTER 20, INCLUDING THE SITE PLAN
REVIEW, PUD, AND HIGHWAY 5 OVERLAY SECTIONS; REGARDING USE OF
MATERIALS AND DESIGN (DESIGN STANDARDS).
Kate Aanenson: Thank you. The design standards begin, the discussion began about 2 years ago and
we're talking about existing industrial and commercial. The council considered raising the standard and the
discussion of brick or better came up and that was kind of the beginning of looking at design standards and
how they're applied, because we have PUD's. We have the Highway 5 overlay district and sometimes
there's different standards even within those. So we began that discussion and then we had Office Max
come in and it was all brick and we all gnashed our teeth because it didn't, kind of even though it was all
brick come in exactly how we wanted it to. It still looked like a box. So we spent some time going back
and looking at this process. Again going back to the issue paper which I did include in your packet. Again
the issue paper discussed the history of design review. What it is. How the city currently regulates it. As I
explained already, we do, the PUD that has different standards and the Highway 5, then also our city code
book also discusses architectural standards. So we also I included in the issue paper comparing ourselves
to what other communities do and obviously cities that have historical significant sometimes have a specific
flavor or character they're trying to maintain and they have an ordinance for that. For example Stillwater,
Wayzata, where they're trying to maintain a certain character. So with that you gave the staff some
direction and we charged off and met with the Planning Commission over the last few years and worked to
develop an ordinance that addressed the following things. Specifically how to amend the ordinance and
what should be included in the ordinance, so based on the fact that we decided that brick or better may not
always solve the problem, we decided that we wanted to apply the ordinance city wide. The discussion of
when 212 comes in, are we going to have those same level of standards down there and what's happening,
so the first goal was that we probably wanted to apply it city wide and include all industrial, office and
institutional and commercial uses. Therefore kind of made the Highway 5 standards, the entire standards
for the entire community. Now this wouldn't, this ordinance doesn't take away from the existing PUD
standards. Those are still in place. Those are specific rules for those projects. But what we addressed was
kind of the standards, as outlined in the proposed ordinance and that talked about architectural style and
building character, looking at size and placement of buildings. We talked about orientation. How they're
sitting on the lot. Entries. Giving a sense of place. These are some of the same things, discussion we've
been talking about with the library even. You know how it's placed on the lot. A lot of discussion and
movement even with that building. Materials and details of those materials. Color of the buildings. Height
and roof design. FaCade transparencies and windows. Site furnishings. Loading areas. Landscaping, lot
frontage and then again orientation from Highway 5 still remains the same because that's again the look of
the community as you go through, so we have specific Highway 5 standards that will remain intact. So
we've been using this as we've been developing this ordinance, some of the projects have come in. We've
actually used this standard now for example when Chapel Hill came in, placement and orientation of that
older part of town. We felt that had a strong character already so we did recommend variances and
actually pushing Chapel Hill closer to the street to give that flavor of the old town, kind of matching what
was happening there. So while this hadn't been adopted, we were kind of using this a some of the basis on
where we were going with the ordinance so we did recommend approval of the variance and the Planning
Commission and the Council did agree with that. So again we have been kind of moving in this direction
for some of the applications. So with that, what we see with this ordinance being adopted, we also intend
to put together, there are color pictures. I think at one point you got the color copies of that. We're going
to embellish that with a few more pictures. Give examples so people aren't kind of hitting them with the
12
City Council Meeting - September 24, 2001
words and also with pictures emphasizing that. We are recommending adoption of the proposed ordinance
and I'd be happy to answer any questions that you have.
Mayor Jansen: Kate, the one thing that I've noticed at least over what's probably been at least the last 9
months, if not longer, as you've been working on these design standards and we've had problems come
forward, staff has commented I think on every proposal that it in fact would meet the new design standards
were they in place. So it's hopefully not as if we are in fact making things tougher but you're more so
documenting the level that you've been expecting in development.
Kate Aanenson: That's correct. We've even given applicants recently drafts that you'll be seeing here
that are in place right now that are kind of moving this direction so yes we have been using those.
Mayor Jansen: Okay, thank you. Questions for staff council?
Councilman Boyle: I have no questions.
Mayor Jansen: No questions? Okay. Well Vernelle, you haven't visited us in a while and I'm sure that
this is why you're sitting in our audience. Thank you for joining us.
Vemelle Clayton: Thank you for inviting me and I am here for Culver's too so I'm a little bit legitimate.
Yes I do want to talk to you about this. I have been involved here for a long time and almost brought along
my board from back in about 1995 or 1996 that I put together the last time this concept was before the
council. At that time, as Kate alluded to, the primary thought was should we try to have everybody build
brick buildings here in town. And so to that end I had put together a little board and I almost threw it away
the first of the year when I cleaned out my desk and office or whatever, but for some reason it didn't get
thrown away, and it really was showing how the charm in our community came about by virtue of the fact
that we had a variety of materials. And I'll get back to that point in a little bit when I go through it
chronologically. But wiser heads I think prevailed at that time and there was no ordinance adopted. Not
wiser than your's but wiser than could have been is what I meant to say. Good grief...
Mayor Jansen: Nice save.
Vernelle Clayton: I won't go through my memo and partly because I'm so ashamed of all the typo's in
there that I don't want to myself face it but I hope that you might have gotten the gist of it and so I won't
belabor those points. I do want to point out that there were 2 of us that responded, Charlie James and I
and I think Charlie suggested an interesting alternative, but I would like to say that we both basically
underline our comments with the same general theme. That we probably have more confidence frankly in
architects and the owners of land necessarily than in staff or council folks or planning commission members
in designing buildings. And that has worked very well for Chanhassen. It's worked very well in the past
because so often in the past we gave TIF or we created PUD's and so there could be a trade-off. In other
words when the landowner had to give something up, he got something in return. In this instance you're
asking all the future landowners to give something up without necessarily being able to get anything in
return. Now the same thing can occur, this just occurred to me as Kate was talking, that when people ask
for a variance you can also extract some things from them and they get something in return. But it kind of
goes against both Charlie's and my grain I think to have so many restrictions on landowners. Taking away
yet another freedom. I think just lately all of us have come to the conclusion that we're for, if there's a
very good reason we're more than willing to give up our freedoms. I also read from time to time in articles,
as I'm sure you do, that while we're so aware of the freedoms that are taken away from us at the national
13
City Council Meeting - September 24, 2001
level, in fact more freedoms are taken away at the local level. And I think this falls in that category. I
don't think that necessarily the plans, the ordinance that might be proposed, the specifics necessarily will
get us where we want to be. If, and I struggle with this. I've thought and I've asked some of you, where
did this idea come from at this time and I guess I know now it came from, it's been around for a while. It
came from one of the prior councils. But then thought more reasonable question to ask probably is what
real purpose is it going to serve for Chanhassen given the fact that we have a lot of tools already to impose
regulations and design criteria and given also the fact that we are so nearly fully developed also because it's
attempting to cover such a broad range of types of buildings, types and sizes and locations of buildings. I
guess in my memo I mentioned that folks, municipalities, counties, governmental units will adopt these
standards when they're trying to preserve something specific and something that's fairly well defined.
