Loading...
6. Halla Great Plains Golf Estates Preliminary PlatCITY OF - 6 CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE 0 P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 Action try City Administrator MEMORANDUM Nod* TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager Do SL6M ttcd to Commission FROM: Kate Aanenson, ATCP, Planning Director Dale Submitted to count DATE: September 8, 1994 SUBJ: Preliminary Plat to Subdivide 92.53 acres into 36 Rural Single Family Lots and One Outlot , Halla's Great Plains, If Estates, located South of County Road 14 (Pioneer Trail), and West and! t of Hwy. 101, Don Halla At the last City Council meeting on August, 1994ethis item was tabled in order that the City Attorney give a legal opinion on the status of theprelinunary plat. The question the council raised was whether the plat had to thi'`1 acre minimum lot size. Please find attached the City Attorney's opinion. Po While the new plat may be better designed, his legal right to lot size and design is base 'on the preliminary plat approved in 1987. ATTACHMENTS 1. Legal opini 2. City Counc CAMPBELL, KNUTSON, SCOTT & FUCHS, P.A Sep 8,94 15:26 Nu.004 P.02 CAMPBELL, KNUTSON, SCOTT & FU( PA. Thortia J. CaniplicII Rogk:r N. Knuc;011 'i hollms N1. Scott ( ;ark G. Fuchs J,urtL•. R. W;(111011 1:I1iort B. Kno.,ch Elizahrth A. Lunn•r Ankirca Mct),)wcll Fo7:hlcr BY FAX AND MAIL n Ms. Kate Aanenson Chanhassen City Hall 690 Coulter Drive, Box 147 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 At(( flT Law September 8, 1994 RE: Ilalla Great Plains Addition (6) '2) 452.5000 Ria (!>12) 452.5550 Dear bate: You asked me if the City Council could require a minimum lot size of 2.5 acres in Halla's new preliminary plat. The answer is yes. ' On July 6, 1987, the City Council approved the preliminary plat attached hereto as Exhibit "A". On June 12, 1989, the City Council gave Halla five (5) years to final plat the entire preliminary plat. Without the extension Halla's preliminary plat would have to ' be revised to comply with the new density requirements of one unit per ten (10) acres. The City can insist that the final plat of Halla Addition be consistent with the preliminary plat approval in 1987. If Halla }proposes something that is not consistent with the ' previously approved preliminary plat, then Halla must comply with the current zoning ordinance requirements of one unit per ten (10) acres. ' The five (5) year extension on the preliminary plat expired in July 1994. I suggest that the owner be informed that unless he ;final plats the property by December 1, 1994, 1 the preliminary plat approval in 1987 will be void. k, Vey truly y irs, ' MPBELL KNUTSON SCOTT CHS, P.A. BY• oger N. Knutson RNK,srn Enclosure Suite• 317 • Hagandale Office C:cntc.t• * 1.380 Center Curve * Egan, MN 55121 _ ` r f • •. i 1 73 IF 'I tq L' 3 'i II to t8 I =' . , :'� •.. - ' �.o,.D PROPOSED GREAT PLAINS t. GOLF ESTATES' Ik J n 1 L L� u City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994 word garbage and you have dumpsters around and it's just ugly. There's no way around it. I guess that's my main concern. Maybe there needs to be a better selling job on this or maybe the city should do a little more work because I think, I think like I said, it could be possibly a good use for the property but all the language we've heard so far and what the lawyer was talking about, he said the dumpsters are empty. The dumpsters are used for this but I don't hear anything about the future. What's to say that after one year they start storing dumpsters full of material in there. Or what's to say they don't start cleaning the dumpsters on the property and there's toxic waste and it runs into the soil or whatever. I don't see that in the language of the staff report and I haven't heard anything about that mentioned so I think more emphasize needs to be placed on enforcement and maybe inspection of the site. And I understand it's a 10 year permit—and that seems awfully long to me. I believe there should be some way we can review that every year. I understand the investment they've put into it and I want to make sure they get their money back from that. Personally I think a lot of the camouflaging is not really money well spent on the fence if you think about it. You know the foot and a half trees and the wood fence, that's almost ugly by some nature. I guess I'd maybe rather see a smaller time period unless there's a trade off that we could work something out. I think that's about all of the comments that I have. I would like to see more emphasize placed on enforcement and the future use of the property and I've been to the Planning Commission several times. Well, it seems like several times. I've always commented to them how I feel the south part of Chanhassen is being ignored and like I said to Mr. Mayor and Councilmembers, pay a little more attention to the southern part of the city. Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Thanks Verne. Anyone else? Jim Sulerud: Jim Sulerud again, 730 Vogelsburg Trail. This is the item that I did come for ... hike and jog and bike along there plus we just live up the road a little bit on TH 101. And I think the trail as you've heard the snowmobile people talk about, it's a major resource in the community. (There was a tape change at this point in the discussion. The Interim Use Permit for Admiral Waste Management was tabled by the City Council.) PRELIMINARY PLAT TO SUBDIVIDE 46.5 ACRES INTO 36 RURAL SINGLE FAMILY LOTS AND ONE OUTLOT, HALLA'S GREAT PLAINS GOLF ESTATES, LOCATED SOUTH OF PIONEER TRAIL AND WEST AND EAST OF HIGHWAY 101, DON HALLA. (Taping of the meeting began again at this point.) Mayor Chmiel: Are there any questions? Richard. Councilman Wing: Did you write all those down? I mean I sort of got lost in the pros and cons and yeahs and nays. Of their request versus these recommendations. Kate Aanenson: Yes. Sharmin and Dave have met with them and were aware of the issues that they had. Councilman Wing: Is there anything to be said? I mean are we going to move ahead and try to put this thing together? Kate Aanenson: The storm water issue obviously ... the lot size and we may have to look at that... outside the MUSA... 33 City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994 1 1 Roger Anderson: That's correct ... to make some adjustment for that but we have to make sure that we have some mechanism in place that if the property or the entire area was, if it ever becomes in the MUSA in this future subdivision, that we have some mechanism to recover the additional storm water ... picked up at this time. Councilman Wing: The Planning Commission picked up on this future road on the southeast corner and looking , at the gradient, it appears to me the road would run into or right along the bluff. How can that road be there and still be compatible with the bluff ordinance? Sharmin Al -Jaffa We met with the applicant. We requested that it be realigned. ' Councilman Wing: Further west? Sharmin Al -Jaffa Correct. ' Councilman Wing: So this wouldn't be acceptable as it's showing here? Sharmin Al -Jaffa No. Councilman Wing: Okay. I Sharmin Al -Jaffa It would move slightly. Don Halla: Sharmin, you might move it all the way over to the next property to the left. Next one. ' Councilman Wing: Now we're surrounding Timberwood with an entire different type of house and lot. An , entire different thinking and our standard subdivision. If we guide this thing to 1 to 2.5, how do we keep it there? What if the MUSA line shifted tomorrow? If Paul was here, it'd be down to the river already. Kate Aanenson: Well we have options when we bring that in. We look at the MUSA line expansion, just like ' Timberwood and they have to be ... and said this will always remain large lot. Councilman Wing: Says who? What keeps them, once the MUSA line, why can't they just go and develop this, ' break it up immediately? Kate Aanenson: Well I think as we go through that process and you as a Council have to decide whether or not what you want to guide it for. ' Councilman Wing: At that time. Kate Aanenson: At that time, right. If you want to exclude them and say they'll be exempt from sewer and they can make it not just for Timberwood. Councilman Wing: But if we're going to develop this large lot now, it'd be nice to protect it for the future. I mean we're approving this based on large lot, large home, or whatever. r� 34 1 L r L City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994 Kate Aanenson: That is why it's gone through several different, the Halla's have made a good faith effort based on the fact that we've looked at 15,000 square foot lot and they tried to come forward with a plat clustering that and we found out that even on a temporary basis they'd have to provide on -site septic. It just didn't work so they came back with even trying to do cluster systems. So they have tried to cluster that in case we did bring it in and said we want this to be small lots. It just didn't seem to work. So we went back to...go back to larger lots. That doesn't mean that they still couldn't in the future, if they locate the house in such a way, they could come back and ask to be included. You have to work with the homeowners now... subdivide. That's something you have to look at. Councilman Wing: Alright. Mayor Chmiel: Before we get any more comments from Council, is there anyone wanting to address this proposal at this time? Go ahead. If you could just, I'd request, because of the time, that the presentation be limited to a few minutes. Paul Graffunder: Well I'll do my best but I'm majorly affected by this development so a few minutes might not be enough. But maybe it is. That's my parcel of property that Sharmin drawing in. I keep seeing TH 101 go right through my garage. I don't know where that comes from but