1g Approval of MinutesCHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
WORK SESSION
FEBRUARY 26, 2001
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Jansen, Councilman Labatt, Councilman Ayotte and
Councilman Kroskin
COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: Councilman Peterson
STAFF PRESENT: Scott Botcher, Bruce DeJong, Todd Gerhardt, Kate Aanenson, and Todd Hoffman
The City Council conducted interviews of Planning Commission candidates from 5:30 to 6:30 p.m.
Mayor Jansen called the work session meeting to order at 6:35 p.m.
DISCUSSION OF THE 2001 BUDGET STRATEGIES.
Scott Botcher and Bruce DeJong discussed the memo which was passed out to council members entitled
2001 Possible Budget Strategies, going through revenue enhancements and expenditure reductions.
Mayor Jansen asked for clarification on the computer equipment certificates. Mayor Jansen asked how
feasible it was that the City would be able to sell the Wrase property in the year 2001 to expect the
revenue.
Under discussion of expenditure reduction, Councilman Ayotte asked what the impact would be for
deleting expenditures, such as the MIS position. Bruce DeJong explained the drawbacks of deleting the
MIS position for the coming year. Scott Botcher asked the council to think about how to cut back or
eliminate costs connected with the city newsletter or State of the City brochure.
Councilman Kroskin asked when the TIF consultants would be back for a discussion with the City
Council. Bruce DeJong stated no date has been set, but that a meeting could be set for that discussion.
Mayor Jansen adjourned the work session meeting at 7:00 p.m.
Submitted by Scott Botcher
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
FEBRUARY 26, 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, and
Councihnan Kroskin
COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: Councilman Peterson
STAFF PRESENT: Scott Botcher, Roger Knutson, Todd Gerhardt, Todd Hoffinan, Kate Aanenson,
Bob Generous, Teresa Burgess, Bruce DeJong, and Kelley Janes
Public Present for all items on the agenda:
Name Address
Steve Berquist
Debbie Lloyd
Janet & Jerry Paulsen
Jim Eggen
7207 Frontier Trail
7302 Laredo Drive
7305 Laredo Drive
1161 Bluff Creek Drive
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS:
Mayor Jansen: This is our first evening where we're actually being televised live, just so everyone's
aware. We are now on live TV on Channel 8 so anytime you want to tune in when we're here on
Monday nights, you'll be able to catch us. But now you have to be on your best behavior too. We have a
public announcement this evening that actually is the presentation of the Maple Leaf Awards for our
Public Safety Commissioners that served-on our commisSion for a number of years. IfI might be able to
go ahead and have them come forward and then we'll ask council'to also step fo~wvard so that we can all
present the plaques. I'll tell you now that Jill Sloss is unable to join us, and unfortunately if we will hold
him in our prayers. He has had some health complications and hopefully Will be joining us in a couple of
council meetings to be accepting his award. The other gentleman who was unable to join us was Greg
Weber. He in fact had a conflict with this evening. While I have the microphone why don't I introduce
each of you. Colleen Dockendorf served on our Public Safety Commission from '97 until 2000. We
have Bill Wyfels with us from '97 also to 2000. And then Bill, and forgive me, I always pronounce your
last name wrong. Bernhjelm, served from 1988 until the year 2000 so put in 12 years on behalf of our
community and we certainly appreciate all the public service that all 3 of you on our Public Safety
Commission provided for us and it's certainly an honor for us this evening to be able to present you with
your axvards. Do please step forward and council if you'll join me in presenting the awards. We can just
go around front. And Steve, you also served on the Public Safety Commission so if you would like to
present these.
Councilman Labatt: Oh sure.
Mayor Jansen: The plaques read, in recognition of outstanding service and dedication to the community.
Please join us in congratulating these folks.
City Council Meeting- February 26, 2001
CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Ayotte moved, Councilman Krosldn seconded to approve the
following consent agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations:
a.
Resolution #2001-11: Approve Resolution Supporting the Use of 2001 CDBG Funds in the
Villages on the Ponds and Santa Vera Apartments.
c. Approve Findings of Fact, Variance 00-14, 960 Carver Beach Ro.ad, Anita Benson.
d. Approve Amended Development Contract for Arvidson's Addition, Project 00-12.
e. Approval of Bills.
Approval of Minutes:
- City Council Work Session Minutes dated February 12, 2001
- City Council Minutes dated February 12, 2001
Receive Commission Minutes:
- Park and Recreation Commission Minutes dated January 23, 2001
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 4 to 0.
B. APPROVE RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING 2001 LIOUOR LICENSE FEES.
Mayor Jansen: Councilman Kroskin, you removed item l(b) fi'om the consent agenda for separate
discussion.
Councilman Kroskin: Yes. t was looking at the spreadsheet for on-sale beer and wine, as well as the on-
sale non-intoxicating and I guess I'd like a little bit more input, and just looking at the spreadsheet as far
as the averages. I didn't run the numbers but just by eye-baiting it, the averages of some of the other
cities on the spread sheet, and I just saw a bit of a discrepancy that we're running on the wine license fee,
you know it looks like we've got an average of $90Oroughly with the other cities and we're at about
$280 and I'm looking at an average on the 3.2 of you know maybe $500-$600 and we're at $280 and I
xvas just, I'd like to have some discussion on that as far as maybe getting our license fees a little bit more
in line there. I wanted to get some feedback from my other councilmen.
Mayor Jansen: I actually looked at that same issue when I went through this and the average on the 3.2
beer came out to almost $400, and your average on the wine license was about the same. And part of
why I did take a look at that was staffnoted that we have not had an increase in the fees since 1994 so
just looking for whether or not we're being consistent with the other communities, and whether or not
there was any room for adjustment, it does appear that the on-sale intoxicating fee is certainly reasonable
as far as not doing an adjustment there. Are there other council people with comments? On those two
issues. Are you comfortable with the fee? Would you be.
Councilman Labatt: I'm not opposed to putting us more in line with the average. [ certainly don't think
we should be the leader in license fees but I'm not opposed to meeting the average.
Mayor Jansen: Okay. Any comment?
City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001
Councihnan Ayotte: I don't have an opinion one way or the other. I don't have enough information
really to see why there is that disparity. There's got to be a reason for it, but I don't 'know what that
reason is.
Mayor' Jansen: Okay. Councihnan Kroskin, do you have any recommendations as to the fee amount?
Councihnan Kroskin: Well if, did youjust say you did do the math on the wine license fee?
Mayor Jansen: Yes. The average is $994 of the other 9 communities listed.
Councihnan Kroskin: And what was the 3.2?
Mayor Jansen: Was $392.
Councilman Kroskin: Well, you know maybe a 50% increase on the 3.2 beer fee and then 100% increase
in the wine license fee from where we are right now.
Mayor' Jansen: Staff comment?
Scott Botcher: It's certainly a policy call.
Councihnan Kroskin: We're still, even at 100% increase on the wine license we'r~ 50% of the average.
Scott Botcher: Here's the rationale behind it, arid this certainly changes from council to council and it's
been since '94 so it probably needs to be addressed. But this has been the rationale. If you look at who
holds the types of licenses, I think that in the past has generally been the concern as to what the rates are.
If you look at the spreadsheet, the city has put the emphasis obviously on the on-sale intoxica{ing fee as a
major revenue generator, just partially because of how many people have that license but also maybe it's
not always fair', who pays it. Arid I can't disagree with what you said. I mean we are lagging and it
maybe needs to be addressed. I think, but realistically that's been sort of the rationale. You've got the
small businesses there, absent probably Byerly's, that pay that small amount. Secondly though, and I
think more importantly, whatever you want to change on this, if you want to increase the fees, you do
need to have a public hearing. We'll publish it and we'll come back and you need to do it in that manner.
Councilman Kroskin: That'd be fine. Why don't we get some public input.
Scott Botcher: Just so you know that.
Mayor' Jansen: So we'll need a motion to table to move it to a public hearing if we're going to increase
them.
Scott Botcher: Yeah, you can just instruct the staff to call a public hearing as soon as practicable and
that gives, you know your constituents an opportunity to contact you with their thoughts, but I can't
disagree.
Mayor Jansen: Councihnan Labatt, are you comfortable with that?
Councihnan Labatt: Yeah.
City Council Meeting- February 26, 2001
Councihnan Ayotte: Yes ma'am.
Mayor Jansen' Okay. If I could have a motion to table with direction to staff to set the public hearing
date.
Councillnan Kroskin: Motion to table with direction to staffto set a public hearing date so we can hear
fi'om the community.
Mayor Jansen: And do I have a second Ibr that motion?
Councilman Ayoue' I'll second that.
Mayor Jansen: Any more discussion of the motion?
Councilman KrosMn moved, Councilman Ayotte seconded to table establishing the 2001 Liquor
License Fees and directing staff to set a public hearing date on this item. All voted in favor and the
motion carried unanimously 4 to 0.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: CARVER COUNTY OUALITY OF LIFE REPORT, PAUL
MOLINE.
Mayor Jansen: Hi Paul. Thanks forjoining us tonight..
Paul Moline: Thank you for having me. I'm going to use the screen here if it works out okaY. My
name's Paul Moline with the Carver County Planning Depamnent and I'd like to just make a couple
introductions here before I stmx. Commissioner Swanson is here. Teresa Pesch fi'om Ridgeview Medical
Center and Nancy Rhineha~1 who is with the University of Minnesota Extension.
Mayor Jansen: Thanks for joining us.
Paul Moline' ...mailed the city about a month ago but if anybody doesn'-t have one I've got a few extra
copies.
Mayor Jansen' Everybody set?
Nancy ~finehai1: We also want your input as we present the report and so if there's an~hing that you'd
like to jot down, give us input on...
Paul Moline' Hopefully by the end of this evening, well at the end of 15 minutes or so, I'd like to have
these questions answered. Essentially xvhat are quality of life indicators? Why is the CounW talking
about this? Why are we making an effort tonight in your city council meeting to talk about this? And
what does the repot1 say that is referenced here? And lastly, where are we going fi'om here with this
project? Just to set the stage a title bit. I know most of you are familiar with the changes we've seen in
the county here. This graph represents just population changes since the turn of the century. You can
really see the last couple decades the rapid rise in population, and just to give a couple examples of that
for folks, I think if you were to look back beginning of even this decade, you would see a lot less traffic
on Highway 5. You would see a downtown here in Chanhassen that is markedly smaller than it is today.
And other facilities in the county for example the Ridgeview Medical Center in Waconia would be a
much smaller medical facility in the 90's. Again, this is stuffthat's been in the newspapers. We've seen
City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001
it quite a bit. Carver County is one of the fastest growing counties in the state. I think during the 1990's
they were the third fastest growing. One of the fastest growing in the upper Midwest. And there's a lot
of changes that are going to continue and really are changing every day here. We've got a major
highway sort of knocking on the door of the county that will bring some changes. We've got a Super
Target opening up in Chanhassen. A major development area down there. And we've got again smaller
towns even, Chanhassen has the bulk of the population in the county but even smaller towns out in the
western part of the county are going to be seeing 3 to 4 times the increase in households. So every town,
every township in the county has seen a remarkable amount of change. City of Chanhassen again, you're
looking at getting up to about 35,000 folks in about 20 years from now. So you are seeing the change as
rapidly as anybody else. So what does quality of life mean to Carver County residents? We did a survey
in 1997 and one of the questions we asked on there was what was important to the residents that lived
here or have just moved here. What was important to them about being in Carver County? And these are
some of the things that they responded. With accessibility to the metro area. The open space and rural
character of the county. Some things you associate with that quite a bit, quietness, safety, small town
feel, lack of congestion, safety, good schools, friendly people. There's a lot of things that people hold
dear to the county and again xvhether they're lived here for 50 years or it's one of the reasons why they
moved here. We've got again in the poll...what people thought of quality of life in 1997 cun'ently and
we've got a fairly good attitude about what that life is like. About 50% of the population has lived here
less than 15 years so there's a large bulk of people that moved here for a reason. Those things that those
people are concerned about over the next 20 years are problems related to population ~owth and
development, keeping tax increases reasonable, control of drugs and related problems, criminal problems,
the road systeln, traffic, transportation are a large concern. Control crime and quality school systems.
Those are all things people are thinking about when they see this, the urban changes coining to the
county. So this project, this sort of sets the stage a little bit for why we did this project. This quality of
life indicator piece was fully together through a partnershiP between the county, a couple of departments
at the county, University of Minnesota Extension and Ridgeview Medical Center, and I guess I Can't
emphasize enough that Ridgeview's involvement here, as a private/public partnership really has kept this
thing moving and I think will keep it moving as we move along here. Why did we do this? One of the
reasons, the initial reason why we did this was to organize some data and information. We get a lot of
requests at the county and a lot of departments are tracking information about the changes I just
mentioned. We saw some initial efficiencies of starting to share data, not only within the county but
xvithin communities and with public. That's reallY what sparked this. We started, it started to grow a
little bit when again ~ve thought it might be really helpful to track how thOse changes are affecting the
county. How things are affecting the county over time. Not just today, but what things looked like 10
years. What they're going to look like 10 years from now. And again recognizing that all this, most
decisions that are made at the county are based on solid, good information, whether it's at the county
level or at the local level. And lastly, coordinating community goals and values. There are a lot of
different plans that come out. At the county we have a comprehensive plan, we have health plans. The
city you have your own comprehensive plan. Private entities, Ridgeview Medical Center for example has
a plan for the future. This, we saw as a way to begin to coordinate those. A lot of values are similar. So
xvhat are these indicators? Really they're pieces of data that reflect the important vision of the county
and trying to reflect some of the values I just mentioned. They also give an opportunity to provide
feedback on the overall health of the community, in this case the entire county. Maybe provide a
symptom if something if something's headed in the wrong direction. It's a good chance to raise a flag
and then see what can be done about that. And really the main point of this is to get, pull a lot of
different indicators together to look at what the big picture is in the county. I guess I can't emphasize
that enough either that we are looking at a lot of different areas here. It's not just land use. Not just
transportation. We're trying to pull it all together to look at that big picture. We had a I0 step process
here that was borrowed from some other places around the country. We did check some other counties,
City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001
some other cities that have done quality of life reports and we tried to borrow some of the best pieces
fi'om those. I'm not going to go through all of these but just emphasize a few of them. One of the things
we did early on was trying to get out to the communities. Community leaders. Decision makers and
that's then what they felt xvas important. Before we decided what indicators should be, we wanted to get
out and ask folks what they would track if they wanted to knoxv how quality of life was changing in the
county. After that we tried to narrow them down. Some of the other studies we've seen had up to 400
different indicators. What we wanted to do was produce a document which people would actually pick
up and look at, so we wanted to get it to around 40 indicators. We had to take, I think initially we had
about 75 and we had to narrow that do~vn to a reasonable slumber. We also wanted to make sure we had
reliable data. A lot of indicators that people were interested in, there just wasn't data out there. Or the
data that was available was really spotty. We had tile bits and pieces but slot something we xvere
comfortable with producing. We also involved the University, through Extension... university faculty to
look at how we interpreted the data to make sure we made some good assumptions and we were tracking
tile right thing. And what we're doing right noxv is promoting this report. We did finish it essentially
early fall. What we're doing right now is trying to get this out to as really decision makers and
community leaders as possible to really see how useful this is to you and xvhat kind of tool you think this
is in terms of making your decisions. We're going to all the townships, all the cities and tile school
boards in the county. And then also some other organizations, Chamber of Commerce. So just to
summarize quickly what's in tile report. We've got 9 topic areas. Economics, and I'm not going to go
through all of these but early on in tile report there's a few pages whicll summarize, they list all the
indicators. Summarize a trend. What direction the data is telling tis it's going in. For example the top
one. unemployment rate. Tile trend is that our unemployment rate is getting loxver and lower. And then
tile next column we have a comparison to either the region or tile state, or in some cases national we have
the data. How's Carver County doing compared to other places? We made some assumptions there.
And again, with unemployment rates, when you consider the region or state, otis' unemployment rate is
much lower. Education, we've got a list of indicators there. Euvironmeut. Grox.xxth and housing. Health.
Mobility. Perception. We wanted to include some more qualitative indicators fi'om residents. How they
perceive things in the County. Public safety and some social indicators. This is just a quick example of
how each page has one of the, every page lists one indicator. I just wanted to walk through how we set
this tip so when you're looking at it you can understand it a little better. In this case it's the added home
value. We tried to document what the significant of the indicator xvas. Why we chose it? Why we put it
in here? What it means? What exactly is being measured? In this case we were looking at assessed
value data from tile county assessor. We wanted to make sure that people understood exactly what was
being tracked here. A little smnmary of the trends. Again in this case looking at the chart, no surprise.
Everybody has an average value of homes in the county has been going tip quite rapidly. This is just
during the 1990's. And then the links, which I think is one of the most important pieces of the document.
We tried to link what this indicator, average home value, what kind of affect it had on other indicators in
the report. The ones listed here, medium household income. There's obviously a relationship between
how much people make and what kind of home they can afford. The second one was percent of housing
that is affordable. Again, one of the larger issues here in the county is how the increase in home value is
affecting tile folks that are trying to buy their tirst homes. Folks that work in the county that want to live
here but can't. Another link would be the link with the home value versus the taxable market value.
Essentially the tax capacity that we have in the county. And point of distribution. Again, those folks that
the types of jobs that are available in the county and their ability to live here or not live here. I'm going
to turn this over to...just to talk about xvhere we're going from here and then we can take any questions
you may have.
Nancy Rhinehart: We put together a...3 year plan and it includes 4 different areas. Tile first one is
continued research. Tile second...technology. The third, community education, which we're doing
City Council Meeting- February 26, 2001
tonight with your group. And tile fourth being staff development. In the area of continued research, what
we xvant to do is to continually update this. Our plan is as soon as the census data becomes available, the
census data itl this report will be updated. And so we'll be using the web site that we have currently put
this on as well as the printed materials to update that information. We also are working on a county wide
survey that was done in '97 to get your feedback, like you're going to give us tonight of is the data that
you're seeing here, the data that...and continue to be using as data to watch, or are there other pieces that
need to be added. And so that's why we want your input here and our survey coming up will be using
that information. So collecting that. Another area of research that we're going to do is family focus
groups. Again getting more qualitative data and going out to different demographic areas. Right now we
want to look at young workers, new immigrants, new residents, not necessarily immigrants, commuter
employees, not necessarily residents. I mean they're not residents. Farmers, senior citizens, school aged
parents and youth that are 18 years and older. And so what we hope to do is collect qualitative data to
add to out' report here. Tile second area we're working on is to update annually, not onIy on the web site
but we do hope to update our printed reports every, approximately 2 years as well. And so you can go
on, it is on the Carver County web site as printed in our report there that youcan go in now and access
the same report that you have itl print form. And then making it in the future more interactive.
Hopefully attracting youth and that type of thing ill the web site development. Om' third area is to
present this, as Paul stated, to every city, school and township board or council in the next couple of
months and to get your feedback. Have an opportunity to dialogue and discuss these indicators. Our
second area is with Carver County Elected Officials Leadership Program. You may have recently
received, each of you.., letter from Commissioner Swanson and Ische inviting you to participate. I do
have a folder here that also gives the same application. You're welcome to take this one as xvell. In here,
this is a partnership that we've included. If you'll open it up here, on the inside, on ypur right hand side
is a description actually of a Minnesota Political Leadership Program. The Humphrey Institute is
dedicated to help, not to help. To support elected leaders and currently they're working on a Minnesota
Political Leadership Program with the legislature. You may have heard about it. Tile opening day of the
legislature there was a leadership program that was started the morning of the opening session. And so
on your right hand side just talks a little bit about what they're doing with the state legislature and who's
on the design team. The objectives and the focus of that particular project. And then on the left hand
side is a description of our county program that is being developed. Our major goals are to provide
action oriented leadership education around these indicators, and issues. Build understandings of key
issues impacting Carver County. Provide a forum for supporting partnerships among elected officials to
address common issues and to celebrate the leadership that you provide in Carver County. It goes a little
bit more itl depth. As to our sessions, we're going to just start it out with a steering session and you can
see the list of design team members of which Commissioner Swanson and Ische and also Teresa in her
elected official hat from District 110 School Board are serving to design this program with you. I don't
know if you want to add anything else to it Teresa? Okay, so anyhow we would like to have your discuss
this and encourage you to have a couple people...leadership program. Our fourth area that we had as a
goal is internal staff development and so we are in the process of training internal department heads, staff
at the county as well as statewide in our...process used here as well... With that.
Paul Moline: I guess we can take any questions if you have any.
Mayor Jansen: Well it's really an exciting program. I had a chance to look through the information and
it is just very well pulled together and certainly with everyone's schedules, I think everyone will have an
opportunity to be able to go through and really use it constructively. I had gotten, I held it up as Nancy
came around. I had gotten my letter. I would love to participate in this planning process and be a part of
it and I commend you for pulling something together like this. Does anyone on the council have any
questions or comments you'd like to share?
City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001
Scott Botcher: I have two questions if the council's passing.
Mayor Jansen: Go ahead.
Scott Botctmr: I guess I've got one con'tment. First of all, Nancy's not fi'om Ridgeview. What's your
name? Teresa. I'm son'y. I guess just an aside. I'm very, very pleased to see Ridgeview involved in this
process. I know you all have made a commitment to the County and to finis community and sometimes I
think we overlook that and I knoxv that itl my conversations wittn Bob Stevens. and even dow'n to Darrell,
tile EMS gu>', as we worked xvith our EMS location, you all have been very, very committed to this
COlnmtmity and you need to be commended for that. Secondly though, Nancy said, no Paul said, that yotl
had a plan for the future.., is that a public.
Teresa Pesch' Just to go offyour COlnment. I'm Teresa Pesch. I'm tile Acting Secretary for tine
Foundation lot' Ridgeview Medical Center Human Services.
Mayor Jansen' \Velcome. Thanks for being here.
Teresa Pesch: Thank >,'ou. I'm here on behalf of our organization. Part of our...looking at one oftlne
quality' of life indicators was that a lot of employers, tlnere are many issues that we face that impact our
quality of work environment that we offer as well as housing. Quality of housing in Carver County. We
have co-founded and sponsored... As we looked at that we thought.housing was...and part of tine area of
interest that we have is the area of transportation and unemployment and affordable housing. We also,
we're doing.., in terms of entry level and what is affordable and Nancy has marshaled, through tile
Hulnphrey Institute, sort of tine key leaders in that issue...that would come out to Carver County and
xx'ork with us in terms of some problem solving. I think tine Mayor, you attended our housing...
Mayor Jansen' Yes.
Teresa Pescln: ...housing and growth as ttnose first three...and then tile participants will be able to watch
the.., so we would very much be willing to come and...and appreciate your comments.