Some of the references that were handed out for Northfield, Chaska for example, they know exactly what
they're trying to define. An old town character. We, as I mentioned, we have character here but we
haven't first defined the character that we're trying to protect and then adopted our design standards to that
character. So I think that step has been taken and probably should be studied. As I go through here, you'll
see that I will talk about some of the specific standards that were suggested, but what I really want is not at
all so I want to make that perfectly clear. We have a lot of tools in place already. I think at the beginning
of this report was probably the most interesting, the most enlightening portion. The portion where various
quotes from various well qualified and articulate folks explained the difference between design standards
and, or design review and aesthetic control. I think then we went on and went let's take a, took a gigantic
leap into aesthetic control when in fact when we're trying to label it is design standards. Thank you Kate.
Countless ugly brick buildings can be found throughout the country and I would submit one or two in
Chanhassen possibly. The part that I guess I don't want to take so much time but it says that our cities
have a long way to go before it's appropriate to use the great work standard of architectural review for
everything. Several other interesting comments and the one that I guess I want to use as sort of
springboard here and going into the specific designs is the one that refers to superficial characteristics of
buildings such as materials and colors. It says and indeed design review has acquired a negative image in
some courts due to ordinances and reviews that dwell on superficial characteristics of buildings. This is the
wallpaper approach to design review. Just make it pretty and does not address more fundamental issues.
And so as I suggested in the first Planning Commission, and you know I'm going out of my way to make
myself popular here, I realize that, but I think then we immediately went onto do some explaining how we
would do wallpapering. I have some other points on the process it says in a few cases. This is the question
I have that I want you to think about is what happens to buildings that are already in place, if these
standards were adopted. I mentioned what might happen to folks that might be considering coming in my
memo, and I'm talking about the folks that are already here. It says on page 12, paragraph 1, make
existing buildings on buildings non-conforming, which at some point in the future if they removed it would
be rebuilt with higher quality materials. And then it listed as an advantage, or disadvantage, give the
community or structures a homogeneous appearance which later on is listed as an advantage. I think it is,
would be a disadvantage because we would have much more monotony in buildings is everyone had to try
to adapt these standards. Then it goes on under advantage, it says under leave design standards as is and
expand the Highway 5 Overlay District requirements city wide and it lists an advantage, new ordinance to
be used to require improvements with existing uses as they expand or rebuild. Later on it says that
wouldn't be the case. I'm sure that if, not sure because of the apathy that I'm so familiar with but I have a
feeling that if all the building owners here in town currently knew that this was going to be applied to them
if they renovated, there would be more people here. And I think at this point one of the reasons more
people didn't respond is because most owners have not land around Chanhassen, have not had the
experience that Charlie and I have, and so really don't understand what this means to them in their right to
choose the type of design that they want, or in the costs that might be attributed to that. I guess I should
add as a comment here, for what it's worth under the disadvantage of having a design review committee. I
14
City Council Meeting - September 24, 2001
believe it was, and that would be the case if there was an architectural review committee or an architect
retained by the city. Add to that another disadvantage that would tend to reflect the likes and dislikes of the
committee only. Or the architect only and so forth. That does occur but anyone, even architects have
previous.., for certain types of design. The conflict that I was referring to occurs on, under Section
20.1061 and 20.62. District applications. The second bullet from the top says that it would apply to single
family residential lots are exempt from design standards. The design standards with the following
exceptions. Replace or repair of existing materials. So I don't, that relates to single family I guess but that
doesn't apply that replacement or repair of existing materials might be... Let me go and just pinpoint a few
things. I just would like to ask, and I've seen this before but under Section 20.64. 20-1064 it says in
addition provisions for washing and cleaning buildings shall be included in the design. I've seen that pop
up before and none of the buildings that I've ever been involved with have any provision for washing or
cleaning and I don't understand why we would be washing buildings.
Kate Aanenson: Can you tell me where you're reading that from.
Councilman Labatt: Page 3.
Mayor Jansen: Page 3.
Vemelle Clayton: Page 3.
Councilman Labatt: Section 20-1064.
Vernelle Clayton: Section 20-1064, Size, Portion and Placement. So that's just a sticking point but it was
a curious one. On the next page it says all buildings shall be located as close as possible to the principle
building setback line and the majority of parking shall be at the rear or side of the building or screened
area. Building entrances shall be as close as possible to abutting streets. And then you showed a
Ridgeview building and I just would like to point out to you that while that looks nice it doesn't work. One
of the two buildings, one of the two, I think in both cases, one of the two doors are simply not used.
They're just locked. In fact Ridgeview has stuff stored right in front of it. You couldn't possibly go in that
door. And the only times people use the other door frankly is when they're running across to Milly's. And
the reason it doesn't work, and doesn't ever work for office or retail buildings, is because there's no
parking on the street. There is so much work and so much study going on in how to make street friendly
and apply certain segments or all of their segments or guidelines for new urbanism, and always you have to
have parking on the street for any number of reasons. One is people don't like to walk in the streets unless
they're protected by that row of cars parked there to protect them from the traffic. It's a perception. It's a
feeling. The other is just plain convenience. Further on in one place it says one row of parking across the
front of the building is okay, but then later on it says preferred not for that. So we've got to get some
consistence and we have to think seriously about what's going to work. Under entries, I'm a little
concerned. It says, this is number one. The main entrance shall be placed at grade. Well, you know what
exactly do we mean by that? What grade? There's some elevations where we really like to push the
envelope a little bit because Chanhassen is not level and if we want to have one long building up to the
street, then part of that building will have entrances that aren't at grade and we'll have to deal with some
ramps. So I guess I'm trying to make the point that we're being far too specific and the more specific you
get the more problems you run into. And speaking kind of generally now, I drove through the industrial
park and I noticed, and you'll love this because you guys need to know that I am about as fussy as anybody
about how buildings look and buildings that I bring in here and before you have a chance to attack, and
even during, I'm pinging away at these guys and staff and I have had all kinds of meetings about how did
15
City Council Meeting - September 24, 2001
we get this particular or that building or that to be a little bit better looking so what I'm going to say now is
going to, is surprising me. But as I drove through the industrial park tonight it struck me that under this
guideline we would not have any of the Instant Web Company, and we probably wouldn't have Pillsbury.
