Loading...
1i. Planning Commission Minutes August 20, 1997.CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 20, 1997 Chairman Peterson called the meeting to order at 8:30 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Alison Blackowiak, Craig Peterson, LuAnn Sidney and Kevin Joyce MEMBERS .ABSENT: Ladd Conrad, Allyson Brooks and Bob Skubic STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Planning Director; Bob Generous, Senior Planner; Dave Hempel, Assistant City Engineer; Cynthia Kirchoff, Planner I; Jill Sinclair, Environmental Resource Specialist; and Phillip Elkin, Water Resources Coordinator PUBLIC HEARING: PRELIMINARY PLAT TO REPLAT OF LOTS 1 -9,16 AND 17, BLOCK 1, AUTUMN RIDGE 2 ND ADDITION INTO 21 LOTS LOCATED. AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF HWY. 5 AND GALPIN BLVD. , AUTUMN RIDGE 3 RD ADDITION D.R. HORTON INC. Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Peterson: Any questions by commissioners? Joyce: The question I have is why they don't need fire sprinklers. Generous: The building code I believe is the number of units on the lot. Joyce: So they're not adding anything? Generous: They're not adding . anything. They put the lot line down the common wall between the back to back units. Joyce: Oh, okay. So there's not as many units per lot. Generous: Per individual lot. s Joyce: I see. Peterson: Bob, we talk about extending the berm, and also as we talk about extending Highway 5 down the road, is that going to be affected at all? Generous: No. It won't even be close to... Planning Commission Meeting - August 20, 1997 Joyce: And I'll second that. 2 Planning Commission Meeting - August 20, 1997 Sidney moved, Joyce seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of PUD #93 -5 for Autumn Ridge 3 rd Addition to replat Lots 1 through 9,16 and 17, Block 1, Autumn Ridge 2 " Addition into 21 lots as shown on the plans prepared by Brandt Engineering and Surveying dated July 18, 1997, subject to the following conditions: 1. The proposed extension of the berming along Galpin Boulevard eliminates one tree. This tree shall be replaced by two conifers with a minimum height of seven feet. 2. The developer shall execute an addendum to the development contract for the Second Addition to incorporate the Third Addition. 3. The applicant shall provide a copy of the final soils report for the subdivision as well as a copy of the final grading plan for the entire subdivision prior to issuance of any building permits. 4. The building designer should meet with the Inspections Division review staff to discuss design and permit requirements before finalizing building plans. All voted in favor and the motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING: AMEND A CONDITION OF THE INTERIM USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR A 32 SQ. FT. MONUMENT SIGN AND AN 8 SQ. FT, VARIANCE FROM THE 24 SQ. FT. MONUMENT SIGN REQUIREMENT, 850 FLYING CLOUD DRIVE, DICK HENNING. Cynthia Kirchoff presented the staff report on this item. Peterson: Questions of staff? Blackowiak: Sure, I have one question. There's a statement in here talking about the interim use Terminating one year after the availability of water and sewer. When is that estimated termination date? Aanenson: That's something that will be discussed as part of the comprehensive plan update. The staging of sewer and water improvements. This area will probably be the last area to be brought in as far as sewer and water. If you looked at the consultants growth strategy, 2020. Our city will probably be developed by then. So it could be 10 -15 years out. Blackowiak: Okay, so then it still would be considered an interim use even though it's 10 to 15 years? Aanenson: Correct. Yeah. Planning Commission Meeting - August 20, 1997 Blackowiak: That's it. Joyce: Kate can we, when we make this motion...? Aanenson: That's what the City Attorney advised. Sidney: What are the actual dimensions of... Kircho ff: The site plan that was submitted, I think was a general sign. If it is approved, I believe he said it would be 8 x 4. Peterson: Part of the frustration that I have is, is the additional 8 square feet going to substantially cha re tiall chap e I mean we' going through a lot of process here for 3 square feet and is it personal opinion of the applicant and then it goes into you know staff s opinion. Is it big truly p p pp enough? enough? � h? Is it not bi h? Where do we draw the line? Is it 1 square feet? Kate, you know g ' with this. It's just a matter of, we et these things and we're bending a lot. My where I m going wit g preference is to not bend. But this is the way it is and this is the code and why vary. Kirchoff• . Staff felt that since it w as an interim use and it was on a major highway, 212, that the applica nt , y p eople you know stated that le are passing him by and missing the turn so that he felt the p additional 8 square feet would be worthwhile, would be the worth the process to go through. Aanenso n: And as Cindy indicated, because it will be eventually some higher, better use that will support it... There was an existing