Scott Botcher: I guess if you have a business card or somettnilng with you, just maybe give it to Todd
riglnt there and he can hand it to me. I guess my second question is finis, and this is more of a comment to
xvlmt we're trying to do. Outside of the census data. which often times by the time you get it compiled
and analyzed is outdated, do you all, and we as a community are moving ahead xvith a community survey,
which is in fact on tile agenda finis evening. And I guess the question is two fold. First of all, do you
plan oil lmving fi'equent local canvas communivy surveys outside and apart fi'om census data? And then
secondly I guess it's more of an offer. Assuming the council goes ahead with this, whictn is premature
because it's still on tile agenda but I'm sort of assuming we're going ahead with this process, if you tnave
questions as we develop out' question list, that you tlnink are ilnportant to Chanhassen, or to us, I
personally would like to see what they are because I don't claim to have all the questions in my head that
we would be considering. I'm sure there's some good ones out there. So we'd be more than happy to
receive those as well.
Patti Moline: To answer tile first question. I think tile last time we did the survey we did try to break tile
results down in sub-groups. Every city and townships as a whole. I think this time around we weren't
recommending to do thatjust because of the cost issues. That we'd probably break it out between urban
and rural or...which gets to your second point that, maybe this is more since we'll have similar questions
City Council Meeting- February 26, 2001
that we're asking on the surveys and then we can prepare...I think that's pretty crucial to you and to us.
And our question list, is in a very...state right now. If you want to ask some of the questions we did on
the last survey but we're trying to get some input on this. If there's maybe some data that we're missing
and ask those questions on the survey so we haven't quite gotten as far down the road.
Scott Botcher: You're farther than we are because we don't have a single question but I think that.
Mayor Jansen: We're starting to work on that in March.
Scott Botcher: I mean it's something that I'm supporting and obviously it's up to these folks whether or
not xve do it and I think they've been supportive but I've been in contact with Minnetonka Community
Ed. They came in and made a presentation here and they have agreed to put together some questions to
forward to us and I would seriously like to look at your questions as well and maybe we can piggy back
some of those but anyway, I'm sorry it took so long.
Mayor Jansen: Well we're also parallel tracking a little bit on the housing issue too because we are
talking about having a housing forum here in the community so I think we've got some good
opportunities for partnership with you informationally and educating our community at the same time
xve're educating on county issues so thank you. It's an exciting project and appreciate your being here
tonight and Commissioner Swanson for your being here also.
Commissioner Swanson: Thank you very much.
May'or Jansen: Thank you. And we will get our feedback sheets back to you.
LAW ENFORCEMENT & FIRE DEPARTMENT UPDATE:
Mayor Jansen: Thank you for joining us this evening.
Sgt. Dave Potts: Good evening Mayor, Council members. I'm going to be real brief tonight. As you
know, if you had a chance to look at my memo to the council, you'll see there's no area call report or'
area citation report. As I believe you might be familiar with, the SherifFs office is transitioning to a new
record system. That's one glitch in our current system that they're transitioning. The other thing is that
they're down 2 or 3 people in our records division right now. They just don't have enough people to get
all the different things done that they have to get done. So I was hoping to maybe bring those tonight and
you could just take them home with you but they are not ready as of yet so I don't have any comments on
those. You'll see item number 3 is the community service officer highlights. That's something that I
mentioned to the council previously that will be included, just as a piece of information that I pass onto
the council. The activities that Jeff is involved in on a monthly basis.
Mayor Jansen: That's a nice addition to the information you're giving us. Thank you for including that.
S=o-t. Dave Potts: Beth Hoiseth, the Crime Prevention Specialist will also be doing something similar on
a bi-monthly basis so we'll probably see one for the first two months of this year next month in a report.
Under miscellaneous items, for our new councilman. Something that I try to do each month is maybe list
some things that the sheriffs office was involved in that's out of our ordinary, ever5, day role in the city
here. And anything of more significant importance that I think the council may be interested in. So the
first one there I mentioned is just a situation where a scout troop leader contacted us at the last minute
looking for some crime prevention information. An officer to do a presentation so we were able to line
City Council Meeting- February 26, 2001
that up for them. That is something we do to any group that is looking for an officer. A law enforcelnent
employee to come and speak at their organization or put on some kind of presentation and this is just an
example of one of those we were able to do for a scout troop in Chanhassen here. Update on the'
American Legion robbery. As you well know this is a fi'esh crime and obviously an ongoing
investigation so I won't be talking specifically about the activities that our investigators are involved in.
Initially, not a lot of information to go on but that doesn't mean there aren't a lot of angles to investigate
in a crime like this. There are quite a fexv and that will be ongoing for quite some time, or if we get a
sudden break and an arrest or something like that, who knows. Hopefully it can be wrapped up but just a
couple of tidbits regarding that situation. The Wednesday afterwards Cari~,er County has a critical
incident debriefing crisis team set up for xvhen something like this happens in the county affecting a good
number of people, as everybody that was at the legion that evening was you know greatly affected by this
situation. So they were able to line up what xve call a critical incident stress debriefing program for all the
victims that were at the legion that evening and that xvas the Wednesday after as I mentioned. Put on by
mental health professionals fi'om the county so that was kind of a/lice thing that went on there. Beth put
together a crime alert that we distributed to all the downtown area. Tl'ied to hit most all of the retail type
establishments. Just kind of keep tile information out there and some reminders and what not. I believe
tile council got a cop3,' of that.
Mayor Jansen: Yes xve did.
Sgt. Dave Potts: As I mentioned, that's going to be solnething new that we're going to be getting tile
council. Along with that crime ale~t xvas an attachment. You know that Beth is working on an e-mail
bulletin for businesses in town. Crime alerts and that type of thing so that was attached there. Hopefully
we'lt get more businesses signed up for that. And the sheriff had some other business with the Rotary so
he took that opportunity to touch on this situation as well. Any questions on that particular incident fi'om
tile council?
Mayor Jansen: I just xvant to share publicly tile compliments that I know I received fi'om tile members of
tile Legion for the sheriff's department's reaction to this event, if you would. That tile timing of being on
tile scene xvas prompt, and the handling o£the victims was significant to them because they were terribly
thrown by what occurred and the deputies that were there and Sheriff Olson's responses just numerous
times have been complimented to me on your behalf so I'm going to pass that along and I've been sharing
that xvith tile other community members. And the sheriff coming to the Rotary meeting on Wednesday
morning was certainly appreciated again letting business people know as well as raising their awareness
of what had happened with these individuals and you knoxv seeking the community support was a
significant effort so our thanks.
Sgt. Dave Polls: Well I appreciate those comments and this was huge for this community. This is not a
conlllqOll, every day occurrence.
Mayor Jansen: Yes it v,,as.
Sgt. Dave Ports: I think back to the bank robbery was '97. Was probably the last time we had something
of this impact and this significance happen in the city of Chanhassen. Very bold. Very brazen and we're
looking very much forward to getting our hands on the suspects in this case.
Mayor Jansen: Thank you for your efforts.
10
City Council Meeting- February 26, 2001
Sgt. Dave Potts: ... certainly made a huge impact on them, but just as a side note, the deputies that work
this town feel violated as well when something is pulled off in what they consider to be their community
so we have the greatest hopes that our investigative team will put a quick end to this.
Mayor Jansen: We'll look forward to good news.
Sgt. Dave Ports: Yeah. Just a tip, State patrol is handling an investigation of Shakopee Auto, on the used
cat' lots down at what we call the lower Y. Highway 101/212 area there. Did a search warrant into some
of the practices down there. Assisted by one of our deputies, just more as a standby. They always notify
the locals xvhen they're in a jurisdiction doing investigation. And that was our only participation in that.
Also something I try to keep the council up to date on is anything that affects the city directly or city
propet~ry. In this case I ~nentioned North Lotus Park had some vandalism. It wasn't a real significant
crime. Just some windows broken out at the wanning house but I do like to mention those incidents to
the council when they come up. And a significant burglary occurred at the Westwood Community
Church office, located neat' Highway 5 and Park Drive in the light industrial area over there. Where their
office is currently houses. A break-in over there. Netted the suspects. Computers and other electronic
items with initial value estimates of over $20,000 so that xvas a significant one that again is, that was
fi'oln the end of January so again another ongoing incident that's being investigated.
Mayor Jansen: Okay.
Sgt. Dave Potts: Any other comments or questions fi'om the council for me?
Mayor Jansen: Cotmcilmen, COlnments? Questions? Okay. Thank you very much for the update.
Appreciate it. Then we have Chief Wolff with us this evening. Hello John.
John Wolff: How you doing?
Mayor Jansen: Good.
John Wolff: Thanks for inviting me. Just a reminder that next Monday afternoon we have the council
orientation. You're be rotating through departments, the fire department included. We're looking
forward to the opportunity to kind of share with you in some detail the kind of services we perform and a
little more about our organization. Tonight I'm only going to spend a minute or two because I know you
have an extensive schedule but a couple of reminders. May 5th of 2001 is our 35th Anniversary of the Fire
Department itself and invitations will be going out to the council and some key staff here at the city.
That's a Saturday evening and we're hoping that you folks can attend.
Councihnan Labatt: May 5th?
John Wolff: May 5th. The actual anniversary is the 6th SO, but we have to be out of there by 11:00 so we
may not make it. Out' staffing is eligible for 45. We're at 44 right now. When we look at our staffing
plan and we get down to the individual levels, we can see 8 to 10 potential terminations in the next 2
years resulting from retirements, kind of the normal burnout that we get from call activity, and just the
challenges between managing a paid on call position and your work and personal life. And also just
stone performance related anticipations that we have. With this in mind we constantly are in a recruiting
~node and I'ln happy to report that we have between 10 and 12 applications which we're currently
reviewing and are scheduled to start another class in June, which is typically when we do start a class.
Typically the first quarter of the year is our slowest quarter. Normally for call activity. But our calls this
11
City Council Meeting- February 26, 2001
year are up 36%, which is a significant number. We don't think that's a straight line trend for the year.
We think it somewhat has to do with having a real winter, xvhich we certainly have had this year and a lot
of weather related activity from that. Most of our major calls fortunately have been out of town. We've
been on 6 major mutual aid calls in our neighboring cities, including the significant apartment fire in
Chaska where there was a fatalitT. We've had 2 very major car accidents here in town on the corridor
between Poxvers Boulevard and Galpin Road has been kind of a significant area for us and as we all
know, that's an area under development and we anticipate that when w'e get 4 lanes out there xvith the
divided, that that xvill improve significantly. But both the recent ones were incidents xvhere it's taken a
significant amount of time to get the victims out of the vehicles because o~f the extent of damage to the
vehicles resulting from head on collisions. In both cases air bags and seat belts but the victims still
having major and significant injuries. We had one yesterday in the middle of the storm, or the da5, before.
And the victim is improving but is in very serious condition. Just a couple of other points before I close
here. With all the snow on the ground we're anticipating some weather related activity as it goes away,
in the form of flooding and the report I heard recently was this is the most snow this area has seen since
1991. I'm not sure how' that will impact us in where we are upstream but we'll keep our eye on that
because the southen~ part of our city has a significant river with some significant exposures down there.
Finally in March we'll be meeting with you folks at a work session to go over a pension proposal which
xve have submitted to the city and we'll have copies for you folks before that work session. I'll take any
questions if there are any,
Mayor Jansen: Great. Any questions for John? See none. Thanks for being here. Appreciate it.
Moving on to unfinished business.
DISCUSSION OF TRAIL ADJACENT TO TH 101, PROJECT 97-12-3.
Public Present:
Name Address
Joan Janke
Lynn Thompson
Dianne \Vhiting
Leon Narem
Pamela & Tom Devine
Frank Mendez
Steven Posnick
Ed Benne~
Charles Hauau
Mel Kurvers
Sandra Resnick
Jay Strohmaier
7002 Sandy Hook Circle
41 Hill Street
51 Hill Street
20 Sandy Hook Road
7640 South Shore Drive
7361 Kurvers Point Road
7010 Dakota Avenue
7017 Sandy Hook Circle
115 Choctaw
7240 Kurvers Point Road
80 Sandy Hook Road
Mayor Jansen: Before we get started on that item, I just want to make sure that everyone who's here is
clear as to what we're actually discussing. The flyer that went out in the neighborhood actually seems to
make it appear as though the discussion this evening was around the roadway as well, and this discussion
in fact is centered around the, I shouldn't say recent but the last communication that we had gotten fi'om
MnDot denying the construction of the trail in the right-of-way. So this item, it's the first time that it's
coming to this council. \Ve at this point have had no review of the roadway concepts as a council and
numerous questions came up of course as we were looking at the trail segment. So we will, in
12
City Council Meeting- February 26, 2001
discussions with staff, be scheduling another meeting time to be able to actually review the roadway
configurations and get everyone up to speed since we do have 3 new members of the council who did not
go through all of those public hearings and aren't aware of the background data on that. So I want to
applaud whoever is keeping residents informed and keeping you involved in the system. What I hope
maybe we can be sure we're doing is distributing the right, accurate information because I'd hate to have
people engaged in a meeting and taking time out from a busy night to come up here thinking we're
talking about something that in fact isn't what's on the agenda. And I know that that can in fact lead to
some disengagement with the system if you would. So if we ever need to.get some clarification for the
flyers before those go out, I would just encourage you to touch base with Teresa or if it's Todd Hoffman
that has the item on the agenda, that that might be the direction to go. Back to the item that is on the
agenda, before turning this over for the staff report, just so everyone's clear where we're going tonight.
Staff Js simply looking for direction from us tonight on whether to, for one, pursue the trail. And the
different discussions around location, timing. You know we'll probably end up with something ora list
of things that we'll need to address after this meeting. That in fact we will not be able to address this
evening since we've not covering the roadway, but I will turn it over for the staff report please.
Teresa Burgess: Thank you Madam Mayor. As the staff report goes through, there is a real brief trail
history. ! have not included the roadway history. I have only included trail history and I'll run through
that real quick for the people that don't have the benefit of the staff report in front of them. On May 22"6
of last year the council authorized us to begin exploration of a possible trail along Highway 101 within
the existing MnDot right-of-way and that would require us to apply for a limited use permit or an LUP.
In June of last year we submitted that document to MnDot for LUP review. In October we received
documentation from MnDot that they were taking the road back out of the turnback process. ';['hat did not
impact our application however. In September we received documentation from MnDot that, I'm sorry.
I switched two dates around. In October we submitted a grant application to MnDot for the trail.- In
September we received a letter from MnDot stating that they were taking back the roadway. In
November we actually received our documentation from-MnDot that they were denying our LUP request.
At that time we met with MnDot and their statement was, if we did full design of the trail, they would
reconsider their denial. And in January we received denial of our cooperative agreement grant
application. Again their statement was, if we would do full design of the trail, they would reconsider
their denial. They have not given us indication that they would approve it. Only that they would
reconsider. At this time the trail is estimated at approximately $1 million. Using a 10% engineering fee,
that leaves the design at approximately $100,000, which is a substantial amount of money. We are
coming to council tonight to answer questions. Gain what insight you need to be able to answer the
question of should we either pursue this trail as a separate project, or should we put it, continue to keep it
in the city plan but not pursue it quite as aggressively as we have been at this point. With that I'll answer
any questions.
Councihnan Ayotte: MnDot had asked us to respond by 19 February. Is the information that they have
requested, this information that you're referring to?
Teresa Burgess: What they wanted by February 19th was full design of the entire trail. It was not
possible.
Councilman Ayotte: Yeah, okay.
Teresa Burgess: And so we have informed them that we would not be responding in that time frame.
We would not be able to get cooperative grant funding until 2003.
13
City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001
Councihnan Ayotte: I just want to make sure that that ,,',,as the...to the request. Okay.
Teresa Burgess: Correct.
Mayor Jansen' That was your question?
Councilman Ayotte' Yeah.
Mayor Jansen: Okay. I guess maybe to help fi'ame this up a little bit. some of the questions that were
flying back and forth today as we were all trying to get our arms around the funding of this issue. At one
point when we were in our discussions with MnDot last )'ear, we were addressing this as a project that
could ill Fact have been funded with TIF. But at this point, because of the timing and because we're
beyond the year 2000, that's no longer an option so as of last year we lost $2.6 million in funding source
lbr the trail, correct?
Scott Botcher: I can't confirm tile $2.6...
Mayor Jansen' From TIF, okay. Tile other pal1 of the questions that we were posing was around tile
state funding the construction of the trail, and ifI understood correctly, if in fact this had proceeded xvith
the roadway, it would have been covered by the turnback funds, correct?
Teresa Burgess: Tile majority of the cost would have been covered by tile turnback funds. There were
city funds involved ill tile turnback and just as there is with the Highway 5, the city would have had a
share of the cost but the majority of tile cost would have been born...
Mayor Jansen: And you reflected it was 90% that the state had picked up on tile Highway 5 trail and
bridges?
Teresa Burgess: I'm not sure. The Highway 5, it's approximately 10% that the city is paying and 90%
that the state picked up. Actually those are federal dollars. In this case, looking back at the file, I'm not
sure what the final discussion was but it does look like it was the 90/10 split again. However the right-
of-way would not have been city funded and so that's a difference that doesn't get incorporated into that
90/10 split.
Mayor Jansen: Okay. And then tile other question that has come up is if ii1 fact we do get permission to
build the trail in their right-of-way, and they come through and do Option lA. Let's sa), we get them to
agree to that. We lose, or at least 90% of the trail is then impacted by even Option lA.
Teresa Burgess: We've estimated 80 to 90% of the trail ~vould have to be reconstructed. The mill and
overlay does not impact the trail because that takes place in the existing asphalt area. But any drainage
improvements would immediately impact because we would be in the ditch area. The other thing to keep
ill mind also is that when we do apply roi' an LUP permit, we are in the same position as any utility that
comes to the city or any one that comes to us for a right-of-way permit. Just as we can ask them to
relocate something at their cost, the State could ask us to remove this trail at a future date. That would be
a condition of the LUP.
Mayor Jansen: So the cost to actually demolition it and remove it would be the city's to get it out of
MnDot's way.
14
City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001
Teresa Burgess: That is a potential. Ifxve ~vere talking about a turnback, it would be a negotiation
point fol' us in that turnback agreement.
Mayor Jansen: Okay. And if it does then, ifI understand correctly, if it does become a turnback project,
the cost of reconstructing the trail then.
Teresa Burgess: Would be negotiated as a part of that turnback agreement.
Mayor Jansen: Okay. So then to construct it we'd be hit once, but we might also then be hit to do the
demolish ourselves.
Teresa Burgess: We could potentially be required to remove the trail at some point.
Mayor Jansen: Okay. Okay. I can keep going. Are there other council questions?
Councihnan Ayotte: Well if they put the trail ill. If we put tile trail in, if I heard the mayor correctly, we
would, there's a possibility that xve'd have to take the trail out.
Teresa Burgess: MnDot reserves the right to require us to do that. They have not said they would, but
they do reserve the right in the permit to do that.
Councillnan Ayotte: And we could potentially, if required to do that, also incur the expense for the
demolition of the trail.
Teresa Burgess: Correct. If MnDot required us to remove the trail, it would be at our expense.
Councihnan Kroskin' Do you know roughly what that would be?
Teresa Burgess: No. We have not estimated the cost to remove the trail. It would depend what they
wanted to do. If they were looking at demolishing the trail so that they could return it to a grass slope,
then xve would be looking at restoration costs. If they were looking at demolishing the trail so they could
widened Highway 101, that's a substantially different demolition because we don't have to do restoration
xvork and so there's really slot a way to estimate that.
Councilman Kroskin: How many linear feet is the trail?
Teresa Burgess: Approxi~nately 8,000.
Councilman Kroskin: Ill your e-mail today, one of your e-mails to us you were saying that your
estimated costs.., was roughly about $125 per foot, not including design, engineering fees.
Teresa Burgess' Correct.
Councihnan Kroskin: And then you did an average of all of 7 other trails?
Teresa Burgess: Todd Hoffman supplied that information. The average of the 7 other trails.
Councihnan Kroskin: $38.00.
15
City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001
Teresa Burgess: $38.00. That includes design and engineering. Our typical indirect costs that includes
our design and our construction engineering as well as legal expenses and administration expenses is
30%. If you're looking at just design, approximately 10% is just design of that total 30%. 8% xvould be
construction engineering. Tile remainder of that is legal and administrative.
Councihnan Kroskin: Todd also sent out an e-mail today where I saw a figure where the, and clarify this.
That the homes roughly used about what, 400 homes? The neighborhood that's impacted by the trail
have been assessed $75,000 to date.
Mayor Jansen: That tile Highway 101 neighborhoods have generated approximately $75,000 in trail fees.
Councilman Kroskin: To date.
Mayor Jansen: To date. And that took into account about 400 homes. And what we ,,,,,ere trying to
really get a feel for is what has actually been paid in towards the trail, because that did come up as an
issue when we were reviewing this previously with tile roadway as to tile actual cost.
Councilman Kroskin: I was just trying to understand what the $75,000 was about.
Mayor Jansen: So tile $125 per foot does not have tile design and engineering in it?
Teresa Burgess: No. That is just considering tile $1 million construction fee. It also does not include
right-of-xvay acquisition.
Councilman Avotte: What's that?
Teresa Burgess: Tile right-of-way acquisition?
Councilman Ayotte: No, what would be the guess that that cost would be.
Teresa Burgess: We have not estimated the right-of-way acquisition at this time. It.is our hope that we
can negotiate a reasonable acquisition, if not a donation with those property owners. Hoxvever until we
have a LUP, it doesn't seem reasonable to approach those prope~%, owners and try to negotiate something
and get ourselves, the horse in fi'ont of the cart. We want to do it in the right order.
Councilman Ayotte: What do you think tile risk would be with respect to liability to the city and it's
residents on whether or not we would have to put that path in and take it out? What do you think the risk
is?
Teresa Burgess: I don't see MnDot approving a limited use permit that the:>, know they're going to
require us to take it out in the short term. So MnDot tends to program in 20 year segments. They are
going to try to be upfront with us and let us know if there's a potential for that relocation. The bigger
issue at this point in my mind is, is the design worth the gamble that MnDot xvill approve the project or
{lot.
Councilman Ayotte: Tile hundred plus thousand.
Teresa Burgess: Is it worth trying to get the LUP at this point, or should we re-evaluate the trail?
16
City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001
Mayor Jansen: Well and I guess part of the questions in where I was going today with my questions is
not only the $100,000 that would be spent in the design fees, but backing up and looking at the overall
expenditure that we're addressing and comparing it to what ~vas actually spent within the referendums for
trails. I was quite frankly floored at how much more expensive this trail corridor is to construct. It
would have taken the entire referendum amount that we spent on 7 trails to build this 1. It's amazing the
disparity. Or going in reverse, if you took that $38 per foot and applied it to this trail, we should be
spending $350,000. What I'm now hearing you say could be more like a million three once you put the
30% additional on that million.
Teresa Burgess: Correct.
Councihnan Kroskin: Where's the disparity coming from?