And I want to tell you if this community could have another Instant Web group of companies and another
Pillsbury, we ought to be out there saying what can we do to help you. You're exactly what we need. We
need your taxes. We need your people coming to our restaurants. So what I'm trying to say is, don't be
too specific here that you don't leave some wiggle room so when the Pillsbury's coming along and Instant
Web folks come along and people with otherwise good designs can't be fit, can't fit in. To that end then we
need to get away from the aesthetic controls and go back to basic design controls which will give staff the
same level of ideas of concepts without the restrictions that some of these specifics would dictate. The
entries, it says here the main entrance and so forth and I won't re-read it, but then it goes on to list canopy
portico overhang or arch above the entrance. Recess or protections in the building faCade surrounding
entrance. Peaked roof or raised parapet over the door. Display windows surrounding the entrance.
Architectural detailing such as tile work or ornamental molding. Permanent planters or window boxes for
landscaping. We're talking about the single purpose, single user building here. Most of our buildings are
not that. Most of them are multi-tenant, and most of our larger buildings are multi-tenant. So again, and
we don't want to put, I don't think that any architect would want to put canopies over every single door. I
know no building owner who would want, let's just picture Market Square for a little while. Every time we
change a tenant, and that tenant wants to have their door somewhere else, that building has been designed
so that a window can be a door this year and a door can be a window next year and they can spread from
1,000 square feet to 5,000 square feet and still have the basic building intact. But we're not going to redo
and put canopies over doors here and there.
Mayor Jansen: Vernelle, I don't mean to interrupt but I'm hoping you're close.
Vernelle Clayton: I'll try. I'll just list some other, just quickly what the problems are without the so
compel. The 40 feet I think in some buildings, on articulation, something in and out. Every 40 feet is
probably too little if it's a big building and too much if it's a small building. Ground level of any multi-
story structure should be visually distinct from the upper stories. I don't think we want to really tell our
architects that they have to do that. I think one of the, for example the building that's pictured, Heartland
America has a band but it's not at the first story. It's higher and if you have a higher building you've got
to have it higher. If you have a really long building, you want it broken up by vertical as well as
horizontal. Okay, I'm glad that I'm not totally out of time here because we have two very important.
Material and details. You know how I feel about brick. Now, there are new materials coming out. One
that's being very successful is called concrete board. The 7 inches I guess I question, if anybody would
like to drive by the new building over in Eden Prairie. The name of the huge company that's passed down
all the building that I've forgotten but they're using concrete board to look like wood and it's a huge
expanse so it's probably about that big and it looks great and that's, in those proportions, if they use 7
inches and they use wood, it would look funny. Stucco and I would like, that leads me down to the next
one which is building materials that shouldn't be used which is EFIS. If we didn't have the right in
Chanhassen to use EFIS, we wouldn't have Perkins looking as it is. We wouldn't have Taco Bell. We
wouldn't have the Americana Bank and we wouldn't have the building that everybody's raving about as to
how great it looks, Bookoo Bikes. If we didn't have stucco we wouldn't have the variety that lends to the
charm that we have in our downtown, and you need that variety. This issue first came up several years ago
and I don't think that the perception has caught up with reality with respect to EFIS. If you require that
folks using EFIS use contractors who have had, who have successfully installed EFIS, that goes a long way
towards avoiding any problems. There were initially some contractors that didn't know how to install it.
16
City Council Meeting - September 24, 2001
And secondly, the material itself has been upgraded and it's much better now than it originally was. So I
really would hope that you wouldn't throw out this opportunity for variety in our town.
Mayor Jansen: I need you to wrap up in 2 please.
Vernelle Clayton: Wrap up, I think I'm about done. I appreciate being, oh, pitched elements. We've been
talking about pitched elements for a long time. If we had pitched elements we wouldn't have Byerly's, and
I think we need to think about, I talked about the parking, landscaping, the new urbanism approach is not
by grouping plantings. Putting up rows. We need to have the flexibility to do that. Alright, I think I know
when I'm not supposed to talk anymore. Oh, fake windows. That's a big one. Don't like fake windows.
Thanks. Sorry.
Mayor Jansen: Thank you Vernelle. We do appreciate your concern and your input on our working
through the ordinances and as you mentioned you've followed the progress that was in making on this one
for some time so appreciate your involvement. Kate, I think the common theme that I was hearing that I
would like to maybe have you address as a staff member, is whether this ordinance is going to be restrictive
of your ability to introduce flexibility and avoid monotony if you would. I know that you regularly remind
us that when you're working with the applicant that you are trying to make adjustments and have some give
and take. As a staff person having to implement this ordinance, are we taking away or are we improving
your ability to be able to work with your applicants?
Kate Aanenson: Thank you, that's a good question. I'm going to try to comment on some of those back.
I'll try to be brief but the intent of this was to give the staff more specifically through pictures and text
what we're trying to accomplish. And what we did is we took a photo essay of all the buildings in town, so
we spent a lot of time. We pulled up what Chaska's doing for their Target. The 40 feet came specifically
at looking at a lot of buildings. Could they make the 40 feet? We believe that works. That's the Target
which is a very large one in Chaska and Minnetonka. Their articulation. If you look at all of our industrial
buildings, they would make it. Again, there was a menu on a lot of things that Mrs. Clayton was going
through. If you go through those, under entrance it talks about if or. The roof articulation was what's been
applied in the past. It will be continued. We've done different approaches to it. I think we've been very
creative in Byerly's in pitched roof elements. How we came up with that. Applebee's, using canopies.
There's other approaches to it. Even Perkins. So we've applied that being creative. I think what this is
giving us is again some direction. As far as having a theme or a character for the community, in
Minnetonka and Eden Prairie who says brick or better, I'm not sure what their character or their theme is.
It's a lot of monotony. I think that's what we were trying to say, there's some other things that are really
important in a building and it can be the landscaping, it can be the windows, it can be the front entrance.