sign with the original application.. I guess like Cindy said because it will eventually be something else in the future. Peterson: I think it's ' s dust putting you g uys s in a difficult spot. You make a variance for this, . because you always, s , somebod y y will always have a reason. It's just a matter of how legitimate it is. Joyce: And I d have to echo just ho that from the fact that, that's not going to be the sign I assume because you already said it can't be the sign ... will this is what would have to fit on the sign and it w ill only o it , it has to be this size. But they're saying, they just want a bigger sign. I can see y the discomfort. I assume the applicant's going to show us something. This is what we're looking at here? I'll wait and see. Peterson: Other questions? May I have a motion and a second to open it to public hearing. r Excuse me. Moving right along, does the applicant or their designee wish to present their g g� p comments to the Planning Commission? If so, please come forward. • perfectly honest with you, I thou Applicant's Representative. ... to be pe y y � ht we just wanted a sign. I g didn't realize that the 8 square feet was, we just need something that says on there that our s Flying location i 850 Fl in Cloud because at the moment there's no way to know that. People pass us b y y . constantl The have no idea what our address is or who we are. They 4 Planning Commission Meeting - August 20, 1997 Peterson: Could you state your name and address please just for the record. Applicant's Representative: My home address? 21051 Elkview Circle, Richmond, Minnesota. Peterson: Thanks. Any other questions for her before she? Thank you. Applicant's Representative: Okay. Peterson: This is a public hearing. May I have a motion and a second to open to the same please. Blackowiak moved, Sidney seconded to open the public hearing. The public hearing was opened. Peterson: Anyone wishing to address the Planning Commission, please come forward. Seeing none, may I have a motion to close the public hearing and a second please. Blackowiak moved, Sidney seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed. Peterson: Thoughts from commissioners. Alison. Blackowiak: You can look at this two ways. It's only 8 square feet, which is not a lot of space. But by the same token, it's going to be there for a long time. Even though it's interim use, we're talking, if we talk 2020 plus a year, we're talking 25 years that this sign is going to be there and I don't think that, in my mind that's not interim use. Interim use is maybe under a year or something. That to me is an interim. I don't know. I don't know if I'm really comfortable going forward with this increased size because it is going to be there and I think that the applicant really feels strongly that they need a sign that's going to be larger and to attract customers, that they need to come back before the Planning Commission with a definite sign plan and let us see something a little more concrete before we can, before I feel comfortable actually going forward and approving something. Peterson: Thank you. LuAnn. Sidney: I feel somewhat uncomfortable about this. Maybe not so much from the standpoint of the size of the sign but I felt like I didn't have enough information, really in the packet here to make any decision and I had questions about the height, the materials, the base. You know materials. Is it going to be aluminum? Is it going to be wood? What is, you know what is the sign going to be like and I did not feel comfortable with the information that we have tonight. It just is too sketchy. I'd like to see more. Joyce: I feel, we've had variances like this in front of us before where we've turned them down and they've been a lot more comprehensive as far as materials and exactly what's going to be on the sign. And right now as we speak we don't even know what the sign's going to say on it. So Planning Commission Meeting - August 20, 1997 if it's not that important for them to show us what's going to be on that sign for that additional 8 feet it's not that important for me to clear the variance. I'm opposed to it. Peterson: Okay. My thoughts are probably the same. I don't think there's a compelling reason to g rant the variance. Enough said. With that, may I have a motion and a second please. Blackowiak: Okay. I move that the Planning Commission recommend denial of the amendment of Interim Use Permit #96 -2 for an 8 square foot variance from the 24 square foot requirement for the construction of a 32 square foot monument sign. Do I need to add more or do I, can I let it go? Okay. That's it. Joyce: I will second that. Peterson: Any discussion? B y lackowiak moved Joyce seconded that the Planning Commission recommends denial of an amendment to the Interim Use Permit #96 -2 for an 8 square foot variance from the 24 square foot requirement for the construction of a 32 square foot monument sign. All voted q q in favor and the motion carried. Peterson: Staff, are you comfortable with the direction? Aanenson: Yeah. I think... reasons... materials. What they were looking