Teresa Burgess: This trail is trying to fit, it's trying to be a low impact trail and that causes some
problems. We're trying to fit into an existing right-of-way. The right-of-way has two wetlands that we
would end up having to traverse. Those have significant impacts, as well as the ~ades. We do have to
meet ADA grades and to do that causes problems with the trail. And then also addressing a number of
the neighborhood concerns. Trying to meet those, and MnDot drainage concerns increase the cost of this
project approximately $300,000 is directly related to MnDot concerns. We did not go back through and
re-estimate. We are basing the $1 million figure off of what MnDot is estimating the trail to cost from
our original $750.
Councihnan Ayotte: There was the MnDot concerns, the ADA issue, two wetlands and what-was the
fourth?
Mayor Jansen: Existing rigl!t-of-way.
Scott Botcher: Grades.
Teresa Burgess: Within the existing right-of-way.
Mayor Jansen: Sitting within the existing right-of-way.
Teresa Burgess: To fit into the existing right-of-way we end up with some retaining walls, and those
are expensive. We end up with some other problem areas that to stay in those areas, the grades are very
difficult. Anybody that's been down 101 can, if you try to imagine a trail in there with reasonable
separation fi'om both the homes and from the roadway, it is a very tight corridor. It's a problem we ran
into with the whole Highway 101 issue. It's always been the issue. It's a very tight corridor. We
certainly feel this trail is important. The question is, is now the time? And that is really why we're
bringing it back to council.
Mayor Jansen: And is now the time, and how do we finance this because now if we're at a million 3, and
even within the CIP we had moved the allocation for this project from 600 up to 800, and now we're
talking about a million 3. And it's certainly a disparity to what's been funded on the previous trails, but I
guess what I keep coming back to was, there is that opportunity if we can get back into negotiations with
the other jurisdictions for the State to pick up the million at least.
Teresa Burgess: A majority of the cost, correct.
17
Cit.',, Council Meeting - February 26, 2001
Mayor Jansen: The majority.
Cotmcihnan Kroskin: What about the county? Is there any option?
Teresa Burgess: If this xvas a turnback project tile county would be interested but as a trail project the
city would be financing this project on it's own.
Councihnan Ayotte: Out of 410.
Teresa Burgess' Out of our CIP budget.
Councilman Ayotte' Out of the CIP.
Mayor Jansen: And again, maybe you're speculation as to tile other parties coming back to the table.
Teresa Burgess: I have actually had conversations with Hennepin County, Carver County, and with
MnDot. The only party I have not discussed it with is Eden PraMe. However Eden Prairie has
previously made statements that they will do whatever Hennepin County recommends.
Councihnan Ayotte: What'd they sa),? When you had conversations.
Teresa Burgess: They are alt interested in continuing to talk about a possible turnback project. MnDot
is very anxious to get this project off their books. The discussion that comes up is that they are not in
support of Option IA, which is what Chanhassen is in support of. And we certainly can provide the
inforlnation to the councihnelnbers. I do have somebody working on pulling that together this week so
we can provide that information and xve would be happy to present all of that to the council so we can-
decide what we should do with the roadway as well.
Councilman Kroskin: The rest of you may know this ah'eady but why are tile), not in support of lA?
Teresa Burgess: There's a discrepancy in what's recommended for the roadway. MnDot recommends a
3 lane. Howex'er they agree that eVentual traffic will require 4. Helmepin County has stated their support
for a 4 lane because they feel that we should design for that level of traffic. Eden PraMe has chosen to
take a position of supporting Hennepin County's position. That is their position. Literally, we support
Hennepin County. They made that before Hennepin County made their recommendation. Carver County
has stated that tile3, are in support of functional, restoring the functionality of tile roadway and they have
not stated what that functionality requirement is.
Councihnan Kroskin: Cai1 we find out?
Mayor Jansen' They'll work with us on it.
Teresa Burgess' They're willing to support Chanhassen's position. However, they want to make sure
that that position meets the functionality. When I did talk with MnDot, one thing they did bring up with
the turnback funds, is turnback funds cannot be used unless the roadway at least meets state aid
standards. We have not run the calculations based on tile traffic counts but we do estimate that that
would at a lninimum be a 2 lane with shoulders and possibly a full length turn lane which would be the 3
lane but we have not done width calculations.
18
City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001
Mayor Jansen: Okay. Keep in mind councilmen that xve do have a new city engineer since we went
through this project the first time and I am going to state this publicly and I've always appreciated
Teresa's handling of the public on the projects that we have had come before us since you've been with
us. And I think that openness and willingness to share information and help with more of an education
and working with us and being able to lead us along those safety issues, I think would make a big
difference in how we might be able to work this project. And also having someone who might be able,
better able to communicate with the other parties that we have to actually come to consensus with and do
the negotiations with. In that you've already had some discussion with them. I'm getting a sense from
you that they're at least open to talking and that's a step in the right direction.
Teresa Burgess: Representative Workman has also come forward and stated that he is interested in
seeing this project move forward and has offered his services to facilitate those discussions. I'm not sure
hoxv far that will actually carry but with his position in the legislature it does carry some weight with
MnDot and also with Hennepin County. At this point he is not choosing a position. He is only saying
that he wants to see this project reach some final determination. So certainly the other parties are
willing. I will get the information to the council and schedule an item for us to discuss the project
because it is something that has become very political, and certainly the council needs to understand and
make a position known before we approach those other groups and discuss how far are we willing to
negotiate if they are xvilling to come our direction.
Mayor Jansen: And I guess councilmen that.would be the direction that I would be the most comfortable
going in. If only because this number on this trail just continually escalates as to how much this is going
to cost. And we have an opportunity that if in fact we can improve the rOadway, and _also get the trail and
not impact ali of the taxpayers to the sum of what is sounding like a million 3 noxv, it would be the more
fiscally prudent step to take. At least to explore those negotiations one-more time to See what we can
reach as far as some sort of an agreement. Now the position that was taken Previously, and ! do not want
to get into the politics of the roadway discussion tonightbut if you take the labels off these roadways, I
think it's a much easier discussion to have as to where we're trying to go. Part of the belief as we ~vere
still referring to this as lA. Concept 1 xvithin the proposals as you'll see was for an overlay and that was
it. It was just for a resurfacing. So as xve labeled our'.s lA, it seemed to keep that stigma around it just
being a resurfacing. Where in fact once You See the resolutions and everybody has to go through them, it
xvas much more extensive than that and it would have been addressing some of the safety issues so I am
hopeful that we might in fact be able to resurrect these discussions and not have the neighbors impacted
by it being a huge project. That in fact xve may be able to move forward with this trail, which right now
because of the financial position that the community's in, we don't have a million 3 to be moving
forxvard with this particular facility and I don't ~know that the neighbors would be willing to be assessed
for the difference between a typical trail and the cost of this one. I believe we all in fact see, and correct
me if I'~n wrong in your comments, I think we all see the significance of wanting this trail along Highway
101. It's just the delicate balance of how we do that and do it fiscally correct too. But go ahead council
if anyone else cares to share comments here.
Councihnan Ayotte: I don't see any other choice but to solicit the input and see if we can get a meeting
going to talk about the options.
Mayor Jansen: Initially we would need to first direct staffto run through the roadway review with all of
us so that all of us are in agreement as to where we're negotiating from. Everyone needs to get a
familiarity with all of the issues that we covered. It's a very extensive review. Prior to, as Teresa said,
then at that point bring the jurisdictions back together for a discussion because it would be a negotiation.
19
City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001
It won'tjust be sitting down, because they do want a larger facility than I think we're going to be willing
to construct.
Teresa Burgess: And ifI could Mayor. I'm not sure, and Roger you'll have to advise on this. When
we're talking about negotiation. Obviously the public, the City of Chanhassen residents want to knoxv
what tile council is directing but do we want to have that ill a less public forunl when the council is
telling staffthis is as far as we're willing to go before I approach Hennepin and say, okay xve're willing
to go this fat'. How far can you come our way? If it's a public meeting and the staff says, and council
tells me this is as fat' as we're willing to go, that's how fat' we'll have to go. Do you understand where
I'm going?
Councilnqan Avotte: Go ahead Rog.
Roger Knutson: Yes I do. It's generally not considered a good strategy in negotiations obviously to load
all your cards on the table and then say we'll only plas' these two or something, if that's what you're
suggesting. That's obviously not a great idea. If you want to negotiate, and that's what it's all about, it's
a difficult way to do it.
Teresa Burgess: So something to keep in mind for tile council is. w'ell I know tile citizens of
Chanhassen want to know what we're doing and we need to share as much information as possible.
Before we approach Hennepin County and MnDot, does tile council want to do that discussion itl public
first? Or do you want to have the discussion in a more closed setting because we are discussing a
negotiation? And then come back to the public with information. It's a difficult situation.
Roger Knutson: Just so we're cleat', we can't have a closed City Council meeting.
Teresa Burgess: \Veil we could have it not as a council meeting. We Could have it in a xvork session
which isn't, it's not televised.
Scott Botcher: I think, just to be more upfl'ont than that, I think, i mean I'm personally not interested in,
and this sounds negative and it's not meant to be but I can't come up with a better word, playing games
with tile dissemination of information. I mean that's just my own personal opinion. I mean I've been in
some of these meetings with Teresa. i'm very comfortable just letting her go with it. We've got to see
where people are. We've got to see if there's movement on the other side and Teresa is very good at
handling people, and that's why she was hired and I'ln very comfortable letting her go with it and she can
give us periodic updates and check-in's and do that but I think instead of losing a tactical advantage by
indicating to Teresa how far you'll go, or in the alternative saying well let's just do it but let's do it when
no one's here, I'd just as soon say you know let's just be up fi'ont. You know Teresa go do your job.
You represent us and let her do the check in.
Mayor Jansen: I like tile idea preceded byjust a review of the projects and proposals and concepts with
council and then they can always be posing questions to you for us to get answers back to them. And
then certainly you know where we're probably going to want to attempt to end up and I think that's an
excellent suggestion if council's comfortable with doing the review ahead of time. To get a feel for the
different concepts. You may need to have some general feel of consensus.
Teresa Burgess: Right. We will pull that information together. There is a substantial amount of
information so if the council doesn't mind, rather than our typical we supply the information the week
before a council meeting, I'd like to give you at least a full week or perhaps two to review tile
20
City Council Meeting- February 26, 2001
information and then those of you that need some additional information, if you can contact me, we have
minutes from public hearings. We have, it's going to take a lot of reading so we will get that information
pulled together in the next week or two. Get it out to you as soon as possible and then schedule, once we
see how big the pile is, schedule that for a council meeting at some time in the future. But allow you
more time than usual for reviewing those staff reports.
Mayor Jansen: And there were numerous, numerous public hearings so if you care to come in and be
able to take a look at all of the comments and public hearing results. We've got everything.
Teresa Burgess: Right. We have it all on tape. We also have it in typed out format and I would
encourage you to at least catch a portion of it if we're going to be discussing it so you can catch the
tenure of the conversations I've listened to. Not the whole thing but large pieces of it. We'll get you the
information that you need. If I could just reiterate, just so I'm clear on what the council's directing at
this point. You're directing us to put this trail on hold while we explore the Highway 101 issue.
However the trail is still an important issue for the City of Chanhassen and we are not eliminating it. We
are simply placing it on hold in the time being.
May, or Jansen: Exactly. That's what I was about to get consensus on. I'm hearing from council that
everyone's interested in pursuing this trail. That we are still committed to it but we have a financial
hurdle to get over here as far as hoxv we go about funding it and possibly with the roadway is the most
feasible, if possible.
Councihnan Ayotte: Simplisticly, because I'm so slow, all we're saying tonight is that we're not going to
spendS100,000 on design.
Mayor Jansen: Correct.
Councilman Ayotte: And that we're going to pursue a trail and if need be we're going to tie the pursuing
of the trail to the various options in a negotiation with all the entities. Is that correct?
Teresa Burgess: That's what I'ln hearing from council.
Mayor Jansen: When you're saying options, are you talking about the roadway options?
Councihnan Ayotte: Yeah. Don't we have to tie the roadway option to this?
Mayor Jansen: No.
Teresa Burgess: We're going back to review the roadway options and possibly negotiate a turnback
with MnDot.
Scott Botcher: Unless we can somehow de-link them.
Councihnan Ayotte: Okay.
Councilman Kroskin: When you're negotiating with the other entities, you don't necessarily have to put
your cards on the table. You can see where they're going to go first.
Mayor Jansen: There's been a lot of that so, a lot of that.
21
City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001
Scott Botcher: Have you ever sat in a room xvith 5 engineers?
Councilman Kroskin: Yeah.
Teresa Burgess: We don't play poker ,,,',,ell.
Mayor Jansen: Okay, straight with direction?
Teresa Burgess: I believe so. If not, I will certainly come back and ask for more information.
Mayor Jansen' Okay. And then let's just maybe get tile roadway on as soon an agenda as we can.
Teresa Burgess' We'll pull the information together and see lnow pile looks for reading.
Scott Botcher: Let's talk about it Wednesday and see how it schedules out.
Mayor Jansen: It will probably end tip being March 26th potentially.
Scott Botcher: We'll just have to move some stuff.
Mayor Jansen' Yeah. Out' 12th agenda is packed so keep ail eye on tine date but we ina3, in fact then be
reviewing this on March 26th would be, it's two council meetings out for us to actually do tine roadway
review With Teresa.
Audience' ...there's no public hearing?
Mayor Jansen: Oh this isn't a public hearing.
Audience: We can't speak? We can't speak to anything ttmt's happened over the last 8 years on this
trail? And now it looks like we're going to wait another 5 years... State of Minnesota.
Mayor Jansen' Excuse me. If we could maybe keep this at a professional tone. That's xvhy I was
concerned about the flyer that went out through the neighbortnood. It was raising a level of anxiety that,
v,'ell in fact we have had a great deal of public comment around this project over the last year which is
what I was sharing witln our new council people and tlmy xvill need to go back tlnrough and go through
tlnose comments. Now we also then need to have the new council people get up to speed on what that
whole roadway project was about and the different options so for us to be taking comment tonight is
somewtnat premature. We certainly feel the frustrations of the neighbortnood and, but the financial
picture here is not what may have been reflected to the residents previously. It's coming as a surprise to
me that we're now at a million 3.
Audience' ...May'or, if maybe one from each neighborhood could speak?
Mayor Jansen: If council members would be willing to open this to a public hearing, I would keep it to
10 minutes but it is certainly up to the council as to whether you're willing to do that.
Councihnan Kroskin: I'd prefer to get up to speed first so what they're saying has, I'm.
22
City Council Meeting- February 26, 2001
Audience: Here's the problem. We've been waiting...construction this spring. Excuse me for being out
of order but, it was supposed to be under construction this spring...we're going to miss a whole other
season again.
Mayor Jansen: No see that's the misinformation that's out there. It was not going to be under
construction this spring.
Audience: I've been to all the meetings for 7 years on this trail so please t~j not to inform me of what
~vas talked and not talked but I've been here.
Mayor Jansen: As far as a public hearing.
Councihnan Labatt: I've sat through all that. Let the nexv guys get up to speed.
Mayor Jansen: Next meeting. The next meeting we will schedule some time but you've got to allow
council to get up to speed and that was not what this meeting was proposed for this evening. And you're
certainly welcome to submit whatever comments you would like to share in writing to all of the council
~nembers and you've got all of our e-mails. You have all of our phone numbers. So as everyone's
getting tip to speed you may in fact experience they're not being able to speak to your issues until they've
got the background data. And I would appreciate your giving everyone an opportunity to get up to speed
so that they are better able to address your concerns.
Audience: I would agree with that except your city.employee just stood here in front of the Whole
council and sit here and talked and discussed about how you were going to maneuver around making this
discussion out of the public.
Mayor Jansen: That wasn't to the public. That was to the.
Audience: Did I just hear that or did I not hear that?
Mayor Jansen: It was to the jurisdictions that are involved in the, okay, I'm going to have to clear the
council chalnber if you would mind. We do need to get on with business. Moving onto new business.
DISCUSSION OF CONTRACT FOR METER REPLACEMENT PROGRAM.
(Councihnan Labatt left the meeting during the discussion of this item.)
Mayor Jansen: Staff report please.
Teresa Burgess: Thank you Madmn Mayor.
Tom Devine: Can I just make one quick comment? The trail as it was proposed in the turn down was 10
feet wide. If we go back to 3 to 4 foot in the negotiations as she has, it won't be...
Mayor Jansen: We can't go to that size. Submit your comments and we'll certainly get back to you.
We're lnoving on with the meeting, thank you.
Teresa Burgess: Thank you Madam Mayor. I would like to make one statement before we get started.
In the beginning of this report it does have a recommendation from staff. That recommendation has been
23
City Council Meeting - February 26, 200t
revised. What we're here to discuss tonight is tile meter replacement. We have two major issues xvith
the meters. One is to improve meter read accuracy and one is to reduce the meter read time. The most
important issue with this is the meter read accuracy. As meters age they have a tendency to slow down.
They don't register all of the water that runs through them. In addition, as we have rust build-up and
magnamese build-up in those meters, that also slows down the meter. As all of the council members are
aware, Chanhassen does have a high mineral content in our water so we do experience a lot of that
problem. I've enclosed information on tile back of your report that shows the water' that we've lost in the
last few years. And when I say lost, it's not that this water ran out cfa pipe someplace. It's that we
cannot account for where it went. And the majority of that water is anticipated that it went through
meters and was not, it was registered in those meters. When that happens we do not bill for that water
but we are still charged by the Met Council for sewage. They base how much they charge us for sewage
on the amount of water we pump from our wells. And also the water that we do not collect, the rates that
we charge our customers for, they are getting the water but they are not paying for it. In 2000 we were
unable to account for approximately 35 million gallons of v,,ater. Now a city of our size we should be
talking 3 to 5 million gallons of water, and we are not able to account for 35 million gallons. That's a
substantial water loss. I don't want to misrepresent to the council that a meter replacement would correct
the problem. However it is tile first and most obvious step in correcting tile problem. It also will help us
to bring into control a better understanding of what the problem really is. At this point we cannot start a
leak detection program because we have no idea where to start. We don't know how much is actually
running through meters. This is the first step. Tile second issue, as we've talked about, is the lneter
rates. The water rates that we've talked about. As we've talked about the street improvements and
should the city be participating in the cost of that watermain replacement. As we've talked about the
water treatment plant and the cost for' that and the water towers and replacement of those towers, or
construction of new towers, we will be needing to look at our w'ater rate and right nov,, because we're not
billing everyone for everything they use, we are having a much higher rate increase than if we were
actually billing for the amount of water that we are actually pumping. If we were correcting it, the 35
million, assuming we recapture it all and I've ah'eady admitted that we're not going to, we're talking
$136,000 that is something that ~ve're producing and we're not collecting money on. What we're asking
for tonight is tile council to at least authorize us to consider a meter replacement program. At this point
if xve were to approach the DNR for a well pe~wnit, they would say no. With this kind of loss they would
not allow us to drill a new well. We are scheduled in 2002 to drill Well No. 9 and we are anticipating ~
that we do not need Well No. 9 in 2002. We xvould like to delay Well No. 9. Actually we would delay
all of the wells by 2 years and then use the money that is scheduled this year' and next year for' Well No. 9
to initiate the meter replacement program. The other issue that's at place is also the reduced meter read
time. As you can see, and I asked all the council members to pass by before they took their seats just so
we could speed this up this evening, but as you can see, what we currently have is a touch meter read.
Kelley, our Utility Superintendent is here tonight. With tile touch meter read xve actually have a pad out
on the outside of the house. What that requires is that once a month, actually once every 3 months
because we only do a qumler of the city at a time. A utility worker actually xvalks up to the house and
touches the house to do a meter' read. Now not all of our houses in town have that. Some of our houses
actually have a little dial on it and somebody has to go out there, read tile dial and type the number into
the meter reader. That, in and of itself lends itself to some.., putting those into houses for about 2 or 3
years. That's a radio. And what it does is you can now do a radio signal from the meter instead of the
touch pad and that radio is already in a number of homes. We are installing them as we install new
meters because that is where things are going. With the radio reader that we have, it's a manual radio
reader, you can read that fi'om quite a distance and I don't know Kelley, have we ever gotten a distance
how far we can read that one fi'om?
24
City Council Meeting- February 26, 2001
Kelley Janes: This unit's probably a couple blocks away. In certain circumstances it?s an omni
directional antenna so it sends a signal out. It may not be as easy to get it you know seeing the house.
We may get it the street behind it.
Teresa Burgess: We have gotten in on a program, the city was registered for a program that h'as one that
actually goes into a car, a much larger unit than what Kelley has in his hand. It's this one over here. We
actually put it in a car. We drive around the city. We can do the entire city, all of the meters in the city
with radios installed, in approximately 4 hours. Right now it takes us 4 man team, one week out of the
month that we pretty much dedicate almost our entire utility crew for one 'week to go out and do meter
reads. It decreases our time requirement. It also increases our ability to respond to customer service. At
this point your meter is read sometime between, in that 2 week period while we run around and do that.
Ifxve ~vere to ~nove to the mobile unit, we would be able to guarantee that all the meter reads would be
done within a 2 or 3 day time period because we would do them for instance the second Monday of the
month every month and the time requirement is substantially lowered. We did receive a quote from US
Filter for the replacement program. US Filter is our current supplier. They are the only supplier that
supplies the type of meter and the type of radio v,,e use. Right nov,, we would be willing to consider an
alternative supplier if one were to come into our area, but right now there's nobody else available.
Compatibility. We need to use radios and readers that are compatible with our reading equipment.
However, if SOlnebody was to come in and be able to do it at a reasonable cost to retrofit what we have,
we would be willing to consider thegn. So I know the question came up, why do we use US Filter?
They're the only ones out there right now. And we do have a good relationship with them so we are
confident. What they have proposed is they would come in and obviously we have to bid this. But they
v,,ould come iu with qualified utility workers on a part time basis. They hire them. They are not city
employees, to replace the meters. It is done on a, we have to make appointments with property owners.
They would be able to do those appointments on evening and weekend hours Which are more convenient
for property owners. And the change out is done. They do it for slightly aboVe cost for the labor to d°
the xvork because what they're interested in is getting the city onto a meter program. They want us to buY
their product is where they make their money. And so they are willing to work with us. Other cities have
done similar projects and have seen turn around of the cost within 4 to 5 years. We're estimating
approximately 4 to 5 years. Also we would be looking at rate increases or potentially staying at the same
rate if we're able to capture, re-capture enough of the water that's currently unaccounted for. I believe I
covered it all. If the council has any questions.
Mayor Jansen' Well I guess one of the questions that I posed was just looking at the relative young age
of, v,,hat 60% of our homes have been constructed in the last 10 years. There's another 30% that are only
15 years old. What's the warranty on one of these meters that we're losing?
Teresa Burgess: I'll let Kelley answer that question.