The orientation. So what we're trying to say is instead of a specific material, there's some other ways to
accomplish good design. And as far as the other point I wanted to make is that there is also in this
ordinance some discretion for the level of renovation. If you're just doing some minor alteration, we're not
going to hold you hostage to come back and re-do the building. It specifically states in there that the staff
would work in that specific area that you're working on, that we would try to bring that up to code but it's
not, you have to take the whole building down. I don't think that's reasonable. The Planning Commission
did discuss that. So that is built into the ordinance. The other thing I just wanted to comment on too as far
as, there was an approach at one time to have an architectural control committee. What the state law
requires is a 60 day review. We thought that would just become very bureaucratic and then after that
process, if the Planning Commission and the Council's not in concurrence we'd kind of add this other level
and I think, in my perception is that the Planning Commission is doing a good job reviewing that level.
What we're trying to give them is a little bit more specifics for the applicant's benefit too of what our intent
17
City Council Meeting - September 24, 2001
is and move that through the process so the bottom line, to answer your question is, we believe this is going
to be helpful to us and I think there's, the intent is to build some flexibility. Every circumstance is unique.
Just as we talked about the changes going on in Villages on the Pond. Every circumstance is a little bit
different, but this is giving us the good framework, a point of beginning for the dialogue. What our
expectations are when you're coming here. And the other thing is the TIF dollars aren't there. Those
incentives to get it up there aren't there. What we're saying, those people that already built there, the rest
of them, our expectations to come in close to that same level.
Mayor Jansen: Okay, thank you. To the new members on the council I want to share with you and
compliment staff for all the work that you have put in to pulling these standards together. Council received
a presentation from Kate that was an extensive photo tour of the community and the different buildings and
if anything Kate emphasized to us the necessity of the variety of the building materials and really put a case
together for how Chanhassen looks and how we want to maintain that so this isn't an effort to change what
we've done, but more so compliment what we've done. And that same video tour or picture tour was also
given to the Planning Commission and there's been a lot of time and effort and comments put in by the
Planning Commissioners to go through some of these detail and try to ensure that both the Planning
Commission as well as staff have some of that flexibility to be able to make sure that we're not getting
monotonous or hopefully too restrictive. But they in fact could then back down and adjust accordingly by
project. With that, any more questions for staff council?
Councilman Ayotte: Yeah, since I'm considered a new member of council, I wonder when I'm going to be
just a member of council but has this been test, has there been a test bed on your design standards? Has it
been tried out in actual applications to see how it works?
Kate Aanenson: Have other communities done it?
Councilman Ayotte: No, have you done something with it to try to see how...
Kate Aanenson: Well it's the Highway 5 ordinances basically with some additional things added to it now
city wide.
Mayor Jansen: And Kate maybe share the comment that you've made all year long as you've been sharing
the development proposals with us. That you have been comparing the proposals as they've come forward
to what the new standards would be.
Councilman Ayotte: But I'm saying with the things that you've changed in this, you've tried it and it's
tried and true do you feel or?
Kate Aanenson: Do I think they're going to work?
Councilman Ayotte: Yeah.
Kate Aanenson: You know and that goes back to the comment that Charlie James had, which is a relevant
comment. What if you make 75% rule? What you think is relevant but there's certain things that
everybody has hot buttons on like you know, if it just didn't have that large green stripe. I mean you've got
to wrestle that so if we say you've met the 75% rule, then you can, we'll acquiesce on the rest, but what if
it's the most important design element? We don't know that until it comes in and that's the nature of the
beast. Every project is so different. We have to look at them all individually and then our job as planners
18
City Council Meeting - September 24, 2001
is every little piece is part of the puzzle. How do they relate to each other? What's the rhythm that we're
creating and the patterns and that's what make the communities livable. That's what people like and that's
what we're trying to maintain and making sure the pieces work together. And so yes, I believe that there's,
are there going to be some rubs and somebody that's going to need a variance? Absolutely. I can't prevent
those. I can't predict the future but I think this is a good point of beginning to give us some direction for
the developers.
Mayor Jansen: And a good point you bring up on being able to give the variances too to this. Gary, did
you have a question?
Councilman Boyle: Well I've got a couple comments. I find it quite restrictive and not flexible. I believe
it's very specific in fact and I, you commented that it would also be beneficial to the applicant because the
applicant would know exactly what could be done or couldn't be done. With that it raises the question,
we're pretty happy it sounds like with what we have today, is that correct?
Kate Aanenson: I'll let you answer that.
Councilman Boyle: Well I think so.
Kate Aanenson: I got directions to change the standards so.
Councilman Boyle: Oh, okay. Well see I'm the new member she was talking about so I'm making
comments that's probably already been talked about.
Mayor Jansen: Well and part of that, and what Kate is reflecting is that this is indicative of what we have
in our Highway 5 corridor so it's looking at some of the development that's come in under those standards
and whether we want to compliment that and use that in the rest of our development as we go forward and
there's a level of comfort in that ordinance and what we've seen developed under it to say through the
Planning Commission also, that this would enable us to continue with the rest of the development in the
community under those same standards and be complimentary of what exists currently.
Councilman Boyle: Do we need this to do that?
Mayor Jansen: There's nothing like this in place in those areas of the community.
Councilman Boyle: But my point is, we've done, if we assume we've done pretty good in the past.
Kate Aanenson: But let me put a caveat with that.
Councilman Boyle: Why couldn't we have the same process?
Kate Aanenson: Because we had TIF back then. A lot of the projects were given TIF. There was an
incentive to get some additional level. That is not there anymore. You know you had a carrot and stick.
Councilman Peterson: There was a stick yeah. It wasn't a carrot. It was a stick.
Councilman Boyle: In your personal opinion would this detract, would this deter a good builder from
saying he wants to build in Chanhassen? Obviously I know how you're going to answer.
19
City Council Meeting - September 24, 2001
Kate Aanenson: Well Minnetonka has brick. So does Eden Prairie. Do people still build there? I believe
there's market forces. Are people willing to go where there's less, you know they still have to have a
market. If somebody wants to come here because there's a market, they'll come here and I think that's part
of the discussion that went into the beginning of this is that there's certain expectations in this market that
you're going to meet that level. And if that level's been set.
Councilman Peterson: And further, to help you out and answer that question Gary, I think that the
Highway 5 corridor standards haven't dissuaded anybody from developing on Highway 5 so I mean that's
probably the best answer to your question. That it hasn't stopped the development on 5. We've got some
very good developments on 5 because of it.
Councilman Boyle: I agree, but isn't this making, it just seems very specific. Almost, what did Vernelle
call it, the wiggle worm? Room. It takes a lot of the room...