nobody's asked me about it but it keeps getting dotted lines through my garage and I'm not sure, something like that. How that's going to affect me in the future. I'm also concerned that if my road and house appear to have an easement of some sort over that road. Not a total easement for unlimited use but some sort. Are they going to be able to give an easement then to all those other lots so those people can bring their lumber wagons down that road and park all their wood piles and whatever they want there? And I also have a problem, I think, with the way the roads are set up. That way, all those 2 1/2 acre mini estates, their back yards become my front yard. Or my front yard becomes their back yards and everybody knows the dog kennels go back there. The old boats and all that junk, which I have myself but I store them where nobody can see it. Well, that's going to be in my front door when they put that in their back yard. Is that a consideration that is given to something like that? I happen to have another question as, I don't think this is platted now and I don't know how this all works but Halla's has kind of hidden behind the agricultural zoning for decades. They've done things the city hasn't felt were correct and then the Halla's have said, well we can do that because we're agricultural. The latest thing I can think of is they have a building there that they're using for commercial retail sales that I don't believe they got proper permits for and they said, well we can build that because we're an agricultural. Is this going to change their agricultural zoning for every lot on there as soon as this is said and done or are they going to still be able to hide under the agricultural umbrella and keep dump trucks that haven't moved for a year down along that road. That type of thing. They say they're agricultural trucks and yes, I guess they are but they don't use them. Who can they give an easement? Did I ask that? Are they going to give those lots an easement? All those people to use my property. I don't know if they can. In the deed it says that...I'd like some protection against that. At this time there's my home and David Halla's home but Sharmin, maybe you can outline the area where two other homes were built this summer I believe. Yeah, right down in there. Do you know that? I thought one was in front and one was behind. I think the way I'm recalling. This easement comes down along this road and comes down in here and one home is to be built in the front and one home in the back. Sharmin AI -Jaffa Something like that. Paul Graffunder. Yes. These two lots here are going to be built. This one here is...told me that it's unbuildable. I don't know if it is or not, or how many people can have an easement on that easement. How many homes can be served. We've had problems there for 15 years. Who's going to plow? Who's going to 35 City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994 1 put rock in there? Who's going to fill the holes? Who can do what with it? Who can park on it? Who can drive their snowmobile on there ... or whatever. I'd kind of like the easement to go away. Don Halla, about 5 or � 6 years ago, maybe it was in '86, submitted proposals to use that easement for a road plus take 30 feet into my property ... 60 feet of my front yard. Bring the road within about 30 feet of my door for this development and I , adamantly oppose that plan. He had an agreement that he had with Teich, or his parents—back in the 60's when Teich's were separating their property and built my home that said something to the effect where property needed for road would come from the Teich's side of the fence. And that was fine for Teich's and would have ' been fine for me had I wanted to develop but Don Halla wants to develop. I think in the, I don't know of anywhere else where those lots can be served other than down the easement that we have now. There's just no possible way to get in on the back side. I don't know if those stub streets are adequate. Those are news to me. I haven't seen any of that. Those stub streets are not going to solve the problem that the other lot holders today. ' The easement isn't a problem but everybody keeps adding one more onto it and sooner or later there's going to be way more problems than what we've already experienced. So those are all the questions that I really would like to be answered before anything is... ' Councilman Wing: Where does your home sit? On that, would you put that back up. Paul Graffunder: I own 5 acres here. This is two separate parcels but my house is right about there under my finger and then I have a rather large garage to the west of that. Councilman Wing: It looks like your garage is safe. Councilman Senn: Your house isn't safe then. , Paul Graffunder: What do you mean? For TH 101? Councilman Senn: Yeah. , Paul Graffunder. Well, they're going to, they go right through my swimming pool. Somewhere