Kelley Janes' What our situation is, this is a meter that is made by Rockwell Corporation Which is now
this corporation here has since, they've changed names. These are the original meters that were put in
probably in the early 70's. This is 1961-62 technology. It's a generator head. The meter itself down
here where the chamber is, is virtually the same meter as this one is. Down beloxv. The difference is the
ability for this meter to, this meter will calculate 1,000 gallon flow through it. Send a generator pulse up
to this meter here, and by doing that it sends to an electrical coil, as you can see here and cause the
odolneter to click. Now the weather can cause this to not function. This is, as the generators get weak,
eventually it tries to turn this number after 3,000 or 4,000 clicks and then one goes.
Mayor Jansen: But I guess my question, not to interrupt you.
25
City Council Meeting- February 26, 2001
Kelley Janes' No, I'm sorry.
Mayor Jansen' That's okay. You're good at this, You lnentioned that these xvere fi'om the early 70's.
When did they make the transition then over to this other model?
Kelley Janes: This meter, we started installing these meters because this product run ended in about
1994. And we started putting in what they call tile ECR chip head. They.no longer make the generator
head so we were forced to convert. And we converted to this type of meter. It's basically tile same
meter, just a different, more accurate reader head and access.
Mayor Jansen: So what was tile warranty then on the original?
Kelley Janes: They give a warrant7 of 5 years for accuracy only in tile meter part of the meter itself.
Okay, they do not guarantee the accuracy of the outside reader, which presents it's problems which is
v,'hat we have found as we went through this. and my predecessor Jerry' Boucher, was that the meters
themselves, the older installations in town and those that were pre '96 I guess. It would be '95, I'm
sorry. What we xvould find typically is that this meter would maybe show 800,000 gallons of flow
through it in tile house, and tile outside reader could show anything up to that number. In some cases I
had seen myself 600,000. 650,000 so there's the loss. We've never billed back for what we find on tile
inside reader because depending on how properties have changed over, you can't really hold someone
easily responsible for that. I only know one community that did that so. and it was not pretty.
Councilman Ayotte: Tile council was assassinated. But what you;re saying is we've got a pig in a poke.
We've got old technology that. and our ordinances allow that old technology to go in.
Kelley Janes: Yeah, tile technology...
Teresa Burgess: At tile time it was not old technology.
Councilman Ayotte: Well, but the design, so what we've got is we've got a better.
Teresa Burgess' We have a better model available.
Kelley Janes: Same actual meter. Same actual chamber. Right here. Different type of access head.
There is no error between here and there. This thing only reads what's in here. It either reads the
number that is used on the meter or it says I don't work. So then we get our reading fi'om that. WE go
down. We replace the meters.
Scott Botcher: Kelley I guess tile question is, and maybe this is more Linda's question. Given the
composition of our water supply, obviously as this stuff affixes itself to the insides of the meter, is there
some sort of warranty with the performance of the meter given those particulates within the water. Is
that. that's still your question. And I guess so if we put that meter in 2 years ago, just for argument sake,
and it slowed down, and you know you can pull those down. You can calibrate them and you can show
it's rate of reduction in terms of reading it, is that a warranty issue?
Kelley Janes: I do not believe so. They can only guarantee accuracy with, it's a factory set accuracy
with clear water. We do have high iron magneses levels. I could pull this chamber apart and show you
the iron manganese on this and in the screens.
26
City Council Meeting- February 26, 2001
Mayor Jansen: If what you're saying is that that one, on the inside is accurate, and that it's the reader on
the outside of the house.
Teresa Burgess: It's the piece on the top of the meter. What we have is we have some that have the
chips but then we have some that actually have little odometers in them. They have little generators.
Mayor Jansen: Is there maintenance that can be done to that outside unit in order to capture the accuracy
since we're losing it inbetween the two pieces versus going to the new technology?
Teresa Burgess: The problem is that it's the connection between the two. What Kelley's talking about
is this piece, where my hand is covering, this piece is a digital little chip. It's a little computer chip. This
piece is a generator.
Councihnan Ayotte: That's electromechanical and that's electronic.
Kelley Janes: Yes.
Teresa Burgess: Yeah, we can't replace this piece... To replace this piece we've got to put in a new
meter. The problem is, this chunk right here. Now we have some problems inside the meters. They stow
down...rust. But this is our real problem.
Councihnan Kroskin: What percent of the meters out there are the old style?
Kelley Janes: We have approximately of the roughly 6,000 accounts we have in, currently we have
approximately 1,800 of these ECR meters installed. That is both new installations for new homes and
buildings and retrofit because this meter's no longer...
Councihnan Kroskin: How many of the old, what percent? What number of the old meters are out
there?
Kelley Janes: I xvould guess that'd.
Scott Botcher: That'd be 4,200.
Councilman Kroskin: So you're saying the difference?
Kelley Janes: Yeah. Now I would like to state one point is that when we take this meter out, in many
cases we will bench test this meter and see if we can retrofit a ECR head onto this meter and re-use it,
okay? Now that does not always happen because the meter is, if we have to replace internal components,
the cost overruns what it would cost us to buy these. But we do try to recycle what we have.
Councihnan Ayotte: What's our meter population?
Kelley Janes: About 6,000.
Teresa Burgess: Approximately 6,000 accounts.
Councihnan Ayotte: That's all?
27
City Council Meeting- February' 26, 2001
Kelley Janes: Yeah. That's commercial.
Mayor Jansen: That's how, many households.
Councilman Kroskin: What are we losing in dollars annually?
Teresa Burgess: $136,000 last year. We were able to reduce the amount of unaccounted for gallons last
year. We have been running right around 70 million unaccounted for gallons. We're not sure where the
entire 35 million xvent to but we are sure that part of it was attributed to the sprinkling restrictions of last
fall. And so because people were not sprinkling, they weren't using the water as fast and.
Councilman Ayotte: Of the 35 million gallons that you mentioned before, are the 35 million gallons lost,
what would be your guess that the 6,000 accounts has something to do with that 35 million?
Teresa Burgess: \Ve expect the majority of that 35 lnillion gallons is lost through meters. Is that it's
being pumped into homes.
Councilman Ayotte: So the 35 million gallons meter loss?
Teresa Burgess: We are estimating that the majority of that water is running through meters and not
being accounted for. A city of our size, we should be seeing 3 to 5 million gallons of unaccounted water
loss, and being trying to track down that amount. If we do not see a significant reduction when we start
to replace meters, and we would certainly be looking at our lTIOSt troublesome neighborhoods first. The
areas we expect the most problems. If we don't start to see a reduction in that xvater unaccounted for,
then we know that we have a leak problem someplace that we need to look for, or that we have a theft
probleln. We can start to look for those problem areas and start looking for that other water. Currently,
because we have such a significant loss, we do not have a place to stmnt except to start with the most
obvious location. Meters that are not accurate.
Councillnan Ayotte: I don't think we have a choice. Personally I don't think w,e have a choice. Just a
couple other questions. How ~nany heads, meters do you think you lose as a result of manganese and
iron, would you sa3'?
Teresa Burgess' They' probably all eventually fall victim to.
Councihnan Ayotte: What do you think a life is on those things?
Teresa Burgess' Actually this meter actually came out of a house.
Kelley Janes: It's difficult to...how many we lose because of the manganese and iron. I think our most
significant problem, and prior to being superintendent I was the assistant superintendent and I read all of
the routes. And did many of the changeovers with the crew and I did find significant number of, you can
see that's iron manganese. This is supposed to black and shiny. And you can see it's like a light powder.
What it does, typically meters never run fast. That's a fallacy. They will usually be very close to a
percentage acceptable to being on. What happens as that grit material...
Councilman Ayotte: Don't do that. Don't do that.
28
City Council Meeting- February 26, 2001
Kelley Janes: I'~n sorry. As the meter eventually slows down because of the mineral build-up and the
water is still flowing through it but the meter has now slowed down. And it slows down the amount of
registry on the meter and that's where water loss occurs.
Councihnan Ayotte: I understand.
Mayor Jansen: I guess what I'm xvondering, one of the comments that you made was that the DNR
would in fact probably not approve Well No. 9 because of the level of water loss.
Teresa Burgess: Because of the level of our unaccounted water, they would require us to find that water
before.
Mayor Jansen: So they would make the assumption that it's not being lost through the meters?
Teresa Burgess: They would lnake the assumption that first of all, we need to account for our water
because they don't really care how much money we make. They only care about where is our water
going. The first, they don't care if it's going through meters. They want us to be able to account for all
of it. Whether it's being stolen or whether it's, which we do have a problem with accounts being turned
on without authorization or with people pulling up to a hydrant and filling up a tank. But the more
significant thing is, if our customers are not being billed for what they are using, then they are not being
conscience of how much water they're using and they cannot incorporate proper conservation methods.
A ~neter replacement program is actually considered a conservation method by the Met Council. They
will recognize that as a conservation method, similar to an odd/even or any other sprinkling restriction
that we were to implelnent on the city.
Mayor Jansen: Understood. Is there a way, right now you've got total water pumped, total water billed.
Do you have that by well or by zone to where you?
Teresa Burgess: No.
Mayor Jansen: You only have a total?
Teresa Burgess: We have a total. Our well system is interlinked. We can certainly break it down by
how lnuch each well pumped and how much each, how much we billed per zone of the accounts. The
problem is that the water we pump from any of the wells could theoretically go to any house in
Chanhassen. There is no physical separation in the system. We know where our biggest problems are.
We know where the oldest homes are and that is where we would start. The oldest homes have the oldest
meters, therefore they are the most problematic. And we would start in those areas and work our way
out. They are also the most difficult to read and so we would like to initiate in that area, because as we
get those meters changed out they become easier for our meter readers.
Mayor Jansen: Because I guess one of the alternatives I'd maybe like to see us explore is that when we
first reviewed this particular proposal back in 1999, the way that it was brought forward to us was in a
stepped, or a phased implementation and it actually was drawn out over, it was a 4 or 5 year period that
was being proposed. And I'm just looking at this million 2 number and realistically that's like $200 a
home that we' re talking about for implementing this new technology.
Teresa Burgess: Right. What we are proposing to do is that we delay all of the wells. We would bump
9 actually to the end and renumber all the wells. We would use that money to jump start this project.
29
City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001
That initial half million dollars that is currently allocated toxvards Well 9. Both this siting and the
drilling of' Well 9. Then we would use existing budget, recaptured funds as we start to reduce the amount
of our water, unaccounted for water. Start putting some of that money towards it and step up our meter
change program with those funds. If we start to see an accelerated improvement we may approach the
council and ask for additional funding but this time we're asking to initiate. And US Filter has told us
that this cost is based on a per each basis. They have estimated at that point, it doesn't matter if we do it
ill a year or if we do it in 2 years or 3 years. But at this point we have asked them to give us an idea of
what kind of dollars are we talking about.
Councilman Kroskin: This bid is for 3,600 units?
Teresa Burgess: This would be fo/' retrofitting the existing ones that do not have the MXU, which is the
radio reader. And also for new meters and MXU units in those that have the old meters in them. So that
we would be switching over, at the same time that xve're switching over to the new meters and doing the
meter change out. we're also retrofitting those existing units so that we can do radio reads.
Councilman Ayotte: What do you think the time is that you save fi'om reading from the road versus,
what's the hidden cost opportunity?
Teresa Burgess: Right now it takes us, it takes a 4 man crew one week per month to read one-third of
the city. And we bill a third of the city at a time. We would be able to read the entire city of
Chanhassen, every account in 4 hours.
Councilman Kroskin: What's tile dollar amount? What's the savings?
Kellex' Janes: ...FTE.
Councillnan Kroskin: What's tile value of that FTE?
Mayor Jansen: But that's tile other pa::/as we're looking fo/' the values and tile expenses around this. I
think we need to throw this back to staff to actually give us the financial piece of this picture that we
didn't have to review this, as fas' as actually taking a look at that full time equivalent and rolling these
numbers out. And the potential impacts that it will have on this utility account.
Teresa Burgess' And just for council information, we are not proposing to eliminate an FTE at this
point. We would simply be eliminating a future FTE expansion.
Councilman Ayotte' But that's a cost avoidance.
Teresa Burgess: It's a cost avoidance.
Councihnan Kroskin: I guess I'd like ~:o see more of a detailed breakdown of all the costs. And I would
like to see some aggressive pursuit of, I don't know what the break is on bids but I'd like to see some
aggressive pursuit of other companies to provide this service and the product.
Teresa Burgess: What we would do is we would, if the council is interested in us doing it, we would go
out to bid. We would publish. We wc, uld do a specification for the replacement. However I would like
to caution council, we will probably only get one or twvo bids because as I said, there is only one supplier
30
City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001
currently in the metro area. And then there's also the manufacturer that may come in and bid. But we
would be open to anyone that is capable of doing the project.
Councihnan Ayotte: Could you include in the bid, and it would be appropriate, and I got this at Fort
Sheridan, you know the big deal where we reduce water reduction. Same type of concept. But we do a
lot of trend analysis from data that was fed in so there was a software application that came with it. Now
are you looking at the software application so you can see where...
Teresa Burgess: We're looking at using our existing software. Our current, our finance department has
told us they are not at this time interested in going to a monthly billing. However, we in the utility
department, and I don't knoxv is Bruce shaking his head, no I've changed his mind? At this point they're
not interested in switching to that. Hoxvever we would be interested in doing a monthly read just so that
xve can track our usage. Get better idea on trends. It would give us a better idea for future expansion,
xvhen we're talking about new wells and new towers, are they really necessary or should we be going to
conservation methods? If we're seeing a spike during certain times of the year, we may be able to
address those by carving off the spikes instead of a new well and ne~v tower, something like that. So we
view this information as very useful not only for, just the ability to bill people but from an operational
standpoint. Our ability to do the trending. To give us an idea when is water actually used and right now
xve do it once every 3 months so a property owner that comes into us and says, why is my bill so high.
We go back and say well, because the meter says so. Where if we could go back and say, well in July
you had a spike. Did you have something going on? Did you have 20 extra people at your home for
some reason? And try to ansxver some of those questions. It would also help us with pinpointing things
like leakage control. _
Mayor Jansen: Well and I guess again one of my hesitations as I'm hearing you express that you're
anticipating that this is a meter loss issue. If we move the next well out 2 Years, and I'm assuming that
that was projected as need. If it's in fact not a water loss so we're not actually recouping supply, have We
noxv shifted a well out that we're going to end up needing to bring back on line as you substantiate that it
is in fact a ineter issue.
Teresa Burgess: Our proble~n is not a Well problem. Our capacity issue is, at this point the city of
Chanhassen's capacity is governed by it's tanks. By it's storage.
Mayor Jansen' I understand that but I assume that the well was scheduled according to.
Teresa Burgess: The well was scheduled based on a study that was done in 1998. It is based on
anticipated groxvth of the city, but it's also, and in keeping that in mind, we have not grown at the same
rate that was originally anticipated by that study. Before we would initiate that well we would do a
feasibility report to see if it's actually necessary, but at this point we are capable of supplying the water
de~nands of the city. We are not seeing any problems with that. Our capacity issues up until now have
been tank related. They have not been well related.
Mayor Jansen: Okay.
Kelley Janes: Madam Mayor, could I add to that point real quickly. We learned a lot from the taking
doxvn of the reservoir about our ability to produce water. You know meeting demands and at that point
Teresa and I discussed that about the well. That it showed us with some good conservation methods we
could handle what people were using as long as they played by the rules so.
31
City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001
Mayor Jansen' Okay.
Scott Botcher: We also learned to build more than one big toxver.
Mayor Jansen' So ifI can maybe try to bring this to a wrap. I'm hearing our needing to get more
detailed financial information so that at least we can see the impacts and oil this particular account that
we're talking about pulling it out of. And if at the same time we're going to be impacting that same
account with tim reconstruction costs.
Teresa Burgess' And that would definitely require us to do a rate study.
Councilman Avotte: Require you to do what?
Teresa Burgess' Reconstruction costs will definitely require us to do a rate study. There is no way
around that. Regardless of whether we do tile meter replacement or not. we'll have to do a rate study.
Mayor Jansen' Okay. So if we can get a better breakdown of tile cost analysis on this it would be
appreciated.
Councilman Kroskin' Maybe we should, before they go to work on that, have them kick back to us
what's going to be incorporated in that rate study and then we could maybe add some things that we may
want to see.
Mayor Jansen: I don't think we're talking about tile rate study tonight.
Councilman Kroskin' I mean not the rate study, I'm sorry. About the cost.
Scott Botcher: Yep, we call do that. We can just give you our topical things and you guy's can fill in any
gaps that you want to have filled.
Councilman Kroskin' Yeah, that'd be great.
Councilman Ayotte: Would it be appropriate too that that feedback would also include costs avoidance
versus cost reduction and a little bit more explanation of scope, because I think you're really onto
something with respect to, you have a trend analysis opportunity. A recommendation as to whether or
not we increase tile monthly billing process for that trend analysis. Whether or not we should tie a rate
structure in tandem with the meter program, or if it should be totally separate? I think you've got a
number of excellent points that really have to be tied together. And I don't want to just see numbers. I
hate numbers. But I think we need a little bit more scope to it too.
Mayor Jansen: Well I think if we're going to move forward with the project we need to take a look at the
cost, but whatever you can get pulled together for us. The financials are probably the keF, to getting the
decision made and I'm assuming you'd like to have this done while you're still with us. Before you go
out oil your leave.
Scott Botcher' She's not going a%qvhere.
Mayor Jansen: \Ve're not going to let you have this baby.
32
City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001
Teresa Burgess: I don't think you get to have a say. We would like to get this initiated just because we
have such significant losses and also because of the issues ~vith the wells. We need to take care of our
loss problem so that we can address the well issues.
Councihnan Ayotte: And we're not going to get a well unless we sho~v where the losses are.
Mayor Jansen: So can we move this to the next agenda then? Would you be able to get back to us that
quickly xvith the numbers or?
Teresa Burgess: Certainly.
Mayor Jansen: How soon do you need it? I don't ~oxv that you xvant to go to the 26th.
Teresa Burgess: ...need to discuss it. Does the council need to discuss it again or should we put it, we
can get it back on the next agenda on consent if that's acceptable.
Mayor Jansen: I think we'll need discussion. Yeah. Yeah, we'll need discussion on it.
Teresa Burgess: I've seen the agenda for the next meeting. Just asking.
Mayor Jansen: Yes. It's a long one.
Councihnan Kroskin: We're putting it on the 12th?
Scott Botcher: The mayor has the right to ask me to take it off if it's too full so.
Councilman Ayotte: Let's give it a shot. We've got to move forward.
Mayor Jansen: Okay, are we clear?
Scott Botcher: Yep, thank you. Yeah the issue Bob, quite simply on the pumping is that they just say
you're pumping x amount of water out of the ground, where the heck is it going? You know use that
first.
APPOINTMENTS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
Mayor Jansen: We conducted interviews earlier this evening. Councilman Labatt had to leave us so we
can still take care of this agenda item. If council has a motion for appointing a planning commissioner.
May I have a motion please.
Councihnan Kroskin: Motion to appoint Rich Slagle.
Councihnan Ayotte: Second.
Mayor Jansen: I have a second for appointing Rich Slagle. Any discussion?
Councilman Kroskin moved, Councilman Ayotte seconded to appoint Rich Slagle to the Planning
Commission to fill the vacancy created by Councilman Craig Peterson. All voted in favor and the
motion carried unanimously 3 to 0.
33
City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001
Mayor Jansen: We in fact ~vill be conducting the second round of interviews at the March 26th, I believe
council meeting, which xvill then take care of the two re-appointment positions so candidates that were in
fact not interviewed this evening, will be interviewed at that point and we'll also then have the results
fi'om the two xve interviewed this evening.
Councilman Kroskin: Will the candidates that were here this evening be allowed to.
Mayor Jansen: We xvon't re-interview them but they're certainly part of the discussion.
CITY MANAGER'S TASK PLAN.
Scott Botcher: This is, and I don't want to make a big lengihy memo so really what this is, and the mayor
and I have met oil this a couple times. To la), this before, especially the new members, to sho;v what
previous councils have used to identify for me what they want me to accomplish over the year. And this
is tile task plan that was developed and implemented by the council and I. I guess what needs to happen
is you all need to review this, and I guess built into that statement, is the assumption that you want to
continue to do this methodology. You know the whole issue of performance measurement and human
resources is a debate that we could fill up a whole meeting with. But assuming this is what you want to
use as your template, you need to go through and identify that these strategies are the strategies you want
to stick with. These are tied to the strategic plan that we haven't really touched yet. But we're going to
get to it. There's no rule obviously that the strategies that are in tile task plan necessarily have to tie to
the strategic plan. You could tie them to xvhatever you wanted to. I mean you know it's a subjective
analysis of the-employee's performance. But I think previous councils have, you know this is the
strategic plan. This is what we've publicly committed to our constituents we wish to achieve, and so they
just laid this template then on this as a task plan so. Really that's my objective tonight. If, I'm sort of
seeking your direction on how you want to re-put this together or if this is not what you want to use, to
give me direction, then you need to come up with some sort of alternative methodology. And fl'ankly this
is, and I know Linda's heard this before. Sometimes some of the stuff that we did, certainly in the last 2
years, has been painfully convoluted. Probably a nice wa), to put it, but there's nothing wrong with it. It
works. I know, there's all sorts of different ways to evaluate employees, but again this is before you
because I don't think you two gentlemen maybe haven't seen this before, is that in fairness to the story?
Mayor Jansen: Yep. That's exactly what we talked about. Knowing that this is the document that
eventually generates Scott's evaluation form, I wanted to make sure that council was for one, aware of
this document. And the tasks that were approved for first quarter at least, as council reviewed this in
December I think was out' last review. So what I would like to encourage the new council to do is to take
a look at this list and as Scott was just saying, is this the type of a format we v,,ant to go forxvard with.
This is how we will get our quarterly updates fi'om Mr. Botcher as to where he is on our tasks that he's
been assigned. We also then can work the priorities of those tasks according to this plan. That way
everyone at least has a good feel for what exactly is being worked on and what the priorities are and what
the expectations are so xve're all on the same page.
Councilman Kroskin: Is the content, is what it is? Set in stone or can the content change?
Ma),or Jansen: It is what it is right now, and that's why.
Councilman Kroskin: Can it change?
34
City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001
Scott Botcher: Absolutely.
Mayor Jansen: Yes. We all need to take a look at it. There will be the strategic planning conversation
that will occur in our retreat. Because that's not going to occur until probably April at this point because
of timing. You at least need to take a look at some of these projects and see if there are some that just
simply aren't valid. That we shouldn't be having Scott necessarily work on, and I would have to express
that if anything Scott's had an assortment of other projects and tasks that aren't even on here.
Councilman Kroskin: How do we communicate that then once we do theft?
Mayor Jansen: We will have to come back together as a council and review the priorities. Now I
wouldn't, I'm not suggesting that we get into any depth at all at this point until we've had our strategic
plan discussion because council needs to reach.
Councihnan Kroskin: Which would be in April?
Mayor Jansen: Yes. Cottncil needs to reach a consensus of what our strategies and focuses ~vill be, so
maybe instead what you're doing is looking at this list and getting a feel for if there are projects that are
currently on the list that we need to be re-focusing from. We can do that.