Mayor Jansen: Well and that's why we posed the question to staff. Because staff likes to have the wiggle
room and the flexibility and if we're in fact taking that away, knowing Kate she would be very comfortable
expressing that to us and it's definitely been a discussion at the Planning Commission because they also
don't want to lose that flexibility and again trying to avoid the monotony. In fact very specifically this is to
make sure that within some developments we're not creating and having the monotony. It's a requirement
that they not be.
Councilman Peterson: I think it's also important to think back of the developers and the landowners or
however you want to characterize them that have put buildings on Highway 5 corridor. They have
challenged the Planning Commission and challenged Kate, even though design standards were there clearly
in writing. They still have challenged the process and it's gotten, and I think we're better for it. We have
some different buildings that potentially were outside of the standards but staff worked with the applicant
and found a way to have a better product so I would, I looked at it, I didn't see it as that restricting because
I know how staff works is that if a developer or an architect, which I've never found them to be overly shy,
you know present something to staff, they're not going to, they're going to look at it and really have a feel
for whether or not it's appropriate. This gives them that tool to say that, and to give the developer or the
architect, this is kind of where we're thinking to give you a tone. Show me what you can do. But that's
how I interpret that.
Councilman Ayotte: Target a deviation then? You know if they want to have something different, give
them a start point to go.
Councilman Peterson: Sure. I mean as what has been proven itself to be effective on Highway 5.
Mayor Jansen: And we've seen that flexibility given even within some of the more restrictive PUD's like
Village on the Ponds. There was a great deal of discussion initially over the swim school. The
architecture. The color didn't, you know it was a little tough and it was something that the city definitely
wanted to see happen and there needed to be some flexibility and it certainly, it happened. It's there. But it
at least gives you a starting point.
Councilman Boyle: Well that was the point I was trying to make. That what the flexibility in the past. I
mean we've made it happen in the past but this is, as I understand now, and I respect your comments also
Craig with your experience on Planning Commission, this just tightens the guidelines I guess, right?
20
City Council Meeting - September 24, 2001
Kate Aanenson: That's the intent. I mean the city attorney can speak to that but if it's not in the ordinance
it's difficult to make somebody do it. Tfyou don't have an ordinance to say that. We've been lucky in the
fact that we have a staff that's willing to get beat up. Sometimes we're in concurrence and sometimes
we're not. The Planning Commission maybe hears it once or twice before we get to that point. But our
goal is, if you're not interested in that, T understand that but if you want to give us the tool to ensure that
people understand the rules, then this would be it.
Councilman Boyle: Kate, T don't want to discourage in any way, shape or form economic development,
and that's kind of where I'm coming from, okay.
Councilman Ayotte: Would this stop the discussions over the selection of brick at council meetings that
have occurred in the past?
Kate Aanenson: I don't think so.
Mayor Jansen: We've tried to move those back into the Planning Commission and staff.
Kate Aanenson: Everybody likes to pick colors.
Councilman Ayotte: Mauve.
Mayor Jansen: And to restricting economic development, I think that this council in fact has shown that
they are looking at being more proactive and if anything, in the discussions over forming a task force for
economic development we're demonstrating that we would like to encourage that. So that is where we're
trying to be sure that if staff has pulled this together that they have the flexibility to be able to work with
businesses and not keep them restricted to the point that they can't build in Chanhassen. Steve.
Councilman Labatt: The question with EFTS came up Kate, and shooting from the hip here. How much of
Bookoo Bikes is EFTS? What percentage?
Bob Generous: About 60%.
Councilman Labatt: About 60%.
Kate Aanenson: The Planning Commission discussed that at length with EFIS versus stucco.
Councilman Labatt: In your wording on it, where EFTS may not be used as an accent. Or may be used as
an accent but not as a primary material.
Kate Aanenson: Correct. In that circumstance it would have required a variance if it was to come in
today.
Councilman Labatt: I just want to get clarification on that. And so let's say hypothetically here that a
homeowner owns an old cottage and he wants to come in for, to renovate his house. He's going to be held
to the new uniform building code. The new standards that are set, correct?
Kate Aanenson: Are you talking about a store or a house?
21
City Council Meeting - September 24, 2001
Councilman Labatt: I'm talking about a house. I'm trying to, the question of renovation came up.
Kate Aanenson: Yes. Yes.
Councilman Labatt: The store owner has an older building, he wants to come in and renovate it, he's going
to be held to these new standards. Will that same apply to a homeowner?
Kate Aanenson: Yes. Well we did put something in there. Let me flip to the page where I had that real
quick. There is a percentage. If you look on page 3, at the top of page 3. Internal alterations to the
building that affect less than 50% of the building gross floor area do not result in the change of the building
height, roof line or footprint. These are some of the places you start. The bottom of the last page. District
applications so there are some exemptions. Replacement or repair of existing material. We're not going to
make you go. If you want to just repair it and maintain it, certainly with our maintenance code that's what
we're going to want. And then the other caveat would be, only those, if you're just changing exterior
material we wouldn't make you do the whole thing over. Just that portion that they're fixing. If you're
changing your entry, it would just be the entry then. So we're trying to be, again the Planning Commission
did discuss that at length too. Kind of making it a rationale approach because we certainly do want people
to maintain their property. We talked about that earlier tonight. And so we're not going to say well if you
don't fix the whole thing you can't fix anything. I don't think that's a rationale approach. You know
slowly over time if you're getting it to where we want it to be, that was the intent.
Councilman Labatt: Okay, well just clarification. No, I like it. I mean I think it's clear direction for
development in the community and what the rules are, so.
Mayor Jansen: Okay. Any other discussion council?
Councilman Ayotte: I do have a question.
Mayor Jansen: Okay.
Councilman Ayotte: Is there, and this is to Vernelle's point. Vernelle, I think this is excellent. That it
gives some parameters but also is there room for, and I'll use the term performance targets that would be a
little bit more of an extension to the intent? Is that asking too much?
Kate Aanenson: Well again, I think that's a similar question that Mr. James asked, and Charlie James by
the way did the Byerly's development. Just so you know. We did send this out for comments and we
tossed that around, but again each building, something might be most important on that building. What
they think is significant might be not the same interpretation as the Planning Commission. But again as I
go back, every project has unique circumstances that they can't, and we work with that.
Councilman Ayotte: It would be hard. Like for example, when you're dealing with hard and fast
applications it isn't, but with the diversity we have, I can see where it could be...
Kate Aanenson: Right, for example we struggled with Chapel Hill, the proximity. Or the height of that
building based on the character of that neighborhood and how do we balance the two so each one is so
unique that you kind of, you give on one and take on the other and you just work. It's a process. And it's
form and function. Whatever that building needs to be and how it needs to work so you have to take.