for, address. Peterson: All right, thank. you. PUBLIC HEARING: AMENDMENT TO THE CITY CODE TO PROHIBIT ENCROACHMENTS ON SETBACKS THAT HAVE BEEN GRANTED FOR VARIANCES. Cynthia Kirchoff presented the staff report on this item. Peterson: Questions of staff. Joyce: The second part of that, no further encroachments are allowed. Is that going to be in there also? Aanenson: Right. It's in Section 20 -908. Under 5. We put that in bold. Joyce: Yeah. I got. Just the one sentence then right? Aanenson: Yeah. Joyce: Okay. C1 Planning Commission Meeting - August 20, 1997 Kirchoff: The sentence is in bold. Joyce: Oh all right, all right. I'm sorry. I thought you were putting it somewhere else, okay. Sidney: Why wasn't that a separate point? Aanenson: Well there's two different ways to handle it and one would be just to make clarification. Every time that would come up, and every motion to make sure that you say that no other encroachments could occur. Just to make sure it doesn't fall through the cracks and that's not left off in ambiguity. We had another one that came up on Lake Riley where actually... came down. They were allowed to have overhang and in order to make the second story more usable, they actually encroach in the setback so again they were kind of given an extra benefit beyond the variance. And the neighbors felt that they had a freebie on that. So what we're trying to say is if you're getting relief from the ordinance, you shouldn't allow the additional encroachment, or you should ask for that. In this instance, which is a bay window and (replace... The normal setback line is what we take the measurement from so what happened with the added bay windows and the fireplaces, it seemed like they were getting additional from the ordinance. Plus it may or may not ... but that's the way the ordinance... Sidney: ...tack on variances at the top... Aanenson: Well actually I think within the ordinance, she had three or four different approaches to ... and we thought that this would probably be the easiest way to, right at the beginning instead of at the end. Or actually the original code I think had three or four different... Instead of putting it at the end we want to make the point in front... And again, we're trying to make it...put in the ordinance too so I mean when... Cindy was to do a variance request, put it in and not have it in an encroachment, just in case it falls ... we've got a fallback... Peterson: Okay. Other questions? May I have a motion and a second to open up the public hearing please. Joyce moved, Blackowiak seconded to open the public hearing. The public hearing was opened. Peterson: This is a public hearing. Anyone wishing to address the Commission please come forward and do so now. Seeing none, may I have a motion to close the public hearing and a second please. Joyce moved, Blackowiak seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed. Peterson: Discussion. LuAnn. Sidney: I really don't have any questions. 7 Planning Commission Meeting - August 20, 1997 Peterson: Alison. Blackowiak: No comments I guess. Peterson: Kevin. Joyce: I'm just im ressed how g ood you guys are. Fill a loophole with just one sentence. Wow. . p Aanenson: Go Cindy. enforcing that could be a bigger Peterson: I'm impressed too but e g gg er challenge so with that may I have a motion and a second please. Joyce I'll make a motion the staff, excuse me, that the Planning Commission approve the ordinance amendment set before us. Is that enough? Blackowiak: Second that. Peterson: Any discussion? Joyce m , oved Blackowiak seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of Ordinance Amendment to Section 20 -908, yard regulations, to prohibit additional encroachment once a variance has been granted as presented by staff. All voted in favor and the motion carried. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISCUSSION - NATURAL RESOURCES. Sinclair: Thank you Chairman and commissioners. Reviewing the third hird section of the i y comp rehensive p i plan, the natural features chapter, and the good news s that much has been accomplish chapter. accomplished in this cha Possibly ore than was anticipated at the time it was written. Just Y m reading it it seems that, it appeared that you know a lot of challenges were based in passing fro g • 1 them were and accomplishing some of the goals but many of them were done fairly some of p g even g . And now the challenge is to create a comprehensive... for the protection and enhancement of the natural resources of Chanhassen. Some of the things that staff decided that the tree cover expanded. Since we have section of the chapter could be expa adopted a tree preservation ordinance, p we have done an inventory. There's been many issues that have come up with development that have also expanded our wisdom and knowledge of tree preservation and enhancement within the Cit The wildlife section also hasn't been addressed that much. Wildlife doesn't become an p issue too often, but I think it is important that we do consider identifying areas that do have good wildlife. Since the are a valuable and important component of the big environmental habitat and w y onmental , picture of Chanhassen. So now I think we've, the City's become more sophisticated in it s environmental awa reness and this entire section could be updated and try to look to the future to find the next challenges for the next century. Phil has the water stuff. 