Scott Botcher: Yeah, I think the communication and it goes t~vo ways and what Linda said is accurate. If
you looked at for example the first quarter, 2001 stuff. I mean a lot of my first quarter 2001 stuff has
been spent on organizational contemplation. How's that? That sort of stuff. Where are we going?
Where do we want to go to shifting and paradigms from what we had before to what we have now. I
mean and the mayor will tell you. She comes in every Wednesday and we always say we're' going to be
out of there in 45 minutes and we're out of there in 3 hours. Because you have to have, as the paradi~n
shifts, some of these very lengthy discussions and there's times where we think we've reached an
understanding on something. I'll say okay, let me play devil's advocate and say this, it screws it all up
again for another 30 minutes, but that's the kind of stuff you have to do. You've got to do that,
especially when you've got a nexv mayor new in office and a new council. What are the rules of
engagement? How are we going to govern? And that's why this.is important. That's w-hy the
community survey's important. This is why that retreat's important. If you don't do it now, you're
hosed. And so that's sort of my first quarter, obviously that's not, it doesn't say on here, think about the
re-organization because.
Councilman Kroskin: So when will we get back on this? Give us what, a couple weeks to look at it?
Mayor Jansen: Yeah, if you've got key concerns, why don't we look at the 26th because the 12th sure
won't work. So it'd be March 26th and we're going into the retreat shortly thereafter so if this at least
starts everyone thinking.
Scott Botcher: And we will have identified the retreat date certainly by then.
Mayor Jansen: Yes. Okay. Thank you. That's all we wanted to accomplish there.
COMMUNITY SURVEY REPORT.
Scott Botcher: The memo was, I think it was fairly self explanatory. I've spent a sizeable amount of
time on the phone with these individuals. They do a vast majority of I guess I would call the public
35
City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001
sector research work in the metropolitan area. The partners involved here, Mr. Morris primarily, is on
the faculty at Augsburg and has done some work at the University of Minnesota. Also this firm did our
park and rec survey and we were involved in that. I won't read to you what's in the letter but I guess the
bottom line is this. This is something that I've understood to be a priority. I think it ought to be a
priority. If you notice, '`veil maybe you didn't know, but he has come down on his price fi'om what
originally '`vas quoted to a number that is, I think a substantial cut in his rate to us. I don't know if that's
because he believes there's an understanding on statistical procedures or not, but at least he got a rate to
be reduced somewhat. If this is accepted by you all, the next month or so, again reporting back on the
26th, would be spent with myself, Mr. Gerhardt, maybe miscellaneous other department heads and the
mayor, representing the council, in developing a draft set of questions that we can consider to be valid
and representative of the issues that you all want to seek information on. Again, they're a draft because
the council as a body is the final arbitrator of what they want to accept as their base of questions and the
methodology. But again that goes to that March 26th meeting and it seems to dovetail fairly well with the
other stuff we're doing.
Councilman Kroskin: Ho,,,,' are the questions fi'om the council generated then?
Scott Botcher: If council members have thoughts or concerns orjust want to talk about the questions, I
would just recommend they just call me or e-mail me. That would be good.
Mayor Jansen: Keep them general so that we're doing a blend of everyone's issues coming tip with the
.specifics generated by.
Scott Botcher: You may wish to have topics addressed that other people haven't thought about, so as a
topical category that we'll say okay, well that's a great topic. We'll then develop a series of questions on
that.
Councihnan Kroskin: I have a question. Just pulling out my stats book I was looking at, are you saying
the sampling is going to remain the same? 400?
Scott Botcher: Yes. In fact I ran that formula.
Councilman Kroskin: I read it too and I came tip with closer to 1,000.
Scott Botcher: No, in fact if you look at the Gallop pole and those folks, they do nationwide surveys of
about 1,100-1,200. So 400 is in fact an accurate nulnber. I can run that for you too if you want.
Councihnan Kroskin: I guess.
Scott Botcher: I guess the issue is, to back up I guess. On the 26th I would expect we'd have Mr. Morris
here and we can put that question to him because you can approve it at that point, the sample size. But
Todd was there, and I pulled the book. We got them on the phone because I thought it was too small as
well.
Mayor Jansen: And if the two of you want to have that conversation so that.
Scott Botcher: ...bore you with statistical V score discussion but, yeah I hated it but. But the 400 ,,vas
the number I got.
36
City Council Meeting- February 26, 2001
Councihnan Ayotte: What's the turn? Can we ask questions?
Mayor Jansen: Sure.
Councihnan Ayotte: What's the turn time on getting the study in and out? How long do you think the
survey would take? We're certainly not going to have anything ready for our retreat.
Mayor Jansen: No.
Scott Botcher: You will not.
Mayor Jansen: We're talking about getting it back probably in May I think was the date.
Scott Botcher: Yeah, I've been telling people June 1. Just to be safe.
Councilman Ayotte: I'm just wondering, when we go on the retreat and do our strategies, we'd want an
opportunity to kind of have a survey possibly influence the strategies, right?
Mayor Jansen: In fact that would be the ideal but it's certainly not going to occur. And we need to get
out as a group and get ourselves focused on what our issues are going to be or we will lose the entire first
year of our tenn.
Councihnan Ayotte: ...what I'm saying is, that once we do the strategies and we get our plan-put
together, how are we going to use that smwey to validate what we're doing or to identify?
Mayor Jansen: It's always a changing document because we can always go back to the strategy after we
have that and yep. Absolutely.
Scott Botcher: Part of it I think depends on what you use your retreat to do. I mean again, starting at the'
base level. Organizationally, at the retreatlevel, especially the initial retreat, and I don't hold any
illusion that you have one retreat and then you're done and you don't ever have to have one. I think
there's a regular check-in process be it every 6 months or on an annual basis where bodies should get
together, step away from the everyday grind of what you guys do here, and check in on certain things.
Given again that we're starting anew, and it will be up to you all, but you may wish to start at an initial
lneeting focusing more again on issues of governance. How you do it. How you relate. What are the
rules of engagement. Those types of discussions. Again at the higher 30,000 foot level, as opposed to
this is our strategic plan. Do we want to do trails or not? That being said, you can do that. Come back
with your report with the survey report, say it's June 1. You look at that and it gives you an opportunity
to do two things. One is that you can apply it to your budget deliberations later in the summer. And then
secondly, if the council moves, wants to go ahead and do another retreat maybe, in the fall or in the first
part of the year hence, you have that data. It's still fairly fresh. It's not dated. It's not stale. Again,
that's up to you all.
Mayor Jansen: And in the initial conversation with the consultant that we may bring forward for
consideration by council for the retreat was that we split the 4 hours. 2 in more the governance mode that
Scott was speaking to. And two, just getting to that high level on the strategic plan because I do think
that we all need to make sure that we're all going in the same direction so that we keep ourselves
consistent and the priorities, as far as what staff's working on so.
37
City Council Meeting- February 26, 2001
Councihnan Kroskin' Bill Morris will be here on the 26th you said?
Scott Botcher: I'll ask him to be here. And probably what I'll do is on the calculations, since I hate
running them. You and I and he will just have a conference call and walk through the calculations. I had
the same question you did. Exact same question.
Mayor Jansen: And as you sting geeing suggestions in from council as to topics that we'd like to cover,
if you can maybe pull those all together and shoot them all out to us at a proper time when you think
you've got most of them.
Scou Botcher: I'I1 try to hit the forward buuon so you have them in as real time as I get them. But I'll do
that as well.
Mayor Jansen: That'd be great.
Councilman Kroskin: Thank you Sco~.
Scou Botcher: You bet.
Mayor Jansen: Any other questions?
Councilman Ayoue: No ma'am.
COMMISSION LIAISON RECOMMENDATION, CITY MANAGER.
Scott Botcher: Ill votlr packet you have a memo dated February.
.
Mayor Jansen' Sho~er than your memo.
Councilman Kroskin: Much sho~xer.
Sco~ Botcher: In here it says I'm paid by the word.
Mayor Jansen' That's you. You thought so on this memo.
Scou Botcher: Well I'm sorry. I was venting. BoSom line is this. One of the things that Linda and I
have been discussing, and quite honestly this is an issue that's not new to Chanhassen because I used to
try to poke the previous mayor and previous council members saying is this the best way to do this9
Mayor Jansen: Steve and I tried for2 years.
Scon Botcher: Okay, well. Haven't had a chance to poke you yet but here you go. You know there have
been issues that have come up, and again I don't want to over state them, that it indicates some
communication difficulties between the govern, ing body being the council, and the advisory commission
that you all establish. And that's not the fault of the people that obviously graciously give their time to
serve on the commiuees, nor is it your fault. It's almost more structural in it's nature. And I guess in an
attempt to address this, when Linda and I have been having our discussions I said geez you know, this is
just what I've had in my experience and it worked really well. Hence my treatise and this was, you know
38
City Council Meeting- February 26, 2001
Linda asked me to put this together I think primarily just to get a response from you all. Not knowing
what you all would think.
Mayor Jansen: It's definitely a change from the way that we've been doing things. It's certainly isn't an
unusual practice. Other communities do this. As far as the capacity in which councilors would actually
serve on the commissions, I think that needs to be maybe a lengthier discussion. There are communities
in which the council representative does serve as a member on the commission and does fill a voting role
on the co~mnissions, which could be significant and something that we'd ~vant to consider on the
Planning Commission, possibly the Parks and Rec Commission in that th6se are both advisory bodies that
are moving issues forward to the council. As far as the time commitment, I zipped everybody out a copy
of the meeting schedules as to when the commissions do get together. Obviously it's the two that I just
mentioned that are the biggest time commitments. I do think it will in fact streamline the communication
xvhich is a key issue. Making sure that again everyone is on the same page and making sure that we've
got a consistency in the philosophy between the council and the commission so that they are feeling as
though they are being listened to and that they're not spinning their wheels because they in fact have that
direct guidance being provided for them on the spot. Now the trick is, the council member does need to
make sure that what's being expressed is a consensus from the council. And that this role is strictly
advisory in capacity. We're not sitting on the commissions to move any issues forward that we're
interested in. It's simply providing that guidance and input on the issues that are being reviewed. And I
knoxv fi'om experience over the last 2 years, that often times if you're in the minority, as much as it hurts,
you have to express this is the consensus of the council. You can certainly provide your own opinion,
but you need to represent the group and make it very clear and that's one of the issues that we spent some
tilne discussing as fat' as making sure that everyone could serve on the commissions in that capacity.
Any comments?
Councillnan Ayotte: I think it's got to be totally advisory initially. I think council involvement on the
commission level is the right xvay to go. I don't think council should be voting members of any
commission, at least frown the get go, and have a period of time to evaluate how it works. And then have
an opportunity to re-visit, after we've gone to it for a period of time, to see whether or not it's beneficial.
We need to measure it.
Mayor Jansen: Well, and heaven knows xve know you like to measure things but I think you've got to be
able to look at this somewhat subjectively as issues are moving up from the commission. And this is
going to be more of an impact on the communication that's happening between the two bodies. So I
don't know if you're referring to statistically.
Councihnan Ayotte: No, no, no. What I'm saying is let's do it, and at a point evaluate the pros and cons
of doing it. That's what I'm saying.
Mayor Jansen: Okay.
Councihnan Ayotte: I'm not suggesting that we study it.
Mayor Jansen: I'm used to your numerical analysis so.
Councihnan Ayotte: I want to make sure that we have a feedback group so that once we do it, we taste it
and we say ummm, that's good.
39
City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001
Councilman Kroskin: i like the idea. I would like to have fut~ther discussion on it. I'm not sure if I'm
willing to dismiss up front whether or not council members should be allowed to vote or not. I would
like to have a discussion amongst ourselves and with some more direct input from Scott on this. Just to
go through it and see how it would work. I'd like to hear Scott's thoughts, even after reading this more,
detail.
Scott Botcher: You can formulate your thoughts.
Councihnan Kroskin: Yeah, I would love to have some very specific COlWersations on how it would
work and I wouldn't like to, I don't want to rule out anything, or rule in anything upfl'ont. I think I would
like to have Councihnan Peterson and Labatt here to discuss and hear their viewpoints. And again get
some more feedback from Scott.
Mayor Jansen' Absolutely. Though Councilman Labatt had to leave, he did express to me before he left
the table that he's definitely in favor of doing the commission liaison positions. He thought that was a
good idea, even with his time commitment being what it is. What we thought we could do with the
timing this evening is, now that we've discussed this, we can bring it up with the commissions as we're
sitting down and meeting with them in our joint meetings on March 5th. So they're at least getting fi'om
us the information that this is something that we're discussing and looking at moving forward with. And
maybe coming back on March 12th,. there's that date again. March 12th or the 26th and actually voting on
it. Anything else to add?
Scott Botcher: No. No, there obviously are just all sorts of organizational dynamic issues that, I think
it's something that can help strengthen your organizatiOn. Can I ask one favor before you go? We never
did take a lnotion on retaining these folks for the survey. Can we do that'?
Mayor Jansen'- Sorry.
Scott Botcher: That's okay. I forgot it too.
Mayor Jansel-t: Especially if we're going to have him come back in again. Is council comfortable? Can I
hear a motion to retain Decision Resources for the community survey?
Councihnan Kroskin: How many firms have we looked at?
Scott Botcher: Looked at two. Because again, these guys are the 900 pound piranha.
Mayor Jansen: They do the majority of the metropolitan communities. They just did Chaska is the most
recently so they've got a lot of good comparisons.
Scott Botcher: The other one was the University of Minnesota.
Councihnan Kroskin: Okay.
Mayor Jansen: Do I have a motion?
Councihnan Ayotte: IfI can remember their names I'll make the motion. I make a motion to have
Decision Resources as the vendor to conduct the survey and that we invite the people in on March 26th to
give us a presentation on their methodology.
40
City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001
Councihnan Kroskin: Second.
Mayor Jansen: Thank you. And I have a second. Any more discussion?
Councilman Ayotte moved, Councilman Kroskin seconded to authorize the retention of Decision
Resources for the performance of the community wide survey and invite them to the City Council
meeting March 26, 2001 to make a presentation of their methodology.. All voted in favor and the
motion carried unanimously 3 to 0.
COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS: None.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS:
Scott Botcher: I received a copy in the mail today, and I haven't had a chance to do anything with it but
the State of the, what do they call it? State of the Region Report. The Met Council's got that little band
on it. Did you all get one?
Mayor Jansen: State of the Region?
Scott Botcher: It's the Met Council's annual report.
Councilman Kroskin: No'.
Councillnan Ayotte: No.
Mayor Jansen: No.
Scott Botcher: I'll have to look at it. I haven't even broken the seal on it. It's got like you know, a
cutesy little band around it that, but I don't M~ow how easy that will copy. We'll give it a shot but I just,
if you got it then I wouldn't screw around with it. I guess if you get it in the next couple days, let me
know because I'll wait. Give it a couple days. And if you don't, then I guess I'll run copies of it.
Mayor Jansen: Okay. Any discussion of anything in the correspondence packet?
Scott Botcher: No. The library has a meeting on March l0th, which is between our meetings. Between
now and our March 12th meeting. Public meeting I think is in this room, 9:00 to 12:00 a.m. on Saturday
morning so I would encourage all those who are watching live at home to please come if you can.
Seriously. We need the input.
Mayor Jansen: Great. Motion to adjourn.
Councilman Kroskin moved, Councilman Ayotte seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in
favor and the motion carried unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 9:27 p.m.
Submitted by Scott Botcher
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
41
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
FEBRUARY 20, 2001
Chairman Burton called the Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Matt Burton, LuAnn Sidney, Deb Kind, and Uli Sacchet. Alison Blackowiak
arrived during item number 2 on the agenda.
MEMBERS ABSENT: Ladd Conrad
STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director; Bob Generous, Senior
Planner; Sharmin AI-Jaff, Senior Planner; Julie Hoium, Planner I; Mahmoud Sweidan, Project Engineer;
and Matt Saam, Project Engineer
Public Present for All Items:
Name Address
Bob & Terri Lee Paulsen
Cyrus Anders
Sheri B.
Jeff Cox
Dan Pierre
Bill Coffinan
Bruce Carlson
Bruce and John Geske
Janet Paulson
Debbie Lloyd
8006 Erie Avenue
19100 Old Excelsior Blvd.
Bloomington
Eden Prairie
1591 Lake Susan Hills Drive
600 West 78th Street, #250
1440 Bavarian Shore Drive
7325 Hazeltine Blvd.
7305 Laredo Drive
7302 Laredo Drive
REQUEST FOR A 50 FOOT SETBACK VARIANCE FROM THE CENTER OF THE CREEK
TO PERMIT CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE FAMH.Y HOME LOCATED ON LOT 11,
BLOCK 1, SHADOWMERE, 500 BIGHORN DRIVE, DEAN AND SUE STANTON.
Julie Hoium presented the staff report on this item.
Burton: Any questions for staff?. Uli.
Sacchet: Yeah, I have a simple question. What's the date that that shoreline was established? Do we
know?
Hoium: The date that the.
Sacchet: Yeah, that line.
Hoium: That was established in 1987.
Planning Commission Meeting - February 20, 2001
Sacchet: That was when the original thing xvas platted. So that line was actually put in place before any
construction went in there?
Hoium: Yes. It was put in place. That was actually put in place in the development contract on one of
the, it xvas actually on the preliminary plat. And it was not shown on the final plat.
Sacchet: And that's the binding.
Hoium: That's the binding, the most restrictive requirement that we havel
Sacchet: Okay, thank you. That answers my question.
Burtoil: Any other questions?
Kind: Mr. Chair, yes. I have a question. In the staff report you address the driveway situation by citing
Section 20-908 xvhich allows driveways to be in front, rear or side setbacks. And in the Paulson letter
they cite, let's see, xvhat's the number? 20-484 that seems to be in conflict with that. Could you speak to
that?
Hoium: Sure. The Section 20-484, it's for the shoreline. Within the shoreline setback requirements. It
goes on to state there's one piece missing. It goes on to state th'at if no alternatives exist they may be
placed xvithin these areas and shall be designed to minimize adverse impact. As the map shows, if we
can go back to it. The west side of this lot is a pond and there's no other place to put a driveway.
Reasonably put a driveway into it. The additional ordinance requirement states basically that driveways
are allowed in the required side, front and rear setbacks. It's basically sO somebody can get onto their
lots. Otherxvise they would not have access to the lot if they couldn't go through the front yard.'
Kind: And because this is a shoreland lot, these shoreland regulations apply. But the fact that there's no
alternative alloxvs, means that the city can allow it, or needs to allow it.
Hoium: Needs to allow it.
Kind: It seems like there was another question that was not addressed in the staff report. Let me take a
quick peak here. Oh, I'm assuming the reason for the, that there was no 60 by 60 foot pad on the original
plat is because this was done before that rule, is that right?
Hoium: That's con'ect. This subdivision, the Shadowmere subdivision was platted in 1987 and the 60 by
60 foot building pad is part of the subdivision review was adopted in 1994, which was after this
subdivision.
Kind: So this is a lot of record.
Hoium: It's a lot of record and ifa 60 by 60 was required, this xvould not be a buildable lot.
Kind: And then you said something about the setback from the lake is now, they're requesting a variance
for xvhat did you say, t6 feet?
Planning Commission Meeting - February 20, 2001
Hoium: 16 feet fi'om, there's 91 foot from the setback of the, where the proposed structure is to the
south. Or the neighbor's house to the south is 91 feet from the lake. The DNR requires a minimum of 75
foot.
Kind: The difference is 16.
Hoium: The difference is 16. It's the City's requirement that goes above and beyond the DNR's
minimum state requirement.
Kind: So this request would not require a variance from the DNR?
Hoium: No.
Kind: I think that's it.
Burton: Okay, any questions?
Sidney: Yes. A question about the plantings that I see in one of the conditions. What is the purpose of
having the native vegetation plantings?
Hoium: To mitigate 'any surface runoff from the drive~vay into the creek or the pond.
Sidney: Is erosion a problem or runoff or is it just runoff that we're looking at?
_-
Hoium: From impervious surface. '
Sidney: Okay, what's the elevation change bet-ween the creek and the driveway. It seelns like it's
substantial.
Hoium: The creek is at approximately 900. The drivexvay, 907. 906. 7 feet.
Sidney: So quite a steep incline.
Hoium: Yes.
Sidney: Okay, thank you.
Burton: Other questions?
Sacchet: If I could clarify one more thing. I want to be real clear about the variance that we are actually
looking at. And there is no need anymore for a variance from the creek, so the only request is for the
variance fi'om the lakeshore.
Hoium: That's correct.
Sacchet: And the minimum is 75 or what the closest house, which is 91, therefore the 16. So we're still
within the minimum.
Hoium: State required.
Planning Commission Meeting - February 20, 2001
Sacchet: State required, and okay. AMght, thanks.
Burton: Okay, this isn't a public hearing but if Mr. Stanton, if you have an:)dfing you want to add, you
can and then I'd have to let anybody else make a quick comment too though.
Dean Stanton: My name is Dean Stanton. I'm tile applicant. I guess we've tried to work with staff to
minimize the runoff and also fit the house on the lot. The information we were given originally we
thought it was a much more restrictive situation than what it is but we probably wouldn't change too
much. I'm going to live there. I plan on living there for many years. I don't xvant the rulloffto cause
erosion. My kids are going to be playing in the lake right next to it. No benefit to me to have all the soil
erode away in my back yard. So I mean we're going to do everything we can to minimize any potential
runoff. There's a huge cul-de-sac there that feeds into that settling pond and over the last 10 years that
structure that was built there was not designed properly so that water's all been flowing into the creek
without settling at all in there because they didn't build it down fay enough. So I think working with staff
they're going to come in and fix that. That will do more to improve the water quality there than what our
driveway xvill impact it. But we wilt put some plantings there. It's in our best interest.
Burton: Thank you. Does anybody else want to comment on this? Okay, then I'll turn it back to the
commissioners and any comments?
Sacchet: I don't mind starting. I think we already pretty much established last time in our discussion that
we don't have a problem with tile lakeshore variance on the basis that tile only person who could have an
objection is the neighbor and the neighbor was here himself saying that he doesn't have a problem with it
so there's no reason why we should not grant this variance as far as I'm concerned.
Burton: Oka,'. Deb.
Kind: Mr. Chair. I agree with Uli's comments and I really appreciate staff taking tile time and effort to
do a thorough job of researching this. I'm satisfied with what they found and support approving the
variance.
BuI'UOll: Ally comments?
Sidney: I agree, looks good.
Burton: Yeah, my comments are the same. I'm glad that we had the extra time here to clarify this so
there aren't the issues going forward and I think they made a pretty good record last time and I think it's
a good report and I'm in favor of this proposal. Somebody want to make a motion?
Sacchet: Can I ask one more question of staff in terms of the wording of the actual thing we're looking
at? You struck out condition 3 which says, extend tile drainage and utility easement. Don't we still need
a utility easement?