22
City Council Meeting - September 24, 2001
Councilman Ayotte: And that's where the deviation would come in versus the.
Kate Aanenson: And it happens, sometimes people have to ask for a variance and we have to be willing to
look at that because it's unique. Just as the mayor was speaking about the swim school and we all just
rolled up our sleeves and said we felt it was an important element to add to the community. What can, how
can we make it work? We take that with every project.
Councilman Ayotte: Okay.
Mayor Jansen: With that, if I could have a motion please.
Councilman Peterson: Madam Mayor, I'd recommend the City Council approves repealing the Article
noted for the Highway 5 Corridor District and replace it with these options, the regulations set forth within.
Mayor Jansen: And a second?
Councilman Ayotte: I'll second.
Councilman Peterson moved, Councilman Ayotte seconded that the City Council approve repealing
Article XXIX Highway Corridor Districts and replace it with the adoption of Article XXIV General
Supplemental Regulations, Division 7, Design Standards as attached with the condition that the
repealing and adoption occur concurrently. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 5
to 0.
Roger Knutson: Mayor, could we also get, would you also consider a motion approving the summary of
the ordinance for publication. We need a separate motion on that. That saves the city a lot of money so we
don't have to publish the whole thing.
Mayor Jansen: Thank you.
Councilman Peterson: So moved.
Mayor Jansen: Okay, and a second please.
Councilman Ayotte: Second.
Councilman Peterson moved, Councilman Ayotte seconded to approve the summary ordinance for
publication of Article XXIV General Supplemental Regulations, Division 7, Design Standards. All
voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 5 to 0.
CONSIDER REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A DRIVE THRU
WINDOW AND SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A 4,768 SQ. FT. CULVER'S RESTAURANT; 450
POND PROMENADE, LOT 1, BLOCK 1, VILLAGES ON THE PONDS 2N~ ADDITION,
WAYNE RISER & ASSOCIATES.
Bob Generous: Thank you Madam Mayor, Council members. As you stated this is a two part review. A
conditional use permit for a drive thru within the Villages on the Ponds project. This building is located up
23
City Council Meeting - September 24, 2001
in the northeast comer of the Villages project. It's adjacent to the Bell Mortgage building or Building 4.
It's accessed off of Great Plains Boulevard and it's addressed off of Pond Promenade. Recently in August
the City did amend the PUD standards to permit thru's drive on this specific lot subject to a conditional use
permit review. The criteria that we looked at were that it be on this site. That the traffic not back out into
the parking area. That the sound from the ordering system be not heard off site and that the drive thru itself
be screened. We reviewed the site plan based on those criteria and the only addition that we have for that is
that the applicant provides some evergreens in the northwest comer of the property to screen the drive thru
from the north. Based on the traffic information we received from the developer, initially they showed us
information for a Culver's in the resort area during the peak season and so these numbers were higher. The
Planning Commission requested that they get us numbers from, traffic generation numbers from a local
restaurant so they went down to Shakopee and did the actual traffic counts there and they came in under
what the projections would have been. The developer, I believe that this is more reminiscent of what will
happen in this community. The engineering department reviewed the traffic circulation pattern and agreed
that there should be sufficient stacking in the drive thru aisle so that the back-up doesn't go into the parking
area for the rest of the development. Staff is recommending approval of the conditional use permit for the
drive thru subject to the conditions in our staff report. The second part is the site plan review. This is a
one story building. It is a hybrid brick-block type structure. It's a light color and there are material
samples there. We worked hard and Vemelle worked hard to have the architectural mimic some of the
other architectural within the Villages project. They've included the tower element on both the north and
south ends. They've incorporated the tall windows. To comply with the design standards that were just
approved tonight, based on our review they only had to add two windows to meet the 50% transparency.
Otherwise the design of this project with it's articulation orientation would have met our design standards.
The roof element has various angles and while it doesn't show up well on the plan, when it's actually built
you'll see a lot of different details in that. We believe that this project meets the design standards for the
Villages on the Ponds and for the new design ordinance and we're recommending approval of the site plan
subject to the conditions of the staff report. The Planning Commission did review this and recommended 4
to 1 approval of the conditional use permit and 5 to 0 approval of the site plan. With that I'd be happy to
answer any questions you may have.
Mayor Jansen: Thank you. The main issue that was really kicked around the most of course was the
traffic generation. That's been the main concern both at the Planning Commission, Council level as well as
any of the comments I think we initially received from residents. I was present for the Planning
Commission meeting on this and there was a resident there who was really reflecting that he as a neighbor
was supportive of this proposal, having now really seen these traffic generation numbers that are being
shared with us. And I think staff did a nice job of showing us that difference between Culver's trip
generation versus the fast food because that of course was the main consideration on this whole traffic
generation. And Planning Commission having requested the Shakopee numbers I think was excellent to
give us another piece of information as far as what we're really looking at to get our arms around it.
Council, any questions for staff?
Councilman Labatt: None.
Mayor Jansen: Seeing none, I know I've gotten both phone calls and e-mails and I would have to say
they've been equal for and against. Community survey saying that we definitely need restaurants. We
know that we want sit down. This is at least meeting partially that request. We know that the community
would like some nicer site down restaurants but this certainly, from the positive comments I've gotten and
received, families are seeming to be quite excited about this type of a product coming into the community.
So appreciate staffs efforts and Planning Commission as well as the applicant working with the
24
City Council Meeting - September 24, 2001
community to make this fit the concept of that development. It certainly will be a nice addition. If I could
have a motion please.
Councilman Peterson: I do have one question for staff I guess.
Mayor Jansen: Sure.
Councilman Peterson: I thought you were going to do comments by.
Mayor Jansen: Okay, sorry. Go ahead.
Councilman Peterson: Bob, one of the things that came from Planning Commission was that they
considered changing the color of the roof. Bob you can humble me by letting me talk about color for a
second. Did they come back and change the color at all or not?
Bob Generous: They haven't. They'd like to go with a darker color actually. I'm not sure, if we get a
sample palette from them.
Councilman Peterson: I mean if you drive by, even though I know the one in Savage isn't the same color
but I mean that roof just, in looking at it, is going to stand out like a neon sign. If you look back at what
we just approved in the previous motion on design standards, it doesn't necessarily speak to that. It's an
abrupt difference and an accent that, it's an aggressive color change.
Councilman Ayotte: That was the same guy that picked the colors for our brochures?