in there. We've got to move when that happens. ' Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Anyone else? Boyd Peterson: Yeah, I'm Boyd Peterson. I live directly to the east of this property. And going back on the ' septic, I think Council and the city generally should hold to that septic system requirement. I personally have had mine pumped many times and we're having trouble with it and I'm right next door. The 70 boring sites that were taken in '87 or whatever, are they available to look at? Were they okayed? I mean is there that many in that area? And the trees, they're kind of down around that southeast zone. There's kind of an issue to protect... ' but other than that I mean, it's not a bad project. It's just that my issue is that septic and I think the city should hold to it. Mound systems are real ugly. I don't know what you can do landscape wise to make a mound system work, just to get that second system but 1 would say let's just not let this thing go by with that septic ' because it may be a long time before the city. And they're with big houses and everybody's life now days, a lot of water runs through those septics. Thank you. , Mayor Chmiel: Anyone else? 36 � I City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994 ' David Gatto: Hello again Mayor, Council and staff. Again, my name is David Gatto. I'm here to represent the 37 homeowners of the Lake Riley Woods Homeowners Association. We, for everybody's information, this is ' Lake Riley Woods. It's well ... Foxford Road. That cul-de -sac and there's a cul-de -sac here. That's Lake Riley Woods. I have a petition from 28 of the people that live there and it says, we respectfully petition that Halla Nursery should not be allowed to redevelop their property into anything smaller than 2 1/2 acres and that the minimum square footage requirement of 1,400 square feet be established in order to preserve the value of the ' properties surrounding Halla and maintain the aesthetic appearance of the neighborhood at'the level adhered to when our homes were built. So we'll leave that with you Mr. Mayor. We don't oppose the development that they have but like we signed up there, we really think that the lots ought to be at least 2 1/2 acres. Some of the ' lots on that plat are small and I believe there's a 1.8 acres and that's what troubles us. The City Attorney there, or at least one of the city attorneys... When I was at the Planning Commission meeting a couple of weeks ago we were told that this grandfather extension had since expired. Can you answer that for me? ' Mayor Chmiel: Yes Tom, go ahead. Tom Scott: Has since expired? David Gatto: That's what I was told. Tom Scott: No. That's not my understanding. David Gatto: It has not expired? ' Tom Scott: It has not expired. David Gatto: Because in looking at the ordinance as it applies today, there isn't of course any 2 11*2 acre ' density. It's all 10 acre density. Tom Scott: That's correct. ' David Gatto: Okay. Well, if I add up the dates that Sharmin just went over, I don't understand how 5 years from 1987 equals August of 1984. ' Kate Aanenson: We can answer that. He had a plat. Came in here and was working on it and it was put before the Planning Commission or the City Council, we believe we're making a good faith effort to try to provide him with the requirements and direction he was given by the staff and so we are trying to get this through the ' process. Give him an opportunity to go forward. We were giving him the direction to try to give an alternative so in our opinion he hasn't expired... ' David Gatto: Okay. Well that's different than what you told me 2 weeks ago but okay. That's fine. We've got a couple other things to talk about then. In the staff report they talk about the outlots create a non - conforming situation. And so I don't understand how they can't allow, especially the one oudot that has the retail establishment there. How can you calculate that outlot in the entire density of this plat and tell me that it does ' indeed meet the overall density of 2.6 acres? I need that question answered and I also would like to see the mathematical calculations because when I divide 102, if we assume the 102 is right, by 36, Sharmin what was that number? You've got a calculator there. 