Hoium: Tile whole western portion of that lot is a drainage and utility easement. It kind of makes an L.
The entire western portion is an easement.
Sacchet: So it's ah'eady an easement so we were thinking we would actually have to have more
easement? Is that when that was originally in there?
Planning Commission Meeting - February 20, 2001
Hoium: That's when we originally thought...extending it further outside of that and we thought there
was a 50 foot setback.
Sacchet: So we still have utility and drainage easement, that's why it was struck?
Hoium: Yes.
Sacchet: And then tile condition 4 you say reduce driveway dimension to'minimize impervious surface
runoff. I just want to commend the applicant for having some steps in done in that context because a
condition like that doesn't really do much unless we're specific and ,ye say, we'd rather not have that
parking piece sticking out towards the creek. I don't 'know whether we'd want to be specific and still say
that or not because it's been basically taken care of.
Sidney: Well pet' the plans.
Aanenson' I was going to sa3,, plans and date.
Sacchet: As tile plans are submitted, okay. So it xvould include that aspect. Okay. That clarifies so I
would make a motion then that the Planning Commission approves the request for a 16 foot variance
fi'om the 90 foot lakeshore setback for the construction of a single family home and subject to the
conditions 1 through 6 as stated.
Burton: Okay, a second?
Kind: Second.
Sacchet moved, Kind seconded that the Planning Commission approves the request for a 16 foot
variance fi'om the 90 foot lakeshore setback for the construction of a single family home, and
subject to the following conditions:
.
.
.
Erosion control must be maintained until all vegetation has been restored.
The basement of the home must be 3 feet above the ordinary high water level of the lake.
Reduce driveway dimensions to minimize impervious surface runoff.
Survey submitted must be signed by a registered land surveyor.
Provide buffer type plantings of native vegetation between the driveway and the creek.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 4 to 0.
PUBLIC HEARING:
REQUEST FOR REZONING OF APPROXIMATELY 40 ACRES OF PROPERTY ZONED
RURAL RESIDENTIAL TO RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY AND PRELIMINARY PLAT
REQUEST FOR 53 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS AND 4 OUTLOTS AND A WETLAND
ALTERATION PERMIT TO FILL 3,360 SQ. FT. OF A WETLAND, LOCATED ON THE EAST
Planning Commission Meeting- February 20. 2001
SIDE OF GALPIN BOULEVARD JUST SOUTH OF LAKE LUCY ROAD, ASHLING
MEADOWS, LUNDGREN BROS.
Public Present:
Name Address
Mr. & Mrs. John Waldron
Mr. & Mrs. Jack Gorczyca
David Hinners
Bob Molstad
1900 Lake Lucy Road
1850 Lake Lucy Road
935 East Wayzata Blvd, Wayzata
150 East Broadway
Sharmin AI-Jaff presented the staff report on this item.
Breton: Any questions of staff?. Thank you, Questions?
Sacchet: Yeah. I do have some questions for staff. It talks about wetland mitigation. That's, we will see
a wetland replacement plan at some point or how does that work?
Al-Jarl: Correct. We are.
Sacchet: Because there's not much details at this point.
A1-Jaff: Correct. And it's a condition of approval that the wetland alteration is, tile plat is contingent
upon the wetland alteration permit being approved...
Sacchet: So that needs to be approved as far as...okay. And then tile report talks about a drainage swale
in tile back yard of Lot 44 to be moved closer to tile rear of the lot line. I was at a loss. I know it's
detailed but I'm kind of curious. If you could point that out Sharmin please. Where that actually is.
A1-Jaff: Here is Lot...here is tile drainage swale.
Sacchet: ...that close to the lot line so...okay. That ansv,;ers that question. Another question, tile
neighborhood next to it, I mean I should say field. R or whatever is next to it on the east side is where
this Emerald Lane would be extended and then eventually would curve around and connect into Lake
Lucy, correct? We don't have any indication ora timefl'ame for that at this point do we?
A1-Jaff: It's going to depend on when Phase II, tile Lundgren development will develop. Lundgren is
developing tile subdMsion in two phases. Sewer and water will be extended with Phase II to the
neighboring property. Until sewer and water is available, development of the neighboring parcel would
be considered premature.
Sacchet: Okay. And so it has to go in steps either ~vay.
Al-Jaff: Correct.
Sacchet: Tile way they measure lot width I think this is, on tile table on page 12. How do you measure
these, and I apologize for asking this question but I'm kind of curious, on a curve? When you measure
this thing on a curve, what does that exactly mean?
Plalming Commission Meeting - February 20, 2001
Al-Jarl: On curve, at the setback line when you meet the 30 foot setback you have to reach the 90 lot
width. The 90 foot lot width.
Sacchet: So 30 foot in basically where we measure this, okay. And this Lot 25 has only 88 width. Is
that a typo or is that an issue? I'm kind of curious. Kind of a picky question.
AI-Jaff: The lot width on?
Sacchet: Lot xvidth which is required to be 90, and in the title it says 88 so I yeas just curious.
Al-Jarl: I consider this one to be on a curve.
Sacchet: Oh, it's on a curve also, okay. So that's why it xvasn't flagged as something.
Al-Jarl: Correct. If you wish to see that line adjusted, we can...
Sacchet: Okay. That answered my question. Thank you.
Burton: Other questions for staff'?.
Sidney: I have a couple questions here. I guess I noticed in the narrative that the applicant submitted
that they're talking about retaining xvalls. And I had made a note here that a separate building permit
would be required if it's greater than 4 feet. Is that one of the conditions and I missed it? I kind of think
I didn't see that and I'm wondering if that should be added.
Al-Jarl: It should be one of the conditions.
Aanenson: It's standard ordinance ansqvay. It does require, even if it's not in here it's still a requirement
of city standards. We can make sure it gets on here but it is... if it's over 4 feet it's engineered.
Sidney: Okay. And a separate building permit?
Aallellson: Yes.
Sidney: Okay. I guess I'd like to emphasize that. Another question about condition 23. States the
applicant shall include a drainage tile system behind the curb to convey sump pump discharge from
homes not adjacent to ponds or wetlands. Could you clarify what that means?
Saam: That's a standard procedure for every subdivision that's something we require. Due to the clay
soils, the predolninant clay soils in town, they tend to trap water. And this drain tile system is intended
to give the water a release and also to give the homeowners a place to discharge their sump pumps.
Again with the clay soil, it traps water and just to prevent flooding of the basement and such. It's a
standard procedure.
Sidney: Now is this dug in under the sidewalks and that I guess is really what my point is.
Saam: Yes. Yep. We have a detail for it that shows how we like to construct it. Typically 3 to 4 feet
deep.
Planning Commission Meeting - February 20.2001
Sidney: Yeah, because there's some subdivisions I've been in where the water is still draining over tile
sidexvalks and that's very treacherous when it's icy.
Saam: Sure, sure. That's a good point. That's another reason we have, yeah. To prevent ice build-up in
the winter.
Sidney: So it's understood that this is dug in under the sidewalks then?
Saam: Correct.
Sidney: Okay.
Kind: Mr. Chair. I have a couple questions.
Burton: Sure.
Kind: I'll start with my street questions. Tile central line of Galpin and Lake LucyRoad. will it nlove
when they're upgraded so that we need to get a greater amount of right-of-way fi'om one side or tile
other?
Saam: That's a good question. Tile center line of Lake Lucy will not move. Tile current center line will
be what it's going to be after this development goes through, if it does go through. What we found in
reviewing this development, and maybe the applicant will speak on it also. Tile center line of Lake Lucy
Road. Oh I'm sorry, did I say Lake Lucy early? Galpin will stay the same. That one will not change.
The center line of Lake Lucy will move to the south 4 feet. What we'd like to get is an 80 foot Swath of
right-of-way on Lake Lucy. That's what we got in tile development to the xvest, across the street of '
Galpin, which is Woodridge I believe. We'd like to continue that swatch of right-of-way for future
upgrade needs so we'd like to go to 80 feet. Currently it's 74 feet. If you split tile 74 feet, you'd be at
37 feet for a center line. Well to get 80 feet We have to increase it by 6 feet.
Kind: And I saw that xvas a condition. Lake Lucy you xvant 40 feet and then Galpin is 50 feet?
Saam: Correct.
Kind: And does the 50 feet give tls enough room to have turn lanes off of Galpin?
Saam: Yeah, I looked at that. We believe it does, yes.
Kind: Because one of the plans, I can't remember which one it is, shows tile turn lane jumping over the
sidewalk. Let me figure out xvhich one it is here. On 2 of 6 feet along Galpin. It shows a bituminous
trail and then underneath of that is the turn lane as part of it. I'll wait til you get it out.
Saam: Are we south of the proposed access or north of it?
Kind: North.
Saam: The acceleration lane then are you speaking of?.
Planning Commission Meeting - February 20, 2001
Kind: Well I think it would be, wouldn't that be considered a turn lane onto Lake Lucy Road?
Saam: Currently with this plat we're not proposing to put in a turn lane onto Lake Lucy Road.
Kind: Should ~ve be considering that?
Saam: In the future if the County turns back Galpin Boulevard to us, which rumors are they will. We'll
receive fimds at that time to upgrade the road. Then we would look at putting in a turn lane and we
probably would do it at that time.
Kind: And is the 50 foot width right-of-way enough to allow for that?
Saam: Yes. Yep. As I said, I looked at it previously and it appears that there's plenty ofroomto Put in
an additional turn lane and to include the bituminous trail.
Kind: Do we want to have the applicant put the trail further to the east so that doesn't need to be
destroyed xvhen Galpin is upgraded?
Saam: Yeah. That's something we'll tweak that a little in the final construction plans. We'll probably
slide the trail to the east, and yet keep it inside the right-of-way.
Kind: Sounds good to me. And then I'm assuming Park and Rec concluded that trail access by creating
this, I don't kno~v what you call this, stub trail to get it up to Lake Lucy Road. Are the5, thinking that
bikers and people walking will go up to Lake Lucy Road and cross Gatpin at that point? If they want to
go south. ' -
Saam: They're hoping. Yeah, it might Seem a little weird that you'd go north to get south but yeah.
Kind: I don't think that's very realistic.
Saam: Yeah, it may not be. In looking at it with the Parks Director, he already has a trail system on the
west side of Galpin and the existing trail system in Lake Lucy. He wanted a connection to that. We
thought the easiest would be to run it north instead of trying to cross Galpin. That could be a condition if
you want to have us look into that. We'd have to check with the County. It is their road.
Kind: I think that makes sense. It just doesn't seem very realistic that anybody's going to go north to go
south.
Saam: Sure, and I agree.
Kind: And then my dead end street condition that I always like to add. I assume you're okay with that.
On the internal streets, that they may be.
Saam: Yep, this road will be extended in the future.
Kind: Yep. I'ln kind of getting famous for that one. I think that's it for Matt. Question for Sharmin.
I'm assuming that the brown lines indicate the 60 by 60 foot pad on there? I just haven't seen it shown
that way before but they fit in there.
Planning Commission Meeting - February 20, 2001
Al-Jarl: Correct.
Kind: Quick flip here. I think that's it for now.
Sidney: Mt'. Chair? One more question Sharmin about Outlot B which you're proposing be turned into a
lot. Is there any obligation that the applicant must turn this into a park or some kind of recreational area
or is this just that they've.
Al-Jaff: That's what the applicant is proposing at this time.
Sidney: Could it become 2 lots if they wish?
Aanenson: They'd have to come back and subdivide it.
Sidney: They would.
Aanenson: Yes. Right nov,, it's left as an outlot. If they're going to make 2 lots, they'd have to come in
and demonstrate that it makes 2 lots which would require another public hearing fox' subdivision.
Sidney: Okay.-
Burton: Alison. I know you got here late but do you have any' questions?
Blackoxviak: Actually I do but can I save them for a moment?
Burton: Sure. I have a question or two. The proposal that park fees be collected in lieu of land
dedication, and I know that's not really our area. It's the Park and Rec but was it discussed, that issue
discussed, do we know, at Park and Rec? The reason I bring it up is because that we have the other issue
we recently looked at, the other plat. Pulte that was an issue, and members of the public wanted to have
the land instead of the dedication. I'm just wondering, was that looked at by Park and Rec?
Aanenson: Yes, they did meet.
AI-Jaff: Yes, they met. It's on page 9 of your staff report and they reviewed this application and that
was their recommendation.
Burton: Okay.
Kind: Mr. Chair that reminds me, I have one more question related to parks or trails.
Burton: Go ahead.
Kind: I'm wondering if it makes sense to explore the option of extending that trail to the south. Kind of
dove tailing on what I want to check with Matt about, the trail along Galpin. Extend it to the south so
that it would join up with future neighborhoods to the south instead of crossing Galpin to go to a
neighborhood on the same side of the street to the south. Is that something worth exploring with Park
and Rec?
10
Planning Commission Meeting - February 20, 2001
Al-Jaff: The trail along Galpin Boulevard ~vas studied in depth when the existing trail was put in. What
we have attempted to do is provide the link between the neighborhoods internally. You will need to fill
more wetland if you put in a trail, but as it stands, and if you look at the comprehensive plan for trails in
the city, the trail along Galpin fulfills that requirement.
Kind: Okay, and the internal, you're talking about on Rudy Lane. There's a sidewalk that will
theoretically connect to the neighborhood that may be developing to the south in the future.
Al-Jarl: To the south or to the east.
Kind: And then I noticed on the comp plan that there;s a trail system that brings everybody to Lake Ann
and Lake Lucy.
Al-Jaff: Correct.
Kind: Okay, I'm going to get rid of that one. Thank you.
Burton: I had another question but I answered it myself.
Blacko~viak: Mr. Chair, I think I'm ready now. I have a few questions and please bear with me if
they've been asked and answered already. The first one had to do with Lot 53. The proposed Lot 53. Is
that still a part of the plan as submitted that we're looking at tonight?
Aanenson: The applicant is requesting approval. Staff is recommending that it be removed.
Blackowiak: Okay. Second question. The outlot and the wetlands, are we still looking at the outlot, as
the wetlands being part of the actual residential lots or has the applicant changed at all?
Al-Jarl: We've talked to the applicant about this and what, the last conversation we had with them, they
indicated that they are willing to expand the outlots to encompass the entire wetland. So it will be
separate.
Blackowiak: So the homeo~vners would not o~vn any part of the wetland.
Al-Jarl: That's correct.
Blackowiak: Correct, okay. And then my final question has to do with Galpin. At some point in the
future I'm assuming Galpin may expand to 4 lanes. Is that a fair assessment?
Saam: 3 to 4, yeah.
Blackowiak: 3 to 4. Have we taken into account right-of-way acquisitions, distance of homes from
proposed a 3 or 4 lane Galpin? It looks like we've awfully close on some of these and that's why I guess
kind of wondering if we've made sure that that's not going to be a problem in the future.
Saam: Sure. Right-of-way acquisition, yes. One of the conditions was to give the city 50 feet of right-
of-way from the center line of Galpin, which would increase the current right-of-way from I believe 83
feet to I00 feet, which is what we have on the other side. On the west side of Galpin. We have 50 feet.
We'd like to continue with that 100 foot swath along Galpin for future upgrade purposes.
11
Planning Commission Meeting - February 20, 2001
Blackovviak: Okay. So does the plan as we see it then show that 50 feet over tile lot lines and the size
has changed based on that?
Saam: Oil Galpin it does show the 50 feet. It's a little confusing because the current parcel boundary or
property line is shown and then the proposed one is shown in a lighter green I think it is inside of there.
And that is at tile 50 feet.
Blackowiak: And is it the 17 feet, is that the little, what the little 17 down there is?
Saam: Yeah.
Blackowiak: Okay, thank you.
Aanenson: Can I go back to the trail crossing question? If it does go to 50 feet, that's why we want to
take the crossing of the trail up to a controlled intersection which ultimately that would be. You don't
want to cross mid-block. That was why the park commission recommended tile trail going north.
Ultimately you clon't want to have a trail crossing mid-block because it's not the 4 way stop.
Kind: It's not a natural place to stop, correct. Yeah.
Aanenson: That's why the recommendation ,,,,'as to go north, it's inconvenient but it's safer.
Kind' And nobodv's going to do it but at least tile>, know they're taking their chances.
Aanenson' And tile pattern's developed to go that xx-ay where it's safer ultimately and whatever that time
fl'amc, whether it's 5 years, 10 years, 20 years, that pattern's in place. That was their recolnmendation. '
Saam' Another issue is tile current grade of the trail on tile west side of Galpin is significantly lower than
the road so you might have a steep slope issue if you'd want to put a trail on there.
Kind: My point is it's not realistic to go north to go south and nobody's going to do it but if kids cross, if
there's no crosswalk there, then people know that they're taking their chances to it. If there's a
crosswalk there then they tend to rely on it and that would be a more dangerous situation.
Aanenson' Right. Well I think you want to take them up where there's going to be a 4 way stop, or at
least stop at two of the streets. Oil Lake Lucy, where it's a controlled stop.
Kind: Makes sense.
Burton: Okay, any other questions fo/' staff'?.
Sidney: One question Mr. Chair. This application came in as a standard subdivision and since I've been
on the Planning Commission it seems like we've been doing PUD's. Why a standard subdMsion in this
case? ...acceptable or encouraged?
Aanenson: The last Lundgren subdMsion was probably done in tile early 90's. Since then most of their
homes now have 3 car garages. We have had problems with the smaller lots, getting 3 ca/' garages on it
so it was our recommendation based on that, some of the pinching of the wetland setbacks, that we
12
Planning Commission Meeting- February 20, 2001
wouldn't accept the smaller lots. There's been some problems so that was our recommendation to do a
straight subdivision.
Sidney: Now is there more of a benefit to the city?
Aanenson: Well I think the concern was, since we've gone to the larger home styles on these, that you
need to have the lot big enough to make it work. If they want to do a PUD and still have larger lot sizes,
that would be okay too. But that's generally not what happens. Even though they say they're going to
put a smaller home on, then you get a buyer and then we're trying to put the square peg in a round hole
so we wanted to have the larger lot size.
Burton: Okay. Any other questions? Okay, ~vould the applicant or their designee like to address the
Planning Commission? Can you please state your name and address.
David Hinners: Good evening. My name is David Hinners. I'm with Lundgren Bros. Bob Molstad with
Sathre-Berquist Engineers is here as well. I want to thank stafffor an excellent report. ! don't have
really too much to say and I'll be brief, as I've been asked to be. The only thing I would ask is Lot 53.
We're very aware of Section 18-57(1), which limits access onto collector streets as well as arterials and
high density streets. High traffic streets. However, given the fact that, I'm going to approach this. It's
basically cut off by this large ~vetland complex in here. The only, and a grade separation. The elevation
here is lower in grade than here. Some of our earlier concept plans did show a road coming down
through this area which would have allowed access to this parcel of land. But we were asked to not
access that which we acquiesced and obviously we did not. However ~ve think that this lot is still
workable. In fact on this drawing here we show a plan, a house that we actually construct. This one was
recently constructed in Foxberry Farms in Medina. What this shows is, this is the, this red line here.
This line I'm trying to... is the current right-of-way of, the south right-of-way of Lake Lucy Road. As
Matt pointed out earlier, the rights-of-xvay of the neighborhood to the east. Excuse me, to the. west,
Woodridge I believe, something to that effect. The right-of-ways don't match up. The north right-of-
xvay did but the south's do not. Now we ~vere obligated to provide 40 feet of right-of-way but in order to
help the city and in order to get this inequitable right-of-way situation resolved, we've giving up 6 feet in
order, so that the 80 foot right-of-way swatch is continuous all the way through. So even with the 6 foot
dedication, with the 50 foot setback to Lake Lucy, plus taking into consideration the 40 foot wetland
setback, we can make a house work. The driveway slope here we have at 9.4%. Granted that's steep.
It's over 120 feet. This is a walkout style home. It's walkout elevation is at 970. The reason why we
wanted to get that basement up was in order to be above any sort of a 100 year flood plain. Based on the
current elevations out there, the water would have to rise 6 or 7 feet in here in order to get into the
basement of that house, and before it would get in there it would be out on this road. Again as I said
earlier, 18-57(1) states that for a proposed subdivision there will be no direct access from a lot onto a
collector street. We also think that paragraph (o), which talks about private streets, might provide some
relief for that, given the fact that one of the conditions is that we have a difficult access getting to it from
our interior streets. Hence city code allows for consideration of topographic and wetlands and other
natural features as a guide. The private street would also serve no other parcels and that it would only
service this one lot. There are numerous private driveways on Lake Lucy Road. Granted they're much
larger parcels than this but we would like to, at least have the Planning Commission consider not deleting
that. It's not going to be a deal breaker but I'd prefer that it at least be considered because I think we
meet all of the criteria. The question was asked why did we not come in with a PUD. We didn't come in
with a PUD because we don't like to ask for variances. We know and understand the past difficulties
that perhaps this committee has had, as well as the city on trying to put very large houses on minimum
lots and homeowners, perhaps there's some here tonight that have asked for variances for decks and so
13
Planning Commission Meeting- February 20, 2001
forth. With this plan, because of the natural topography of the site and tile fact that we're respecting
virtually every~thing on the site, because of our design and the way that xve've approached this project, we
didn't think a PUD was the right way to go. Our lots are amply sized so we don't believe that this board
or the ciD; should be burdened with the variance requests and so forth. I'm rambling on. I said I would
be brief so that's basically all I had to say. I'd be happy to answer any questions that you might have.
Sidney: Mr. Chair.
Burton: Go ahead.
Sidney: A question about Lot 53 and tile house that you are showing. Does that house have a deck
attached to it?
David Hinners: It does.
Sidney: Does that fall within tile setbacks, so we're okay?
David Hinners: ...This is called an end load. This is an end load house meaning that tile cai' would
actually come in this xvay and drive straight into the garage in that fashion. It's a very common deal.
Tile deck is over on this side of the house. This particular plan is called a Fairfield. I brought this plan.
I mentioned that this one was built and I thought I would show you what it looks like. This particular
garage is tile way you more traditionally see it facing tile street. On tile plan that I've got, this unit
basically turns this way so it faces that way. But as you can see it's a very handsome house. It's quite
large. It's 86 feet wide. It's 34, 38 feet deep.-
Sidney: Hoxx' big is tile deck?
David Hinners: 14 by 14 is the way xve typically build them.
Sidney: Okay.
Burton: Any other questions?
Sacchet: Yeah, I have quite a fexv questions fi'om tile applicant. First of all tile comment that Outlot B
would bare to be plat-ted as a real lot because you put things there. You don't have an issue with that?