Councilman Peterson: So you know I guess I haven't hid the fact that I'm not a big proponent of having a
drive thru in Villages, as I commented I think in the last meeting and didn't vote for it but I think that what
that abrupt and pretty neon roof is going to do is going to attract visual. I can see why they want it, but it's
just going to bring all the eyes to that roof and go right down to everybody looking at the drive thru so I
guess I would like to at least consider reinforcing what the Planning Commission recommended to soften
that color to as much as we possibly can.
Kate Aanenson: That is in condition number 22. I don't know if you wanted to direct staff to look at
different palettes or, I think the Planning Commission's recommendation was to go darker.
Councilman Ayotte: Say again Kate?
Kate Aanenson: The Planning Commission's recommendation was to go maybe a shade or two darker.
Mayor Jansen: They wanted a dark navy.
Kate Aanenson: Yep, and that is a condition, number 22, changing the roof to look at darker so that's
something that certainly.
Councilman Peterson: Yeah, I'd like to see that if we could.
Kate Aanenson: It was my understanding that the applicant's okay with that too so.
25
City Council Meeting - September 24, 2001
Mayor Jansen: Okay. So you just need to see the color palette and approve it.
Vernelle Clayton made a comment from the audience which was not picked up by the microphone.
Kate Aanenson: I'm not sure if that sample reflects it.
Vernelle Clayton then introduced the manager of the new Culver's restaurant.
Mayor Jansen: Welcome. Thank you for being here.
Kate Aanenson: Maybe just to clarify that motion is that we darken the roof, if that's your direction. That
we work with the applicant and make sure.
Councilman Peterson: That's my opinion, yes.
Councilman Labatt: Can we reword 20 then, or 22 to give it a little bit more teeth?
Kate Aanenson: Right, that's what we're suggesting.
Councilman Labatt: Craig's what your options here? You know the applicant shall consider, I think that.
Kate Aanenson: Take consider out.
Councilman Labatt: Puts everything in his book.
Mayor Jansen: Should work with staff?
Councilman Peterson: Should work with staff to find a color more appropriate to Villages on the Ponds.
Kate Aanenson: Can the staff be more specific?
Vemelle Clayton: Can you say the roof in Shakopee...
Mayor Jansen: Kate, what would you like it to say?
Kate Aanenson: Well I guess we would be happy with the applicant shall change the color roof to be a
darker shade of blue. I mean so a little more specific. And then from my understanding that's what Mr.
Riser agreed to. I'm not sure that that blue reflects it. Is that the question?
Bob Generous: No, that was the original.
Kate Aanenson: That's the original application so if you're looking at that blue, it'd be these may be
darker but that material sample.
Councilman Boyle: Is the objective to get to the same color as the Shakopee store?
Councilman Peterson: No.
26
City Council Meeting - September 24, 2001
Mayor Jansen: No, darker.
Councilman Peterson: If you drive by there, their standard corporate color is extremely bright.
Kate Aanenson: So we'll get the different color palettes and make sure it's the dark, on the darker shade.
Mayor Jansen: Okay, very good. Okay, are we set? If I could have a motion please.
Councilman Labatt: I move that we approve Conditional Use Permit #2001-7 subject to the following
conditions, 1 through 5. Do we need two motions then?
Roger Knutson: You can do one motion and combine them.., see if they go.
Councilman Labatt: Subject to conditions 1 through 5 and we approve Site Plan #2001-7 subject to the
following conditions 1 through 22, and changing 22 to read the applicant shall work with staff to change
the color of the roof to a darker shade of blue.
Mayor Jansen: Can I have a second please?
Councilman Boyle: Second.
Mayor Jansen: And discussion of the motion?
Councilman Labatt moved, Councilman Boyle seconded that the City Council approves Conditional
Use Permit #2001-7 for a drive through window subject to the following conditions:
1. The drive-through shall provide sufficient stacking to assure that traffic is not backed into the
parking lot drive aisles.
2. The loud speakers used for ordering shall be shielded so that noise is not heard off-site.
3. The drive-through shall be screened from off-site views.
4. The drive-through window is approved only for a restaurant use that custom prepares foods at the
time of order.
5. Trip generations for any restaurant use on the site shall be within 25 percent of the average trip
generation rates shown for a high turnover, sit down restaurant in the Trip Generation, 6th Edition,
Institute of Traffic Engineers.
And Councilman Labatt moved, and Councilman Boyle seconded to approve Site Plan #2001-7 as
shown on the plans prepared by John Oliver & Associates, Inc., dated 8/15/01, subject to the
following conditions:
1. An understory evergreen element shall be added to the northwest area of the property. Evergreens
should be 10 to 15 feet at maturity.
27
City Council Meeting - September 24, 2001
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City and provide the necessary
security to guarantee erosion control, site restoration and landscaping.
All areas between paved areas and wetlands shall be revegetated per the planting plan that was
approved as a part of Villages on the Ponds.
All areas disturbed as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restored with seed and
disc-mulched or wood-fiber blanket or sod within two weeks of completion of each activity in
accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook.
The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, i.e.
Carver County, Watershed District, Metropolitan Waste Control Commission, Health Department,
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Army Corps
of Engineers and Minnesota Department of Transportation and comply with their conditions of
approval.
Submit storm sewer sizing design data for a 1 O-year, 24-hour storm event.
Add the following 2001 City Detail Plates to the detail sheet: 5203, 5215, 5300, and 5302. Also,
show the most current revision of plate no. 3102.
Prior to building permit issuance, all plans must be prepared and signed by a professional civil
engineer registered in the State of Minnesota.
No building permits will be issued until the City receives as-built plans for the development.
Any off-site grading will require easements from the appropriate property owner(s).
Revise the western slope off of the drive through area to show either a maximum slope grade of 3:1
or to install a retaining wall.
Some of the parking stalls are less than the minimum allowable width of 8.5 feet. These should be
revised as necessary.
Detailed occupancy related requirements cannot be reviewed until complete plans are submitted.
The utility plans will be reviewed during the permit process.
The owner and/or their representative shall meet with the Inspections Division as soon as possible
to discuss plan review and permit procedures.
The applicant shall eliminate the staking and wiring instruction detail in the landscape plan titled
'~tree planting - guy wire".
All signs shall require a separate sign permit.
A 10 foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e. street lamps, trees, shrubs,
bushes, Xcel Energy, US West Cable TV and transformer boxes. This is to ensure that the fire
28
City Council Meeting - September 24, 2001
hydrant can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City
Ordinance #9-1.
19.