37 City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994 1 Sharmin Al -Jaffa 2.8 units. I David Gatto: That's 2.8 acres. Does that include that Outlot D which we established at the Planning ' Commission? Sharmin Al -Jaffa Right. David Gatto: Okay. So you established at the Planning Commission that he doesn't even own Outlot D so can we take that away? Sharmin Al -Jaffa Correct. So it was 92. ' David Gatto: Is that what it is? I don't know. ' Sharmin Al Jaffa Correct. That would be, if you divide it by 36 units that would be 2.5. David Gatto: 2.5...? Okay. And that's assuming that you allow the retail establishment outlot to be calculated. ' Audience: That's what they're saying. David Gatto: Well yeah. You know I don't understand that so I hope that Council takes that into account here—as I carry on my discussion. I'm trying to finish. This trunk sewer is extremely troublesome to us. In our development. We heard some encouraging words a minute ago that you might grant this plat a sewer exemption. We only hope if something like that is possible, that we could be granted the same thing across the , street. We all have septic systems. We all have wells. You have to have a water treatment system on the wells but I know that all the neighbors say it works very well, Mine works very well. My mound is so efficient I have to water the top of it every couple days or the grass dies. It's, as I'm saying, so efficient that everything , drains down. Not only through the mound but into the earth it's built on that was supposedly not able to bear the burden of the effluent but I have to water it every couple days. So it works fine. I paid $10,000.00 for my mound and my well and I know everybody else in our development did. I know everybody else in this new development is going to and are we ... and I can assure you, if that you people let that happen here in Chanhassen , I'll be right here at your desk again. I'll bring all 37 of my neighbors with me and I'm sure that people from Deerbrook will come along with us. That's the development that's directly to the east of this and I think some of these other folks have septics too so take care of us. I'm not going to take any more time. I know it's ' getting late and I think that was really our concern. ...development but we're going to be watching very carefully what you allow and what you don't allow and what you calculate for acreage is in there. Thank you very much. ' Mayor Chmiel: Anyone else? If not, Richard do you have any other questions? Councilman Wing: No. Just when, however this comes back, when you clean it up, 2.5. I mean when you ' push your calculator it ought to say 2.5 and I think we should stick with that. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Colleen. , Councilwoman Dockendorf. Well I always struggle with preliminary plats. I try to keep in mind preliminary means preliminary so I get too caught up in the detail. But overall I do have some problems, even with the 38 a I City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994 ' preliminary concept and that is I'm so lost in the mass at this point so let me just tell you what I would like and you can tell me if it exists. I'm not really keyed on this overall density. I want to see 2.5 lots. ' Kate Aanenson: Minimum lot size? Councilwoman Dockendorf: Yes. I don't want averages. I want to see 2.5 lots. I realize that there's a lot of unfortunate history with this platting and the city needs to be held responsible for past actions but I'm frankly disappointed that it can't be 10 acre lots. So I guess I don't have any, if we get to that point, the 2.5 minimum acres, I don't have a lot of problems. I mean everything else needs to be resolved and that has been discussed. I ' would like Scott, I'm glad you're still here. In reading through all the Minutes and notes, there is a problem that may fall under noise ordinance in terms of these facility. The speaker system, the peacocks. That's a completely separate issue but I wanted to bring it up because it does seem to be a problem. ' Scott Harr: We do have complaints on it. Councilwoman Dockendorf. And what can we do? ' Scott Harr: We issue permits for the loud speakers. For the PA system and what not ... housing in the area is taken into consideration. ' Councilwoman Dockendorf: So it is something that we have looked into? Scott Harr: And that we do control. ' Mayor Chmiel: Anything more? Councilwoman Dockendorf: Well, see I'm not so certain that we can give even preliminary. There seem to be too many changes necessary so I guess I'm finished. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Michael. ' Councilman Mason: I'm okay with averaging. As long as it does in fact come out to 2.5 when everything is said and done here. You and I, 1 mean we'll have, we'll continue to have discussions, maybe even arguments ' over that. Councilwoman Dockendorf. Maybe even fist to cuff. Councilman Mason: Oh, I don't think that will happen. I don't think that will happen. But I guess my view of this is that, if it averages out to 2 1/2, I think the intent of the ordinance is still there. You know 10 acres or not I think is, for me at any rate is kind of water over the dam and I only half jokingly wrote down the times they ' are a changing but you know, what are you going to do. I'm concerned about the easement issue. That sounds like a real valid point to me. I see that as this, what's going to happen with those homes? What is going to happen with that road? And the go carts and that whole issue has got to get cleared up somehow and