David Hinners: I have ilo problem xvith that at all. In fact on our final plat, which we now have ready to
submit. It's a little early but it is shown as a lot and block. We had shown it as an outlot because in
some cases the tax entities, if you platted as lots and blocks, sometimes the tax entities will look at it,
because they don't see all of this. All they see if flat with lines and they look at that as one great big
giant lot and they get taxed for that. Now, because this is a homeoxvners association owned site, each of
these 52 or 53 lot owners will be 1/52nd or 1/$3''d owner in that site and so what xve'll do is a company a
letter to tile Carver County tax authority pointing out that this is an outlot. It's owned by the HOA and
that the value of this lot should be spread out amongst the owners so that that value on that lot should be
very minimal. If it was all outlot it would be...
Sacchet: I understand. There was a comment in the report that Lot 46 needs a little tweaking. Did you
do that in 5'our revision already also?
14
Planning Commission Meeting - February 20, 2001
David Hinners: Yes sir.
Sacchet: And you already answered the question that the lot lines were adjusted so they don't include
wetlands.
David Hinners: Correct. We pulled these lot lines back from here to the, through the property so that all
of the, in fact here it is. Perhaps this shows it. This is before, and this is after. Now those outlots, this
one, this one and this one will be deeded through the homeowners association. We don't have a problem
doing that. The question I would ask is what if we didn't have a homeowhers association, would we deed
it to the city?
Sacchet: And yeah, obviously there would be drainage and utility easements over these wetlands. That's
pretty standard. You don't have an issue with that, do you?
David Hinners: I have no problems xvith that at all. In fact we typically will place a covenant over those
wetlands restricting certain.
Sacchet: And one thing I found kind of funny, probably because I didn't fully understand it was the
situation with the trees. You made a statement that only like 9 or so significant trees will actually go
away and I noticed a lot of them aren't, all the smaller ones you basically replant so you don't have to do.
David Hinners: We don't have inany trees on the site.
Sacchet: But what I'm xvorried about is over there towards the bluff. You showed some significant trees
that stay but then there's grading all around it and even retaining walls. I think that's very unrealistic
that.
David Hinners: That was a mistake.
Sacchet: It is a mistake? Okay.
David Hinners: This tree right here is clearly in the grade. We're showing it as a saved tree. That's a
mistake. It should have been taken out. In fact Jill, the Environmental Resource Coordinator, in her
tabulations she excluded from the saved trees, the trees between the walls. This tree as well as the 33
inch ash tree that we plan on staging it up here. So all of those have been taken. She's already assumed
that those aren't going to be saved, although we're going to try to save them. That one and these m,o
over here. So they're not even in the count but ~ve still plan on trying to...
Sacchet: So if the tabulations stay were already taken out.
David Hilmers: Right. So if for some reason they get whacked while we're building the house or
something, they're already taken out.
Sacchet: And you try to save them as much as possible.
David Hinners: Correct. Now in fact on these right here, we've done from a double to a triple wall.
Sacchet: By the bluff there, okay.
15
Planning Commission Meeting- February 20, 2001
David Hinners: Yes, we've moved these walls up closet' to tile rear of the pad so that these trees now
exist behind the walls, downhill of the walls.
Sacchet: So they have a real chance potentially to make it that way, okay. And Lot 3 is going to be kind
of a contention point obviously. Bear with me. Yeah, I think that's all the questions I have. Thank you.
Burton: Okay, any other questions for the applicant? Thank you. May I have a motion to open tile
public hearing?
Kind moved, Sacchet seconded to open the public hearing. The public hearing was opened.
Burton: Okay. If anybody would like to address the Planning Commission on this proposal can approach
the podium and state your name and address.
Kind moved, Sacchet seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed.
Burton: Okay.
Sacchet: That was fast.
Button: Comlnents? Anybody want to start?
Kind: I can go. I'd like to talk about Lot 53 first. I agree xvith the staff report. I think that that is an
unrealistic lot. Especially when I hear that the grade of the driveway is going to be 9%. That just seems
like it's pushing it a bit. And also it, just fi'om what the applicant showed, it looks like it's going to be
tight right up to the back setback and I think most homeowners would desire a deck offthe back of their
house, not on the side. So I agree with the staff report on that and I would like to change the approval to
be 52 lots and not 53 lots. What else here? And then leave in condition 17. I agree with the condition to
expand the right-of-way to 50 feet, so I'd like to leave that in there. And condition nmnber 26. Before
going to the City Council I think that new plat should be submitted that shows the lot lines not extending
into the wetlands. I think that's critical. And that I'm assuming that the lot sizes have been re-calculated
on that plat as well. Okay, I like to check my assumptions. At the dead end streets, I'd like to post the
sign that talks about that they may be extended in the future so we don't run into problems there. I would
like the applicant to consider including benches in the totlot areas. I'm becoming famous for that
condition too. And then I'd like to add a condition that talks about a clear communication disclaimer and
require that hoxne buyers sign a disclosure statement that includes information about the future upgrading
of Galpin and Lake Lucy and information about wetland buffers and have the disclosure include an
actual plan that shows the home placement and what area would be available for future deck and porch or
patio expansion, and include all the setback lines. What I'm interested in, and whether it's realistic to
have, who should keep these disclosure statements? Should they be submitted to the city? I guess that'd
be my preference.
Sacchet: I would think so.
Kind: Just trying to avoid future problems that this commission has seen. And then I like LuAnn's idea
of adding a condition, just to make it clear, that the applicant needs to be aware that the retaining walls
require separate building permits.
16
Planning Commission Meeting - February 20, 2001
Sidney: If greater than 4 feet.
Kind: If greater than 4 feet. Now I've said all that and I'm going to say it all again in the motion. Oh
well.
Burton: Any other comments? Uli?
Sacchet: I think it's a very clean proposal. I do believe that Lot 53's not viable though. I really don't
like it personally. Not just because of the access. I mean you have to do ~t lot of fill in there. You're
filling in 10 feet in some places at least so you're pretty much creating a hill in an area. And it seems
pushed. If we have regulations that xve could prevent it I would vote for that. Other than that I think it's
very good. The condition I'd like to extend a little bit is the silt fence. I'd like to make sure they come
down.., but other than that I think it's clean. I think that the wetland is treated very'fairly and there's an
effort made to preserve the trees. As far as the development goes, I think this is a very clean approach. I
like it.
Sidney: Yeah Mr. Chair. I like the proposed development as it stands. I guess I do have a problem with
Lot 53. I don't think it's going to work. The applicant said that they're well aware that homeowners
don't like to go in to the city and ask for variances and I can see this is a case where there would be
plenty of opportunity for people to ask for variances so I'd really discourage that lot as they've planned
it. I guess that's it.
Blackowiak: Yep, Mr. Chair. I agree. I had pretty much the same issues as my felloxv commissioners. I
don't like Lot 53 either. -It just, it doesn't fit. It's an island onto itself. It's not any way connected to the
other 52. It seems like an after thought to me. I say take it out. It would need a variance for the drive~vay
an3~vay so ! mean, you're talking about variances and how you don't like to get them so, we just omit it.
We don't have to ask for a variance so let's get rid of that. I'm comfortable with the Galpin Boulevard
right-of-way. That was one thing that concerned me. That as long as we have that figured in, put the
calculations, I am ready to move with that. And then one of my big points here was that the lot line shall
not extend into wetland basins and I would not support that in any way if they did. But as long as they're
taken out and they're not in the wetlands, I can support this. So those are my comments.
Burton: I think I pretty much agree with everybody's comments. I think it's a nice project and it wasn't
really that tough to review it. It's a pretty straight forward subdivision. I think the staff did a nice job of
laying it all out. I agree with everybody's comments. I'm not really going to waste time going through
those all again. One thing that I would note, is I do think it's curious that nobody came forward pushing
for dedication of land for parks when that's been pushed for on other projects like Pulte. I think that this
is fine the way it is but I just wanted to note that and with that, if somebody wants to make a motion.
Kind: Mr. Chair, I'll make a motion. I'll make the first motion the Planning Commission recommends
approval of Rezoning #00-5 to rezone 40 acres of property zoned RR, Rural Residential to RSF,
Residential Single Family for Ashling Meadows as shown on the plans dated Received December 15,
2000.
Burton: All those in favor of the motion signify by saying aye.
Kind: We need a second.
Burton: Sorry, I jumped the gun.
17
Planning Commission Meeting - February 20, 2001
Sacchet: Okay, second.
Burton: Any discussion? Good, no.
Kind moved, Sacchet seconded th'at the Planning Commission recommends approval of Rezoning
#00-5 to rezone 40 acres of property zoned RR, Rural Residential to RSF, Residential Single
Family for Ashling Meadows as shown on the plans dated Received December 15, 2000. All voted
in favor and the motion carried unanimously 5 to 0.
Burton: Okay, that is approved. Next motion please.
Kind: Mi'. Chair, I'll make the motion the Planning Commission reconlmends approval of the
preliminary plat for subdivision #00-15 for Ashling Meadows for 52 lots and 4 outlots as shown on the
plans received December 15, 2000 subject to the following conditions 1 through, let's see. What do we
go to, 35 xvith the following additions. I want to make sure you noted that it's 52 lots, not 53. In that
original part there. Okay, I would like to add a condition number 36. That dead end streets shall be
posted with signs that say this street may be extended in tile future. Number 37. The applicant shall
consider including benches in the totlot areas. Number 38. To ensure clear communication tile applicant
shall have each home buyer sign a disclosure statement. The statement shall include information about
flmu'e upgrading of Galpin Boulevard and Lake Lucy Boulevard. Information about xvetland buffers and
the disclosure statement shall also include a plan that clearly shows the home placement, the area
available for future deck, porch or patio and all setback lines. Number 39. Applicant should be aware
that retaining walls greater than 4 feet require a separate building permit.
Sacchet: Do you need a second first before we lnake comments?
Blackowiak: Yes.
Sacchet: Then I second. And t have a comment. And one is a question. Since we say now 52 lots, with
that Outlot B, what's happening with that? Is that going to be a lot which brings it back to 53?
Aallenson: No.
Sacchet: Okay. One fl'iendly amendment.
Kind: Yes.
Sacchet: Condition 25. Silt fence shall be provided adjacent to all areas to be preserved as buffer or if
no buffer is to be preserved, as delineated wetland edge and shall be removed upon completion of
adjacent construction. I want to make sure these things come down.
Kind: I agree. I agree.
Sacchet: Because they're an eyesore.
Burton: Do you accept the amendment?
Kind: I accept that amendment.
18
Planning Commission Meeting - February 20, 2001
Burton: Any other discussion?
Kind: Any other amendments? That's it. I have an amendment. Number 26. I meant to say before
going to City Council, applicant shall submit the revised plat that shows lot lines do not extend into
wetland basins and the recalculated lot areas. Do you accept my change?
Burton: Okay. Do you accept your own change?
Kind: Yes I do.
Burton: Any discussion? My only comment would be, I think the disclosure statement's a good idea. I
think it's a little odd but I support it.
Kind: You don't like it?
Burton: I like it, I just think it's kind of odd. And we haven't done it I don't think before.
Kind: I kind of want, I want to do it though from here on.
Burton: Yeah, it seems ah'ight. So that's it then.
Kind moved, Sacchet seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of the
preliminary plat for Subdivision/400-15 for Ashling Meadows for 52 lots and four outlots as shown
on the plans received December 15, 2000, subject to the following conditions:
.
.
.
,
.
,
,
.
The applicant shall enter into a deVelopment contract containing all of the conditiOns of
approval for this project and shall submit all required financial guarantees. The development
contract shall be recorded against the property.
The applicant shall meet all conditions of Wetland Alteration Pe~znit #00-5.
Tile proposed drainage swale in tile backyard of Lot 44 shall be moved closer to the rear lot line.
This will minimize tile amount of drainage easement required.
If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will be
required to supply the City with detailed haul routes and traffic control plans.
Each of tile ponds shall be designed to National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) standards.
The proposed drainage area in the southeast comer of the site shall be routed to the southwest
pond and adjacent wetland instead of to the northerly pond. This will better follow the proposed
drainage pattern shown in the City's Surface Water Management Plan.
Staff has reviewed the ponding calculations and found that additional information and revisions
are necessary. Staff will work with the applicant's engineer to correct the calculations.
Prior to final platting, storm sewer design calculations will need to be submitted. The storm
sewer will have to be designed for a 1 O-year, 24-hour storm event. Drainage and utilities
19
Planning Commission Meeting- February 20, 2001
easements xvill need to be dedicated on tile final plat over the public storm drainage system
including ponds, drainage swales, and wetlands up to the 100-year flood level. The minimum
easement width shall be 20 feet wide. Emergency overfloxvs from all stonnwater ponds will also
be required on the consti'uction plans.
.
Erosion control measures and site restoration shall be developed in accordance with the City's
Best Management Practice Handbook (BMPH). Staff recommends that the City's Type III
erosion control fence, xvhich is a heavy-duty silt fence, be used for the areas adjacent to the
existing xvetlands. The final grading plan shall incorporate erosio'n control fence around the
perimeter of the grading limits. Itl addition, tree preservation fencing should be denoted on the
grading and drainage plan as well. Erosion control matting or xvood fiber blankets will be
required for tile steep, rear yard slopes of those lots itl tile north and southwesterly portions of the
site.
10.
Prior to construction commencing, each of the existing wells and septic tanks will be required to
be capped and/or removed per state health codes.
ll.
Sanitary sewer for this development shall be designed to serve tile neighboring properties to the
east. Staff will work with the applicant's engineer to establish a sufficient sewer depth to serve
tile neighboring properties.
12.
Tile property has not been previously assessed for sewer and water hookup and connection
charges. As per city ordinance, each newly created lot will be required to pay a sewer and water
hookup charge of $1,3.22 and $1,723, respectively. Itl addition, since tile property is within tile
Lake Ann sewer district, a sexver interceptor charge of $1,011 and a sub-trunk charge of $828
will be due on each lot. The sewer and water lateral connection charges will be waived'
contingent on the developer installing tile internal lateral utilits, lines. All of the above fees are
due at tile time of building permit issuance.
13.
Utility improvements will be required to be constructed in accordance with tile City's latest
edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed construction plans and
specifications will be required at the time of final platting. The applicant will also be required to
enter into a development contract with the City and to supply the necessary financial security in
tile form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee installation of the improvements and the
conditions of final plat approval.
t4.
Landscaped median islands maybe permitted within tile public streets contingent upon the
developer entering into an encroachment agreement with the City and that the configuration be
acceptable to the City's Fire Marshal.
15.
The applicant should be aware that tile maximum allowable street grade is 7%. Areas xvith a
street grade greater than 7% should be revised to meet the criteria.
16. Existing driveway entrances to the site off of Galpin Boulevard shall be removed.
17. Lot 53 shall be deleted and Outlot C be expanded to include the northeast comer of the site.
18.
Increase the amount of platted right-of-xvay fi'om the centerline of Galpin Boulevard to 50 feet in
width. Likewise, increase the amount of right-of-way fi'om tile centerline of Lake Lucy Road to
20
Planning Commission Meeting- February 20, 2001
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
40 feet in width
Revise the preliminary utility plan to show the proposed sanitary sewer pipe size and ensure that
all of the sewer manholes are a minimum of 10 feet deep. Also, add an additional sanitary
manhole along Topaz Drive at Station 3+00.
Revise the preliminary grading plan to show the existing 18-inch culvert that enters the site in the
northwest corner. Also, show all proposed easements and add a legend.
Submit streets names to the Building Department for review prior to final plat approval.
The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, i.e.,
Watershed District, Metropolitan EnvironmentaI Se~wice Commission, Health Depat~rment,
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Army Corp. of Engineers, Minnesota Department Of
Natural Resources, and Carver County and comply with their conditions of approval.
The applicant shall include a draintile system behind the curbs to convey sump pump discharge
fi'om homes not adjacent to ponds or wetlands.
Storm ~vater shall not be discharged into any wetland basin prior to pretreatment.
Silt fence shall be provided adjacent to all areas to be preserved as buffer or, if no buffer is to be
preserved, at the delineated wetland edge and shall be removed upon completion of adjacent
construction. -
Lot lines shall not extend into xvetland basins. Prior to going to City Council, the applicant
shall submit the revised plat that shows 'lot lines do not extend into wetland basins and the
recalculated, lot areas.
Drainage and utility easements shall be provided over all existing wetlands, wetland mitigation
areas, buffer areas used for mitigation credit and storm water ponds.
Wetland buffer areas shall be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's
wetland ordinance. The applicant shall install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of
City staff, before construction begins and shall pay the City $20 per sign.
Based on the proposed developed area of 35.25 acres, the water quality fees associated with this
project are estimated at $28,200 and the water quantity fees associated with this project are
estimated at $69,795. The applicant will be credited for water quality where NURP basins are
provided to treat runoff from the site. This will be determined upon review of the ponding and
storm sewer calculations. Credits may also be applied to the applicant's SWMP fees for oversizing
in accordance with the SWMP or the provision of outlet structures. The applicant will not be
assessed for areas that are dedicated outlots. No credit will be given for temporary pond areas. At
this time, the estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat recording,
is $97,995.
Environmental Resource Specialist conditions:
21
Planning Commission Meeting - February 20, 2001
31.
"9
34.
24. The applicant shall revise landscape plan to show a minimum of 323 trees to be planted.
Minimum requirements for buffer yard plantings shall be met.
25. A minimum of two overstory trees shall be required in the fi'ont yard of each lot.
26. The developer shall be responsible for installing all landscape materials proposed in
buffer yard and rear yard areas.
27. Tree preservation fence shall be install at the edge of the grading limits on lots 20-23,
27-28, block 1 prior to any construction.
28. According to tree preservation plans dated 11/30/00, all trees on Lot 23, block 1 shall be
preserved by the developer/builder.
29. Any trees removed on lots 20-23, 27-28 in excess of proposed tree preservation plans
will be replaced at a ratio of2:l diameter inches.
Building Department conditions:
a. Demolition permits must be obtained before demolishing any existing structures.
b. Final grading plans and soil reports must be submitted to the Inspections Division before
building permits will be issued.
Fire Marshal conditions:
a. An additional fire hydrant will be required. It is to be located on Topaz Drive
approximately 150 feet east of the intersection of Galpin Blvd and Topaz Drive.
b. If any trees or shrubs are to be removed, they must either be chipped or hauled off site
due to close proximity of neighboring homes. No burning permits will be issued.
c. A ten-foot clear space must be lnaintained around fire hydrants i.e., street lamps, trees,
shrubs, bushes, Xcel 'Energy, US West, cable TV and transformer boxes. This is to
ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters.
Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance 9-1.
d. The proposed street names meet approval with the Chanhassen Fire Depamnent.
e. Fire protection including fire apparatus access roads and water supplies for fire
protection is required to be installed. This protection shall be installed and made
serviceable prior to and during time of construction. Pursuant to 1997 Uniform Fire
Code Section 90t.3.
f. Submit radius turns and dimensions for the cul-de-sacs with center islands to the City
Engineer and Fire Marshal to approve. If the cul-de-sacs are to have islands, "no parking
in cul-de-sac" signs will be required.
Park and Recreation conditions:
24. Full park fees be collected in lieu of land dedication.
25. The applicant provide the necessary trail easement or outlot and construct an 8 ft. wide
bituminous trail connector from Topaz Drive north to the intersection of Lake Lucy Road
and Galpin Boulevard. Trail fee credit shall be granted in consideration for this condition.
26. The City Engineer's office shall ensure that the 8 ft. wide bituminous trail connector is
located far enough away fi'om Galpin Boulevard to ensure that a future turn-lane or
widening of the road can be accommodated.
The lot depth for Lot 46 shall be adjusted to maintain 125 feet.
22
Planning Cmmnission Meeting- February 20, 2001
35. Outlot B shall be replatted as a lot prior to issuance of a building permit."
36.
That dead end streets shall be posted with signs that say this street may be extended in the
future.
37. The applicant shall consider including benches in the totlot areas.
38.
To ensure clear communication the applicant shall have each home buyer sign a disclosure
statement. The statement shall include information about future upgrading of Galpin
Boulevard and Lake Lucy Road. Information about wetland buffers and the disclosure
statement shall also include a plan that clearly shows the home placement, the area
available for future deck, porch or patio and all setback lines.-
39.
Applicant should be aware that retaining walls greater than 4 feet require a separate
building permit.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 5 to 0.
Burton: Okay, do we have another one?
Sacchet: Alright, I make a motion the Planning Commission recommends approval of Wetland
Alteration Permit #00-5 for Ashling Meadows as shown on the plans dated Received December 15, 2000
and subject to the following 3 conditions as they are.
Blackoxviak: Second.
Burton: Any discussion?
Sacchet moved, Blackowiak seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of
Wetland Alteration Permit #00-05 for Ashling Meado~vs as shown on the plans dated received
December 15, 2000, subject to the following conditions:
Wetland replacement shall occur in a manner consistent with the Minnesota Wetland
Conservation Act (MR 8420). Eight copies of a wetland replacement plan shall be submitted to
the City for review, comment and approval by the City and other agencies prior to final plat
approval. The applicant shall provide a Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants for
Replacement Wetland. The City shall approve a wetland replacement plan prior to any wetland
impact occurring.
.
The wetland mitigation area shall be constructed prior to wetland impact occurring and shall
meet the City's buffer strip and structure setback requirements.
.
The applicant shall re-seed any disturbed wetland areas with MnDot seed mix 25A, or a similar
seed mix that is approved for wetland soil conditions.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 5 to 0.
PUBLIC HEARING:
23
Planning Commission Meeting- February 20, 2001
REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A 28,821 SO. FT. OFFICE WAREHOUSE
BUILDING TO BE LOCATED ON LOT 8, BLOCK 1, CHANHASSEN LAKES BUSINESS
PARK 7TM ADDITION ON PROPERTY ZONED IOP, INDUSTRIAL OFFICE PARK, EDEN
TRACE CORPORATION.
Sharmin A1-Jaff presented the staff report on this item.
Burton: Any questions for staff?.
Sacchet: Yeah, I do have a few questions. South is a park. That kind of peaked my interest. And v,;here
is the park?
Aanenson: Across the street.
Sacchet: That whole area is park? Okay.
Aanenson' The apartments that were approved are over on this side.
Sacchet: Tile apartments are further east?
AallellSOll' Correct.
Sacchet: That's what I was trying to establish. If there was enough area. Trash enclosures. They're
missing, correct?
A1-Jaff: Correct.
Sacchet: Any, I guess it's more a question for tile applicant. Tile retaining wall has to wrap on tile. is
that the south side? Basically instead of it coming straight out it has to wrap so it doesn't get into the
easement, is that tile idea there?
A1-Jaff: That's correct.
Sacchet: Okay. And then we have an issue in some places with tile 30 foot maximum of the driveway
and in some places 26 minimum of the drive aisle. Carl you point out where...for' me please?
A1-Jaff: Sure. This portion meets tile ordinance requirements which is 26. These are tile 24 right here
and staff is recommending that they be widened to 26.
Sacchet: And where's the 32, place where it's too wide? From the staff report I wonder where there's an
area where it's actually too much.
A1-Jaff: Oh. This actually.
Sacchet: Where it comes in.
A1-Jaff: Where it comes in.