8 Planning Commission Meeting - August 20, 1997 Elkin: Basically my, what I cover, as you know are lakes, wetlands and creek corridors, including the Bluff Creek. Most of the goals set forth in the original plan were met with the 1994 Surface Water Management Plan. The Plan classified, identified all the wetlands, the larger wetlands within the City. Classified them as far as their condition. Ultimate developed conditions were calculated for the city wide in determining the amount of runoff that will be generated. How much we need to store. What kind of treatment we need to provide for this. We also started a lake monitoring program and lake management plans were established through this. Shoreline ordinances were put in place to protect recreational lakes and other water bodies. And the Surface Water Utility was implemented to fund the program. Now we look to where we go from here and what the new goals are for the City in protecting our lakes and natural resources. The lakes still, our target is to continue to look for point source pollutants going into the lake. At the time this report was done, the concern it was, the concern was failing septic systems and businesses that were dumping industrial waste directly into the lake. Now it's gone. We've identified those sources and closed those off. Now we're looking at places where we have storm water pipes bringing untreated storm water directly into the lake. Trying to reduce the amount of sediment. The amount of nutrients that these old storm sewer systems are creating. Another goal is continued public education. We have a number of exotics that have been introduced into the lakes such as Eurasian Water Milfoil is the most famous one that the State, both the City and the State are not really sure how to deal with at this time and there's a lot of controversy on that. We also want to continue our public education on the best way for lakeshore owners, of what they can do to provide water quality, or ensure water quality, or protect water quality and to make it better by changing the way they use the lake and how they landscape their yards. And we're also looking long term at some major restoration projects on lakes such as Lake Susan, Rice Marsh Lake, that have large amount of phosphorous in them and some drastic measure to get these lakes that provide you know water quality. of these lakes such as alum treatment and those are quite costly but the long term goal is to get fish back into Lake Susan and into Rice Marsh Lake so it's not a major point of nutrient loading into Lake Riley. And bringing those lakes together helps the chain of lakes and ultimately provides better water quality for Lake Riley. Moving onto wetlands. We have, if you've read the report, the change in the Wetland Conservation Act now have allowed for a provision for individual cities or local governing units to develop their own comprehensive plan. Comprehensive wetland management plan. The requirements for this were met with our Surface Water Management Plan. That we've identified all the wetlands in the city. We've classified them and so we're very close to having our own plan approved by the State of Minnesota. And what this means is that we will no longer need to, we will stand our own. Won't have the State reviewing all our wetland plans. All our, we won't have to go to State for permits and approval on our wetland management. ...when the State stepped in, or the Wetland Conservation Act, they implemented stricter regulations as far as wetlands within the State of Minnesota. Now we are, we can't be any more lenient but if we want we can identify areas that are worth protecting and evoke stronger regulations and impacts to those and restoration requirements. Another goal of the comprehensive wetland plan is, in our Surface Water Management Plan we divide wetlands into four categories. Pristine would be the calcareous fen that are a very important biological resource. Natural wetlands. Wetlands that have not been influenced by development or farming and that are in their natural state. Have a lot of natural habitat. Ag -urban wetlands. Wetlands that have wetland characteristics but have been influenced by the farming or development. And utility ponds that are basically storm water I Plannin g Commission Meeting - August 20, 1997 ponds with new developments. 