I'm not quite sure how to clear that up. But, and I know. Kate Aanenson: ...that is not part of this plat. We don't intend to do anything nor with this plat do anything with it. We wouldn't allow access onto it as part of this plat. The intention was, there's 4 existing lots or 5 that 39 City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994 have access onto that. It's a private drive. It will continue to act as a private drive for those homes and this plat , will have access off of a public street which is required by ordinance. Councilman Senn: Which 4 or 5 because he'd have to have a variance. ' Councilman Mason: But that's, I'm sorry. But that doesn't have, what you're telling me is that that doesn't ' have anything to do with this plat. Kate Aanenson: No. He's asking a legitimate question. He wants to make sure that those people don't have access off of that as a part of the plat. ' Councilman Mason: Right. Kate Aanenson: And we'll make sure that doesn't happen. They want access off of a public street, which is an ' ordinance requirement. Those who live along that will continue to use it as their private drive and maintain it however they're doing. ' Councilman Mason: Okay, okay. And how about that issue of, and I know we've talked about this before and it is getting late and I quite honestly don't remember what. What does happen when all of a sudden somebody's back yard is all of a sudden now facing somebody's front yard? ' Councilman Wing: Ask Colleen. Councilman Mason: I mean that's, yeah. I'd be concerned about that. ' Councilman Senn: I have 4 back yards along my front yard. , Councilman Mason: Well, is all that stuff stored back in there? Councilman Senn: Yeah and it's a pain in the butt. There's sheds. There's garbage piles and everything, yeah. I And the ordinances don't prohibit any of it. Councilman Mason: So when final plat comes up or whatever, can something be put in there about landscaping? ' Screening. I mean I hate to use the word screening with the past discussion that got tabled but I mean we've done that before with what, landscaping. Kate Aanenson: We do that all the time with different subdivisions—lots which are less desirable and maybe ' there's a way to do the landscaping... Roger Anderson: Can I interject here? I Mayor Chmiel: Time's getting late. We're just trying to keep going here. Councilman Mason: You know I don't know how all the neighbors feel about it but if I can see something ' about landscaping so the sight lines are protected because that is an issue but yet I don't think we can deny people to develop just because of that but how can we reach some sort of compromise. I don't have any trouble with going ahead with preliminary plat but I will go on record as saying there's a whole lot of stuff that has to ' 40 1 I City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994 t be taken care of before I would give final plat approval. I mean we've got to, I think maybe it is time to get this off of square one but I share a whole lot of the concerns that have been mentioned. ' Resident: Future Councils are going to have problems with that street if you don't take care of it today. Councilman Mason: But, you know you're right but I think that's a separate issue. I mean that's not connected ' with this plat. I mean you're right. You're right. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Mark go ahead. ' Resident: But you've got the opportunity now. You're not going to have the opportunity years from now. Mayor Chmiel: I could rule you out of order because this is a discussion up here at Council. Thank you. Councilman Senn: Right now what that easement serves nothing in the Halla development, correct? ' Kate Aanenson: No. They're using it right now their... Councilman Senn: I'm not saying using it. I'm just saying that that easement specifically. Kate Aanenson: When this is developed? Councilman Senn: Yes. Kate Aanenson: No, it will not... ' Councilman Senn: Okay, so that easement will, there's nothing to the north? Kate Aanenson: Correct. Councilman Senn: Okay. So that easement will only serve the properties then to the south of it? Kate Aanenson: Correct. ' Councilman Senn: Which are the current properties that have an easement over it. They'd be land locked otherwise, correct? Kate Aanenson: That's correct. Councilman Senn: Okay. Kate Aanenson: To provide access to the ... property. That's, we were talking about moving that road. Councilman Senn: Yeah, I understand but besides from that, the land locked properties that are in there to the west ... need that easement to get in and out. I 41 1I J City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994 Kate Aanenson: They have that easement and they will continue to have that easement. They're using it as a private drive, correct. Councilman Senn: Okay. And none of that is in the ownership of the Halla's or under ... right now? , Kate Aanenson: It's my understanding they have an easement. Councilman Senn: They have an easement but they don't, I mean an easement is very different. Okay. So ' even if Halla got rid of that easement, all those other people would still maintain that easement and we have absolutely nothing to do for it? Okay. Alright. The other thing I'll just ask you real quick. On the road over , here, the future road you're talking about. Kate Aanenson: The realignment of TH 101. Councilman Senn: No, not TH 101 but this future road. Kate Aanenson: Oh, yes. If the nursery property was ever to be platted, we would block that, instead of having I direct access onto TH 101... Councilman Senn: So they put the public systems in. ' Kate Aanenson: They would just throw a stub street... Councilman Senn: Okay. And then I saw the comment in here or I saw the Oudot A shall have no additional ' access granted to TH 101. That's more or less additional over what's there now. Kate Aanenson: Correct. , Councilman Senn: Alright. Last question. Item 35 really confuses me and I think you're missing the point. What are we trying to do? Covenants be provided for the new property owners informing the days and hours of the retail commercial site and if changes are made to those hours and days, the property owners be informed of ' such change. You lose me there. I mean if we're informing them all we're going to do is start the fight, we haven't provided an mechanism for the ability to fight. It seems like a bottomless pit where we're going nowhere and why is it even in there. ' Sharmin Al -Jeff: It was ... by the Planning Commission to let new homeowners that will be buying into the subdivision know that there is a nursery... , (There was a tape change at this point in the discussion.) Kate Aanenson: We'll use the 2.5... ' Councilman Mason: Well so that's the issue right? Councilman Senn: And you said 2.5 minimum. You said 2.5 minimum and Richard, did you say 2.5 minimum? I thought so. Well there, I guess it means we deny. 42 I I City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994 Mayor Chmiel: That's what we're looking at. Okay, do we need a motion to do that? Or should we give it back to staff and let staff see if they can work with them. Tom Scott: You can just continue it and I mean you've expressed your sentiments to staff, if staff's comfortable with that. ' Mayor Chmiel: Alright. Does everybody understand? It's back in staff's lap to continue to work. Don Halla: We're back to the conceptual drawing basically. That's what you're back to is the 1987. ' Mayor Chmiel: If it takes longer and another Council comes in, they might make another change. Kate Aanenson: I guess the other issue too is we've kind of passed that time frame and we'd like to get, keep it ' moving so that either a plat goes forward or it dies. You know we keep extending this, extending this so if you want to give him the 2.5, I'd recommend you make that in a motion and have them come back within such a time period because otherwise we're back in the same window. Was there a time frame for them to come back? ' Mayor Chmiel: But with all the uncertainties that are there yet, things that are still not answered, I think if staff works back with that, knowing that the maximum is 2.5. Or I should say minimum is 2.5, I think you can work that out to come back and bring it back again to Council for the final. Or for the preliminary portion of this. Don Halla: Can you put those side by side? c FJ Councilwoman Dockendorf: I can't see a thing on this. Councilman Mason: Well. Sharmin Al -Jaffa How about if you compare the easterly side or the westerly side. Councilwoman Dockendorf. I think the point is moot because the 2.5 doesn't necessarily mean it has to be that configuration. Kate Aanenson: Right, it could be something totally different. Tom Scott: I believe what Kate is saying is that Council set some deadline as to when this plat would come back so we don't put ourselves in a limbo type situation. Potentially it could be another year or two years before the plat actually comes back in a reconfigured form. Maybe we could get some input from the applicant as to timing on presenting everything in the plat. That might be helpful here. Roger Anderson: The timing for a reconfigured plat may be secondary. I feel that through the process here Don has rights, if I understand the rules correctly, to develop that piece into 37 lots. And making allowance I believe that he has to meet the 2 1/2 acre minimum, which was in effect back at that time and that's what has driven this thing forward is the number of lots actually. Not the 2 1/2 acre requirement. The 2 1/2 acres is to obtain a certain neighborhood characteristic I believe and to meet the individual soil treatment site provisions, which we fully intend to meet. But this doesn't fall under the current ordinances, the way we understand it and admittedly it's a complicated situation but if there is a requirement now that each of these lots be 2 1/2 acres, I think that throws a whole different skew on it. It's not just a reconfiguration issue that our engineer can do. It's the legal 43 City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994 1 Councilman Senn: The thing on 1. 