Fire lane signs and yellow curbing will be required. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact
curbs to be painted and exact location of fire lane signs. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire
Department/Fire Prevention Division #6-1991 and Section 904-1, 1997 Minnesota Uniform Fire
code.
20. A stop sign shall be installed at the exit of the drive through.
21. Add windows on the floor plan to reflect the windows shown on the elevations.
22. The applicant shall change the color of the roof to a darker shade of blue.
All voted in favor, except Councilman Peterson who abstained and the motion carried with a vote of 4
in favor and 1 abstention.
Councilman Peterson: Abstain just on the simple basis that I like the project with the exception of the drive
through.
Mayor Jansen: Okay, and the motion passes 4 with 1 abstain. Thank you and welcome to Chanhassen.
COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS: COUNCIL/COMMISSION LIAISON UPDATE.
Mayor Jansen: Do we have any council members with commission reports? I would just say we had a
couple of major issues that came before us this evening that Planning Commission and Kate spent a great
deal of time on. They've been doing numerous ordinance reviews and certainly the two that we passed
tonight took a tremendous amount of time so certainly appreciated and they did a very nice job of going
through all of the detail in bringing that forward so just thank you for having done that.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: UPDATE ON TH 5 ROAD CONSTRUCTION
REGARDING ENTRANCES TO THE LANDSCAPE ARBORETUM AND CRIMSON BAY
NEIGHBORHOOD.
Teresa Burgess: Thank you Madam Mayor. Update might be a wrong work for this. This evening I have
a 30% submittal that MnDot supplied to us and the purpose of presenting this tonight is so that the council
can see what is being proposed for this section of roadway. This is from Highway 41 out to approximately
the intersection with Arboretum entrance and Crimson Bay. MnDot's map here is not the best. The one
that was presented in the staff report is much more accurate of the limits of the project. It also reflects
Highway 5 incorrectly so that is something they need to correct on the plans. Still their map is not quite
accurate. These plans are on file in the engineering department. If any of the property owners in that area
are watching tonight and would like to come in and see these plans, they are available but we do request
they make an appointment so someone is there to answer any questions. I will also be sending out a letter
to the property owners detailing the information I'm giving you this evening and letting them know these
plans are available. We should be receiving 60% plans in approximately a month. A little bit more detail
for the council. This is why you didn't get a copy in the staff report. The plan is huge. This is a copy of
the plan as it appeared all on one sheet. It is relatively small. What they are proposing to do, I'll just talk
really loud. What they're proposing to do is this is approximately where the existing project is under
29
City Council Meeting - September 24, 2001
construction right now... We have the 4 lanes, an existing raised concrete median.., by the time this project
goes forward that will be in place. It tapers down to 2 lanes and paved shoulder. As they come through
they'll be creating.., and eventually that will become a left mm lane into the Arboretum entrances. The
private drive into the Arboretum. And there will also be a left mm lane into Crimson Bay. A large number
of our accidents out in this area, people that are sitting in the traffic drive lane trying to make that left
mm... Crimson Bay. We also have right mm lanes added. The right mm lanes will allow...to get off the
road... The revised section occurs mainly in the existing roadbed. Most of the work will require simply
paving the existing shoulder and they'll be dragging out some pavement.., is not widening the roadbed at all
and it has very minimal impact into the wetland to the north near Lake Minnewashta and into the wetland...
As I said, we'll be sending out a notice to these property owners... They have not supplied any plans or
information with this provided along to the property owners... That's about all I have for tonight. If you
have any questions I'd be happy to answer those. Or if you have any concerns I'd be happy to bring those
to MnDot. This will be a MnDot project, not a City of Chanhassen project. We have not been asked to
participate financially in this project.
Mayor Jansen: That's good news. We like hearing that.
Teresa Burgess: So far.
Mayor Jansen: So far.
Councilman Labatt: Is this going to be completed in conjunction with the completion of 5 and 41 ?
Teresa Burgess: This project is slated to be done after the golf tournament. Highway 5 is slated to be
finished before the Hazeltine golf tournament.
Councilman Labatt: So this will be September, 2002. Completed or began?
Teresa Burgess: It will be initiated in September of 2002, possibly August. I'm not sure of the exact
date but it will be after completion of the Hazeltine golf tournament that they will initiate this project and
start construction. They will have it substantially complete in 2002. There will probably be some work
that needs to be completed in the spring of the following year, just as Highway 5 will be completed
substantially this year with follow-up work in the spring.
Mayor Jansen: Any other questions for staff?
Councilman Labatt: Just on Highway 5, what is their progress, their hopeful schedule.
Teresa Burgess: Right now they are on schedule for Highway 5 and we will be switched back over, if
they continue on schedule, be switched back over in June of 2002. For traffic back on Highway 5. They
will remain on the bypass through the winter and they will work on that road as long as they can given
weather conditions. And strike conditions. There is a potential for MnDot to go on strike October 1st.
Councilman Labatt: Okay.
Mayor Jansen: Okay, any other questions for staff? Okay, thank you Teresa. Appreciate it.
30
City Council Meeting - September 24, 2001
CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION.
Mayor Jansen: Under correspondence I had one letter that I guess I was surprised to read on the parade.
Councilman Peterson: I would agree. It's on my list to talk about.
Mayor Jansen: Okay. I wasn't sure if the discussion had occurred when okay, in my absence but there is a
letter and I will mention this to Mr. Gerhardt when he returns, that was sent to Deb Kind addressing the
parade and the financing of that. I want to make it perfectly clear that there has been no council discussion
about whether or not the financing for that parade will be included in our budget. Obviously this letter was
generated due to the staff recommendation that council has not had an opportunity to review yet. Normally
these kinds of details are what we go through as we start in with our department head reviews of their
budget issues and Mr. Gerhardt has those scheduled over the next couple of work sessions. And I believe
Park and Rec is one of the initial discussions that we will have so I just wanted to note that and I will let
Mr. Gerhardt know that that needs to be communicated that we're not doing budget cuts until after staff
has actually done those reviews with council. Were there any other items under correspondence
discussion?
Councilman Ayotte: Not correspondence but in the liaison with commissions. I want to just comment. I
didn't get the opportunity yet, that the Environmental Commission received a presentation by Bob
Generous on solicitation of garbage removal and so on in the city and there was some concern. Prepare an
information paper for council. I just want to advise council that it was coming forward.
Mayor Jansen: Okay, thank you very much. Anything else from council members? Okay with that ifI
could have a motion to adjourn.
Councilman Boyle moved, Councilman Peterson seconded to adjourn the City Council meeting. All
voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
Submitted by Todd Gerhardt
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
31