75% ° of the wetlands within the city fall into the ag -urban category and the goal we wa nt to work towards now is to evaluate, as a sub- category or a rating system of ag -urban wetlands to see which ones are affordable. Which ones are in good condition and which ones are in poor conditions and work on goals towards restoration of those wetlands. And finally, fresh creek corridor. We are still working with the Bluff Creek management ' plan. Working with the trying watershed district t in to preserve, get the watershed district to help us acquire land. To do restoration and the erosion that's occurring on the bluffs and to meet our as far as water quality goals, the protection of the Bluff Creek. Ground water quantity goals and q Y g water. Finally grow ground water protection. We are working on a plan, we're required to by 1999 to develop our own ground wa ter protection plan. That is in the works. It's not completed yet but we ' re hoping to y have that b 1999. That concludes mine. If you have any questions. Peterson: Questions of staff. Joyce: I'd Just congratu late y ou on being picked as one of those LGU's for the comprehensive g p wetland plan. I think great. ink that's eat. Would you be responsible then for that? Is it just the planning? Elkin: We have a plan. y Basicall what we have to have now is public hearings and go through g the process of notifying the various state agencies that work ... plan and have hearing dates and a ' been working with the Board of Water and Soil Resources and following line of goals. We've b g the guidelines of the law to make sure that we're meeting all the goals set out. We're meeting all the requirements set out by law. Joyce: If this is approved, t hen Phil would you be the one that would handle all the requests that come in from the contractors or whoever...? • That's pretty much the same. It would operate the same way as now but Elkin. Right, yeah. p Y notify p right now I have to still the Department of Natural Resources, Board of Soil and Water s and et their comments on it, and if they say, I mean they can tell me Resources, Army Corp g g p that okay this it's restoration plan is not good enough. We want .5 more acres, but they won't, it like ... they'll just g et our notice but they won't require any more... other wa Joyce: Oh, so it sounds like it's good the o y around too where it's just that you know we're going to, you know. • know if we had unfortunately some of the Elkin: Right, and what it allows us to do is be, you short comings I see are wetla nds that we have within the city. Villages on the Pond is a good. just formed throw h activit , you know farming activities, the road example of that. Have g Y , the didn't care about that and they're low quality wetlands. They're activities, back when y . ns that there will never be, you know the unrestorable. They're Just going located in such locations I it makes us or y ou know we have to mitigate that regardless. to stay low quality wetlands and y mean how low quality so we still i have to treat those where, I think a more reasonable approach s alit wetland. Increase we identify the high quality protection around those. You know do the p mitigation there. Replac e an y wetland , we're taking the low quality 1 to 1 but not go to the 10 Planning Commission Meeting - August 20, 1997 extreme measure of protecting and preserving the low quality wetlands just because they're there. So it could be better but yeah, I'm happy. We're moving in the right direction. Joyce: So good. Peterson: As we talk about informing the public, in many ways it's not that dissimilar to trying to inform the public about recycling. Maintaining water quality. Do you have a plan developed to begin that process of information and try to get that paradyne shift started? Elkin: I've started a lakeshore j ournal for, that would go to riparian homeowners. People who live on the lake to specifically talk about the condition of the lake. It's information that, you know recycle but just trying to beat home that this is your, the City is doing this but you also have a responsibility for, you know because you live on the lake, to work towards water quality. We're trying, you try to get away from Kentucky Bluegrass lawn all the way and then 50 feet of sand and then a huge boat dock, huge boat house. We're trying to provide some sort of buffer before the lake and reduce the amount of sand. You know you get people think well, do you really need sand from one property corner to property corner. Are you using that, you replace it you know every 5 years because it goes, when you replace it it's because the sand is now in the bottom of the lake. And just keep beating that home. I think that's, and continue our efforts in being visible and working with the homeowners associations on doing projects related to the lake. Trying to improve water quality. Because if they, you know if lakeshore owners don't see the City doing anything, they're not going to do anything. And hopefully we get one neighbor to do it and they'll... Joyce: Some way of putting a reward system. -in there which, lowering property taxes comes to mind. Peterson: Give them sign variances or something. Joyce: But I mean that's, you know that's how the recycling thing did it. You know there is a bit of a reward for recycling. You don't have as much trash out there and they don't need, yeah. Sinclair: Additionally, Chanhassen is part of a University of Minnesota research project. They'll also be doing work on this subject as well. Teaching homeowners how to landscape their yard. ...to use to reduce pollution in their runoff to storm sewers, to wetlands in their back yards, any of that. And out of that project they will set them up with outreach educational materials for cities like Chanhassen and you know throughout the metro area to give to the residents so we'll have help ... as well for this education perspective. Peterson: You also mentioned that we now have the ability to become more restrictive than the State. Are there any immediate plans to do that or is that something that we're going to? Elkin: No. I would first ... getting a plan and I would work up, talk to people. Find some proposals before it would be reasonable. You know what would be acceptable. 