44 and the planning question I think that's going to take more than that. I don't see it as just a black and white situation. Kate Aanenson: How about if we table this for the next City Council meeting and we get a legal opinion and ' resolve that issue and then also maybe come back with a time frame where we can resolve another plat... Mayor Chmiel: Okay. I don't see that as a problem. Can I have a motion to table? , Councilman Mason: So moved. I'll move to table. Councilman Wing: Second. ' Mayor Chmiel: Okay, moved and seconded. ' Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Wing seconded to table action on the preliminary plat for Halla's Great Plains Golf Estates until the next City Council meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. ' Councilman Mason: I guess if I could just add. I think we also need to continue this discussion about why every lot should be, what the rationale is and what the rationale isn't for averaging so it comes out to 2 1/2 acres or maintaining every lot. I mean we average PUD's. We average a lot of things and I'm, I don't personally ' don't think tonight's the night to have that discussion but. Mayor Chmiel: And I think we can continue that probably at the next meeting. ' Councilman Mason: Okay. Councilman Senn: Since we're bringing it back, I think it becomes an interesting question because it's one we ' have to keep asking ourselves all the time and I think the neighbors should ask themselves the question. What's more important to you. The configuration, design layout or this absolute number and that's something that we have to deal with constantly up here. And just to say magically 2.5 can give you a nice, wonderful square lot ' boxed neighborhood subdivision that in our eyes sometimes we've looked at and kind of gone yukk. Okay. And so we try not to just simply etch in those numbers and say that's it. We look more at overall design configuration and say, well if you give a little bit there, you get to something that looks nicer. So all it is is a ' question and something to look at. Councilman Wing: And don't forget the TH 101 issues of grading and sight line and what the responsibilities ' are. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, I'm going to suggest that we do 10 and 11 and cut it off after that. ' Councilman Mason: No argument there. Mayor Chmiel: And I'd like to get the approval of 1(b) and 10) with a quick explanation as to whatever it ' might be. Councilman Senn: The thing on 1. 44 J L u n r City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994 Mayor Chmiel: Well no, we'll just come back to that but I'm just putting it in the proper sequence. Councilman Mason: Do we need to make a motion to amend the agenda now or do we wait? Councilman Senn: Well and that's what I was going to ask. I thought some of these people were kind of sticking around here for 1(b). Mayor Chmiel: Is there somebody sticking around here for 1(b)? Councilman Senn: There were people that were here on the business fringe. Item 1(b). Mayor Chmiel: City Code amendment to BF district. Additional permitted and conditional use final reading. We went through the process of this with the first and now this is the final. With the recommendations as to what. Councilman Senn: I'm just asking, should we move that up to take care of them? Mayor Chmiel: Well, I think what we'll do is just continue with what we have. We'll go to item 10. That item 10 I don't think is much of a problem. ANNEXATION /DEANNEXATION REQUEST, CITY OF CHASKA. Councilman Senn: I move approval. Councilman Wing: Second. Resolution #94 -86: Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Wing seconded to approve the annexation/deannexation request for the southwest corner of West 82nd Street and Highway 41 between Chaska and Chanhassen. AD voted in favor and the motion carried. DISCUSS CONCEPT OF ENTERTAINMENT COMPLEX, REDEVELOPMENT OF THE CHANHASSEN BOWL FACILITY, LOTUS REALTY. Councilman Senn: The one I feel bad about is I'd love to spend some time on this and we aren't going to have it tonight for number 11. So 1'd really, if we're going to push something off, and I know that's not fair because they've been sitting around all night. Mayor Chmiel: They've been here so let's bring in number 11. Brad Johnson, you're on deck. Councilman Senn: Let's come up with a time we can get together and do this. I mean right now to rush through this. Mayor Chmiel: You've only sat here half the night and waited. Councilman Senn: Do you want to stay for a few more hours and go through it? Mayor Chmiel: How long of a presentation will this take? 45 1