11 Planning Commission Meeting - August 20, 1997 Peterson: I mean the Bluff Creek area would be probably. • n. An of the remaini Elkin. The Bluff Creek, the fe y g natural wetlands would be candidates for increasing the buffer zone but again the Bluff Creek plan you know has got all these things � Prairie. The Walnut overlapping ...Walnut Grove. How could I forget. Little House on the pp g Grove development, getting in our setbacks from the creek increased and so we're working that development. You know we're working that way. We've got several different flows so, I don't know. It would have to be, it'd just have to be very cautious on how we, first thing may be require further classifying her classif in the wetlands. Defining the highest as high quality and a rating system. I reall y thought haven't even about how to go about it. I mean thought that much about it. Peterson: And clearly ow would be the time to do that versus having a developer come in . he's � thinking that he s o erating, that they're operating under certain restrictions and then all of a g p sudden we just change our minds and we want higher setbacks. - • No that's. We're running into the same thing with Bluff Creek. Elkin. Right, right. g Development evelo along he creek. We're letting them know about, they'll ask what are the setbacks g and we'll tell them... Yeah, there's a lot of public education to go along with it. Peterson: Other questions or comments? Nice job. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Sidney noted the Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated August 6, 1997 as presented. ONGOING ITEMS: Aanenson: I just wanted to let you know, on your meeting on the, City Council meeting last week. Halla was the request for entry, kind of portico was tabled until he gets into compliance some of the issues of the stipulation agreement. That has been done to date as far as there with s p was illegal sig there. The Villages, Building No. 17 ... materials there. That's going to play into our discussion as far as what's on the next Planning Commission agenda which I'll talk about in a minute. And the also approved the final plat for Highover which is Jerome Carlson's TH 41. Tying back to the Villages Building No. 17 which is the office building. The plat on y g g most g st southerly office buildi There was some concern about the use and the material selected in that. On the September Pmeeting the Famous Dave's is coming forward. Peterson: Go back to, what were some of the. Aa nenson: Stucco. Whether or not stucco was, the amount of stucco and that cut face block. There was a problem with that. Peterson: It was felt it was too contemporary? A y anenson: No. That maybe it should have been more brick. More brick in the building. As a matter of fact the council did recommend approval of the building with brick instead of the cut 12 Planning Commission Meeting - August 20, 1997 face block on the bottom. The Famous Dave's which will be coming on the September 3rd meeting to date, it doesn't meet what we believe is kind of the vernacular of the European kind of design. It tends to be more Western flavor so it may not be on the 3 rd agenda if we can't, or if it goes forward the way it is, we won't be recommending approval so ... on that. And the Valley Sales will be on for the September Pmeeting and then also Villages. That Building No. 4 which will be a retail building. Famous Dave's and Building No. 4 will both be up ending. The east corner of that project. Up adjacent to Highway 5 and Great Plains. And then just a reminder in our first meeting in October, we'll have a work session and I'm planning on having Roger Knutson, the City Attorney come to that one and just talk about some issues there. OPEN DISCUSSION: Peterson: We have a guest this evening. Maybe have some open discussion. Mayor Mancino: ...to talk to see if you have any questions ... I don't know just a few comments. We're going to be going to the budgeting... resume this fall. Of course I think October is winter but anyway. In our work sessions we do every other Wednesday and so we'll be doing that for the next 2 or 3 months. Looking at different departments and trying to lower our... What have we been doing? Thank you for the work on the Villages on the Pond. The last office building that Kate was referring to as far as your comments on outside area. Aanenson: A plaza. The street plaza. Mayor Mancino: The plaza, yeah. It's going to be on main street and what is their? Aanenson: Actually that is Main Street. The main. Mayor Mancino: That's what they're going to call it? Aanenson: You didn't get to see that but it was your recommendation that and it turned out very nice. Some street furniture and some nice landscaping to really warm up that entry. It turned out. Mayor Mancino: Good. What else have we? Any other questions that you had things we looked at from the Planning Commission? Questions about. Joyce: It's been a slow summer. Peterson: It's been a real slow summer. Mayor Mancino: It doesn't feel like it. Peterson: Where are you at with, I really don't think we have anything specific... 13 Plannin g Commission Meeting - August 20, 1997 Mayor Mancino. • We are kind of doing, ertainly not at the level that you are, talking about and g� • v isitin g of as far as how to brin go out and the southern part g in the MUSA line and some sort of a, somewhat of a schedule. Timing schedule and looking at it and what that means as far financially how that will impact the city. Because we have had some people as water, sewer and finan y p ask about that. Bring sewer and water from Chaska or from Eden Prairie, etc. And kind of .. all t down in the south and so we are as a Council, we've gone out and we're getting our developmen discussing that more conceptually p hilosophically, the details. What else are some of the things p y, p p we ' ve done lately. ? We heard a presentation from the several volunteers that are on the library ' that our resent library board in Chanhassen feeling p needs to be expanded. We're a growing community. And we'll ll be talkin g about that or setting up a task force or whatever. What else has come up lately in our work sessions... The no wake ordinance. Phillip ... a Wake ordinance for us to look at. We've man ' had hone calls from people who live on Lotus Lake and Lake y p Riley, Minnewashta, concerned about the shoreland, the erosion problems. So we are developing an ordinance about t get so we can et to it right away when we are having rains like this year. Have some sort of policy to follow. And how we enforce it is the other problem. It seems like it's been very, very busy. plan as it's defined or as it will be defined? Peterson. Where are you at with the strategic p • e're trying . Mayor Mancino: Well strategically what w ry g to do with our Work sessions and the City Manager, Don Ashworth a and I are tr to do it so that our work sessions are now made up. of half the work session is doing things more strategically, from a strategic standpoint. And yet we still work on issu es things that come along and so that's why we're looking at this lying more g p strategically... different standpoint. From the fiscal, financial standpoint. Sewer and Water. Bringing it 1 n. Wes till have some questions about Where to build the homes and where that goes into the southern p art of the city. So...all sorts of things. Peterson: Well we appreciate the feedback. Joyce: Yeah, that's nice. Aanenson. • I had one other item I'm sorry. We have advertised for a planning commission y vacancy. Haven't had an submittals yet. A couple of inquiries. Peterson: Consider doing a referral fee or something. • one second. We have had. a lot of phone calls. Mayor Mancino. Auto dealership, dust to take o Y Not a lot of letters ...have had two or three and I did suggest .to people to write letters versus just putting things down and thoughts... It is also, and I'm sure that you're getting calling. You know pu g g ' 's ' 'n and taking time and ex laining to the process because everybody them too, it's dust sitting g p confused about the process and it's almost like, now did we invite these people to apply and how And making sure that the know that there is a staff report for them the process happens and etc. g y to read g d rior to coming to the Planning Commission, etc. So I can tell you. 14 Planning Commission Meeting - August 20, 1997 Joyce: I was going to say, before the neighborhood meeting, get a couple phone calls, they think Y g g Y that's the meeting. Their meeting, not ours. Aanenson: Yeah, we have a neighborhood meeting setup. That will be going out August 27 th . Blackowiak: Is that Valley Sales holding that list as well? Aanenson: Yes. Yes. Yeah. That's all the information I have. I'm sure they'll be sending letters out again. Mayor Mancino: And it is. Aanenson: Wednesday. An off Wednesday. Mayor Mancino: As you know, it's really helpful as far as I'm concerned, to attend ... I mean you get what everyone says there and I also think on both the applicant and the neighbors knowing that... as elected or appointed officials or... that means a lot to them. Peterson: Thanks again. Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Aanenson: That's all I had. Peterson: Cool. How about a motion and a second to adjourn? Joyce moved, Sidney seconded to adjourn the meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 9:25 P.M. Submitted by Kate Aanenson Planning Director Prepared by Nann Opheim 15