Sacchet: There it's too wide.
24
Planning Cominission Meeting- February 20, 2001
AI-Jaff: 36 is the maxi~num it can be. And I don't recall the exact width but it exceeds that. I can
measure it.
Sacchet: I just want to know where it is. That answers my question. In terms of the parking on the south
side, I mean it's kind of on a hill and then it goes down the road. So there is really no way of screening
the cars... I mean considering it's a park across the street, that's xvhy I'm bringing this up.
Al-Jaff: Typically they require screening through a berm and landscaping. A berm is not an option in
this case due to the grade of the site and it drops by 8 feet. What the applicant is doing is putting in
landscaping.
Sacchet: Trees.
AI-Jaff: Trees as well as shrubs.
Sacchet: Okay. And this is kind of a silly question again. If there is such a thing. The handicap parking,
does it matter which side of the handicap parking the space is? The open space because it's kind of one
way or the other?
Saam: Not for ADA requirements, no.
Sacchet: Okay, it doesn't, okay. And on the plantings, I don't know if somebody has that answer. The
boulevard trees. Tlie trees along the roads. I didn't see what species they are. Do you know?
Aanenson: That was put in with the Lake Drive West project. We could check on that for you.
Sacchet: And then the lots along the little stub street. Same thing?
Aanenson: Yes.
Sacchet: I was just curious because.
Aanenson: That was part of the street improvement.
Sacchet: So that's not pmx of this development? That's part of the street thing, so that's xvhy they're not
identified. Okay. Yeah, that's all the questions from staff. Thank you.
Burton: Any other questions for staff'?.
Kind: Yes Mr. Chair, I have one question that's related to parking. It's something that came up today
xvhen I was at Southdale. That their stalls are very narrow and I have, I should have gotten a tape
measurer out to measure what they are. Since the applicant exceeds parking, would it be appropriate to
allow them to get rid of a couple spots in order to make all the stalls wider? Less door dings.
Al-Jaff: They are wider.
Kind: They are wider than your normal one? I'I1 ask the applicant that when he gets up there. That's
all.
25
Planning Commission Meeting - February 20, 2001
Burton: Any other questions for staff'? Okay, would the applicant or their designee like to address the
Planning Commission? State your name and address please.
Mark Undestad: Mark Undestad. I'm at 8800 Sunset Trail in Chanhassen here. With Eden Trace. Kind
of the last one of the list here, aside fi'om the gentleman behind me here but that's wrapping up the
industrial park. The parking stalls, they are a little wider than the regular ones. These are 9 foot. You're
required to put 8 foot.
Kind: Okay.
Mark Undestad: And nobody likes their doors getting dinged.
Kind: That extra 6 inches would have made all tile difference today.
Mark Undestad: But parking, you know we really wouldn't want to get rid of the parking. As we've
been finding in the park out there, we're getting more office tech, showroom, not so much warehouse use
anymore out there and we need more parking's required iii these buildings so xve're actually smaller
footprints to get more parking. Tile trees that are out in the boulevard now, there's a mixture. It's some
ash and maple and oak that was put on in tile boulevard initially and then we're adding to that around tile
site obviously. Aside fi'om that, ally questions?
Burton: Questions?
Sacchet: Yeah, I have 2 questions. I'm curl°us about this trash enclosure.
Mark Undestad' Yeah. everything's supposed to be kept inside.
'Sacchet: Ill tile building?
Mark Undestad: Inside the building.
Sacchet: Is that realistic? I mean I think I'd be a little uneasy about that.
Mark Undestad: Yeah, ilo I am too. We just sent memos out to a couple of tenants down on Mallory
Court that have some things outside yet and they need to get them inside. The new Microboard's
building that they have going on right now, there are no drive in doors. Nobody can have anything
outside so there's a large common area inside tile loading dock areas, which is the same thing we're
going to provide on this, in this area. There will be a large loading area in here that's dumpsters and
recycling and all that stuff will be kept in there. Like the Microboard's building, we're painting the
walls, tile ceilings, the floors. Making it as clean and nice looking as possible...
Sacchet: So can you point out where exactly you would have that trash?
Mark Undestad: Inside the building.
Sacchet: Right in there, inside the loading dock?
26
Planning Commission Meeting - February 20, 2001
Mark Undestad: Yeah, it's going to be right in here. We'll cut out an area in here so there will be
interior loading dock doors for...
Sacchet: Okay. Then that's a plan. Then I have kind ora picky question. The top of your faCade, the
light part, is that block or what is it?
Mark Undestad: Yeah. It's all, it's a combination of rock face and smooth scored blocks.
Sacchet: Because I was a little confused when I looked at the fagade drawing, it was shown as block on
top of there so I want to make sure that that is not an oversight. In that situation in the past when little
things like that, then all of a sudden it's there and it's not what was meeting.
Aanenson: It's up there. '
Mark Undestad: These shmv the rock face. The different rock face colors on here. The lighter band will
be alternating rock face and smooth score. The same for...
Sacchet: You see what confused me is this here, going all the way up. Like in, I think it was in a little
draw'ing, this was like blank and then in this one it shows actually rocks.
Mark Undestad: Yeah, all rock face all the xvay up.
Sacchet: So this is all rock, it's just a lighter color rock and down here you have the darker color rock.
So it's those two guys sitting there? -
Mark Undestad: Right.
Sacchet: So okay.
Mark Undestad: Alternating rock face. The rock face all the way up. We'll slip a smooth score in every
noxv and then. That gives it that 3 dimensional look on there so not just a straight fiat face going all the
way up.
Sacchet: Okay. I beIieve that addresses my concerns, thanks.
Burton: Okay. Any other questions?
Kind: Yes Mr. Chair. One question. Uli's question about the building materials reminds me, inside the
U. I'm assuming that that is the same material. On the plans it didn't call it out specifically.
Mark Undestad: Yeah, no it's the same look all the way around.
Kind: That's it.
Blackowiak: Okay Mr. Chair, I have a question. We've got, right after this we have a hearing on Lot 7,
and as I look at these two, your Lot 8 and then Lot 7 afterwards, can you tell me how the U's match up?
Do you know how it goes?
27
Planning Commission Meeting - February 20, 2001
Mark Undestad: Yeah, v,,e've spent time together on both lots to get this all to work out. So trucks can
get in and out of there.
Blackowiak: So it's pretty much straight across? Okay. Okay, and then do you know, and a second
question for the next applicant, how much longer the south elevation of Lot 8, of the Lot 7 building is
than your building? You probably have no idea. What's the distance between, of the north elevation of
your building?
Mark Undestad: The distance of the north elevation?
Blackowiak: The length of it, yeah.
Mark Undestad: From here to over here?
Blackowiak: Oh is that north?
Sacchet: North is this way.
Blackowiak: So xvould this be the north elevation? Across the U? That's what I'm looking for that
distance.
Mark Undestad: 240 feet.
Blackoxviak: 240, okay. Okay, thank y'ou.
Burton: This is a public hearing. May I have a motion to open the public hearing.
Kind moved, Sacchet seconded to open the public, hearing. The public hearing was opened.
Burton: Anybody that xvould like to address the Planning Commission, please approach the podium and
state your name and address. Okay.
Kind moved, Sacchet seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed.
Burton: Okay, then xve're onto comments. Anybody like to start?
Sidney: Well it looks straight forward to me, although I kind of have a feeling like we've seen this
building before. But I have no problems with the design or anything like that. Well designed and I noted
that there is more than adequate landscaping, which is one...
Burton: Thanks. Other comments?
Sacchet: Yeah, just one thing that still irks me a little bit. By widening the drive aisles are we going to
get less space for landscaping on the east side?
A1-Jaff: No.
Sacchet: Or a little less landscaping between the building and the parking lot or how does that?
28
Planning Commission Meeting- February 20, 2001
Al-Jaff: It's 2 feet only and what they could do is, well you don't need it. On this side what you'd end
up doing is maybe reducing it by 2 feet here.
Sacchet: Okay. How about on the east side?
Al-Jarl: That would, now remember that this yard could be reduced further.
Sacchet: Okay. And then there's less room for trees. Well it's only 2 feet. I think it's a moot point. It's
not worth talking over. I think it's a very clean, good proposal. I support'it.
Al-Jarl: And if the applicant needs to reduce the size of the. . . plan.
Sacchet: Well that's why I was bringing it up.
Al-Jarl: I mean it may be a couple of feet in this direction or a couple of feet in this direction.
Sacchet: But that would have to be mitigated based on the conditions.
Al-Jarl: Correct.
Sacchet: Okay, ah'ight. Well I'll let you sweat over it. ..
Burton: Any other COlnlnents? No? Okay, I think it's a nice project and I think it shows that the
applicant made an effort-to comply with the city's ordinances and I think it looks pretty nice. So we need
a motion.
Sidney: Well Mr. Chair I'll make the motion, if that's'okay. The Planning Commission recommends
approval of Site Plan 2000-1 for a 28,821 square foot office warehouse building to be located on Lot 8,
Block 1, Chanhassen Lakes Business Park 7th Addition as shown on the plans dated received January 19,
2001, subject to the following conditions, 1 through 24.
Kind: Second, and I have a fi'iendly amendment. I'd like to add a condition number 25, just for clarity.
That the interior of the U shall utilize the same building materials as used on the other exterior
elevations. Since it was not called out specifically on the plan.
Sacchet: Can you say that again? I lose you. Sorry.
Kind: The interior of the U shall utilize the same building materials as used on the other exterior
elevations.
Sacchet: Gotch ya. Alright. I'm for that.
Burton: Any other discussion?
Sidney moved, Kind seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of Site Plan
#2000-2 for a 28,821 square foot office warehouse building to be located on Lot 8, Block 1,
Chanhassen Lakes Business Park 7th Addition, as shown on the plans dated received January 19,
2001, subject to the following conditions:
29
Planning Commission Meeting - February 20, 2001
.
,
.
10.
ll.
12.
13.
14.
Revise tile plans to remove tile proposed retaining wall fi'om the public drainage and utility
easement.
Tl~e proposed storm sexver along the north property line, which drains to the south, shall have a
20-foot xvide private utility and maintenance easement recorded over it.
The maximum slope for any handicapped parking or drop-off spot is 2%. Revise tile
handicapped parking spots on the east and west side of the building to comply.
The shared access drive must be enclosed in a private easement.
Tile developer shall apply fbr and obtain a permit fi'om the Watershed District.
Tile applicant shall report to the City Engineer tile location of any drain tiles found during
construction and shall relocate or abandon the drain tile as directed by' the City Engineer.
Ret, ise tile site plan to comply with tile maximunl drive aisle width of 36 feet. Tile drive aisle
shedl correspond with the one shown on tile grading plan.
The applicant shall provide detailed storm sewer sizing calculations fora 10-year, 24-hour storm
event prior to building permit approval.
Add a storm sewer schedule to the utility plan.
Oil tile detail sheet, add City Detail Plate Nos. 2202 and 3101.
Prior to building permit issuance, all plans must be signed by a professional civil engineer
registered in the state of Minnesota.
On tlie site plan, include the name of the street (Upland Circle) that tile lot is accessed fi'om.
Also, include Upland Circle and Lake Drive West oil tile location map.
A 20-foot wide private utility easement shall be recorded for the water line, which extends into
Lot 7.
Rex, ise the grading plan as follows:
a. Show the location of the existing driveway off of Upland Circle for Lot 4, Block 1, Chanhassen
Lakes Business Park 7~h Addition.
25. Shoxv the location of the existing streetlights on the east side of Upland Circle.
15.
16.
17.
The drive aisle widths shall be a minimum of 26 feet wide.
Full park and trail dedication fees shall be paid in accordance with ordinance requirements.
One. ground low profile business sign is permitted per tot. The area of the sign may not
exceed 80 square feet and a height of 8 feet. Also, one wall mounted sign per business shall
be loemfitted per street frontage. The total display area shall not exceed 15% of the total
30
Planning Colnmission Meeting- February 20, 2001
mo
b.
g.
18.
19.
C.
d.
f.
h.
area of the building wall upon which the signs are mounted. No sign may exceed 90 square
feet. All signage must meet the following criteria:
All businesses shall share one monument sign per lot. Monument signage shall be subject
to the monument standards in the sign ordinance.
Wall signs are permitted on no more that 2 street frontages.
All signs require a separate permit.
The signage will have consistency throughout the development and add an architectural
accent to the building.
Consistency in signage shall relate to color, size, materials, and heights.
No illuminated signs within the development may be viewed from the residential section
south of the site.
Back-lit individual letter signs are permitted.
Only the name and logo of the business occupying the unit will be pe~znitted on the sign.
The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to erecting the signs on site. A detailed sign
plan incorporating the method of lighting, acceptable to staff shall be provided prior to
requesting a building permit.
Building Official Conditions:
The building is required to have all automatic fire extinguishing system.
The building plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the State of
Minnesota.
The owner and or their representative shall meet with tile Inspections Division as soon as
possible to discuss plan review and permit procedures.
Fire Marshal conditions: '
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 fire
hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City
Ordinance #9-1.
Submit radius turns and dimensions for parking lot access to the City Engineer and Fire Marshal
to review and approve.
Fire lane signs and yellow curbing will be required. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact
curbs to be painted and exact location of"No Parking" fire lane signs. Pursuant to Chanhassen
Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division Policy #6-1991, and Section 904-1 1997 Uniform Fire
code.
Comply with the Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division policy regarding premise
identification. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division Policy #29-
1992.
Post Indicator Valves (PIV) are required. Please indicate location for review and approval on
utility plans. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location.
All additional fire hydrant will be required. See attached site plan for location of hydrant.
Comply with the Inspection Division water service installation policy for commercial and
industrial buildings. Pursuant to Inspection Division Water Service Installation Policy #34-1993.
Copy enclosed..
Comply with the Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division policy regarding notes to
be included on all site plans. Pursuant to Policy #4-1991. Copy enclosed.
Comply with the Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division policy regarding
~naximum allowed size of domestic water service on a combination domestic/fire sprinkler
31
Planning Commission Meeting - February 20, 2001
20.
supply line. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division Policy #36-1994.
Cop5, enclosed.
Comply with the Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division policy regarding fire
hydrant installation. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Depa~tmelit/Fire Prevention Division Policy
#47-1998. Copy enclosed.
A lighting plan shall be submitted to the City. Only shielded fixtures are allowed as
required by ordinance. A detailed lighting plan should be submitted. Street lights
consistent with Lake Drive West will be at 200 feet intervals, staggered from one side to
the other.
21.
The site plan fails to show the trash enclosure location. The dumpsters must be screened
by a wing-wall and doors with siding and trim to match the building. Current state
statutes require that recycling space be provided for all new buildings. The area of the
recycling space must be dedicated at the rate specified in Mi~mesota State Building Code
(MSBC) 1300.4700 Subp. 5. The applicant should demonstrate the required area will be
provided in addition to the space required for other solid waste collection space.
Recycling space and other solid waste collection space should be contained within the
same enclosure.
22.
Rooftop equipment and lnechanical equipment are not shown on the plans. All
equipment must be screened fi'om views.
23.
The applicant shall enter into a site plan contract with the city and provide the necessary
financial securities as required for landscaping.
24. All loading dock doors shall be painted a color to match the proposed building."
25.
The interior of the U shall utilize the same building materials as used on the other exterior
elevations.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 5 to 0.
PUBLIC HEARING:
REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A 26,040 SO. FT. OFFICE WAREHOUSE
BUILDING TO BE LOCATED ON LOT 7, BLOCK 1, CHANHASSEN LAKES BUSINESS
PARK 7TM ADDITION ON PROPERTY ZONED lOP, INDUSTRIAL OFFICE PARK, P.O.S.
PLUS, INC., THE DESIGN PARTNERSHIP, LTD.
Sharmin AI-Jaff presented the staff report on this item.
Burton: Questions for staff.
Sacchet: Yeah. I do have a few questions. First I have a comment on page 3. Second paragraph there
was a cut and paste from the previous proposal for this proposal. Now these projecting columns, can you
describe them a little more? I mean xvhat you're trying to recommend. Because I can't quite picture it
enough 3'et.
32
Planning Commission Meeting - February 20, 2001
Al-Jaff: The applicant will address this further. We just don't want a fiat wall.
Sacchet: Yeah, that is probably a good idea. Concrete stoop on the north side of the building be
removed. That's, can you point out on the plat which one that is. Please.
Al-Jarl: Right here.
Sacchet: Okay. There's a door there? Okay. Yeah, this is a staffquestio'n. There is quite a good
number of trees that you say this plan is deficient. That there needs to be more trees. There's no room
for thegn.
Al-Jaff: We believe that there is room for them. Now please remember that our ordinanCe, and I had this
discussion with Jill Sinclair probably, well it was this afternoon. We have a 30.foot front yard setback.
30 foot of green. You will be able to accommodate those trees. Also, these trees are shoxvn as the site
that potentially.., exceed what will be out there.
Sacchet: So initially.
AI-Jaff: They're probably 20 years old.
Sacchet: So it's quite a forest out there huh?
Al-Jarl: If you stagger' them we believe th'at there will be enough room. We also think that they need to
demonstrate that there is no room. In our opinion there will be enough space for them.
Sacchet: Okay. And that kind of leads to my other concern, and I'd like staff's opinion too and then also
the applicant's. Right now xve have some significant trees planted ~vhere they have proof of parking, or
how do we call that.., isn't that a conflict?
Al-Jarl: Jill and I had this discussion again this afternoon. What we were thinking is plant some of the
trees within the area that is immediately adjacent to the building. However, let's assume the need
presents itself and they need to put additional parking. What we will look at is there's no net loss of trees
on the parcel. One of the thoughts that we had which made me think of trees and.., in this area. There is
no proposal whatsoever to disturb this area in the future. This way you would take advantage of the
years of growth for those trees. They're not being disturbed.
Sacchet: So yeah, this has been thought through basically.
Al-Jarl: Correct.
Sacchet: I don't mean to second guess but it was a concern I had definitely. Now in terms of this proof
of parking. According to the ordinance, or what this is, it requires unique characteristics and/or
documented parking demand. Which one or both or how does it apply?
A1-Jaff: Well the applicant knows.
Sacchet: So we should let the applicant speak to that?
33
Planning Commission Meeting - February 20, 2001
AI-Jaff: Correct.
Sacchet: Okay, that's fine xvith me. That's all the questions I have. Thanks.
Bm'ton: Any other questions for staff?. Would the applicant or their designee like to address the
Planning Commission? And can you please state your name and address when you get to the podium?
Victor Perlbachs: Good evening. My name is Vic Perlbachs. I'm the architect of record fi'om the
Design Partnership Architects in Minneapolis. And I do want to say that } think we have been working
with staff, as Sharmin has pointed out and I think that we've made some improvements. Good suggested
improvements to the landscape plan and the building itself. And what I have, I guess what ~ve're
proposing to do is to project, we have these pilaster look across, well around all sides of the building but
predominantly on the elevation in question. And we're proposing to project that 4 inches out fi'om the
face of the wall. From grade level up to this stone medallion feature that happens every time one of the
pilasters goes up to the roof parapet. And we're also, if I might just review some of the building
materials. I'll strut with tile fl'ont of the building. We are putting in brick up to a stone band and then the
rock face block. Two colors of rock face block. Tile stone medallions. Stone cap. This projection of
tile building and then aluminum finish material at the top coping and tile entry canopies. Those materials
do go around to all four sides but we drop the brick fi'om the non public face sides of the building. I do
have a computer printed image of the view of the building from the common drive entry fi'om Lot 7. And
it shows some of the architectural relief and projections of building the canopies at the sides and parking
dock so. And we did understandably so, that the landscaping shown here is rather mature and we are
working with staff to, on tile hough and east.., and I think that's a very good suggestion to get this planting
along here and carry it around to the east side and also. Although I have worked on numerous jobs where
tilex' have been able to transplant 20 foot tall spruce trees so, there would be an oppommity to move
those in the future... Are there any other questions regarding the columns or any~d~ing else?
Burton: Questions for the applicant?
Sacchet: Yes Mr. Chair. First of all could you address a little bit tile parking needs. Like our guidelines
says that there needs to be unique characteristics and/or documented parking demand that justifies not
doing tile required, so if you could speak to that a little bit, that would help.
Victor Perlbachs: Tile business is predominantly a sales, warehousing and then re-assembling, re-
packaging and shipping of computer related goods.
Sacchet: So you know what kind of business is going to be in there? That's ah'eady established?
Victor Perlbachs: Yeah. Yep.
Steve Shipley: Do you want me to?
Victor Perlbachs: If you'd like to, sure.
Steve Shipley: I'm Steve Shipley and I'll be building the building. It's a single use building and so we
have basically 14 employees and so to go to 45 parking spots, you know it seems like tile plan looks
better with some of the trees and grass rather than the asphalt. And hopefully I won't ever have to do
that. That's not my intention. So we figured with the 28 parking spots, that's basically 2 times more
than we actually need so that's tile reason for that.
34
Planning Commission Meeting - February 20, 2001
Sacchet: So you'll be the occupant of the building?
Steve Shipley: We are the ones.
Sacchet: Are you occupants or owners?
Steve Shipley: I will be the o~vner leasing it back to my corporation.
Sacchet: Okay. So changes are you're going to be there for quite a while, that's basically why I'm
asking that.
Steve Shipley: Yes.
Sacchet: Okay. Okay.
Steve Shipley: I have a business noxv in Chanhassen that I lease and we've outgrown this space so.
Sacchet: Okay. That sounds convincing, thank you. I don't know which one of you would be able to
address the other question about the tree situation. I'm still a little bit uneasy about this tree situation. It
seems awfully croxvded. Now you've touched on it briefly just a second ago but can you go into that a
little deeper please.
Steve Shipley: I know that we do have a landscape architect working with us on this project that has
been working with staff and I'm not party to exactly what was discussed over the last da5, and a half but
I've been assured that we're making progress and that there won't be a problem.
Sacchet: Well I'm happy to have ),our assurances. I think that's the questions I have for you right now.
Blackowiak: Aside from projections of the brick on the east elevation, or actually on ail the elevations !
guess, what else have you looked at doing for the east elevation and specifically let's say the eastern half
of the south elevation. Those are the two that I'm most concerned with.
Victor Perlbachs: So you're concerned with this?
Blackowiak: Yes, exactly. Because I think those will be not only most visible from neighboring tenants
but also from Lake Drive West and those apartments. I think that's kind of what they're going to see.
Victor Perlbachs: I think what our attempt was, that through the use of color and the actually burnish
block band, rock face block, two colors of rock face block and stone medallions, that that would be
acceptable because the function of that kind ora building is purely warehousing. There's some high rack
storage on the inside right up against those walls and there really is no, there's no need to have any other
kind of relief in terms of glass because they'll be covered up. There's no, any setbacks in the building
would cause a problem with forklift traffic and accessing the goods that are stored there.
Blackowiak: Yeah I understand. I'm just sort of, I'm concerned about the outside. You know what the
people are going to see and I'm just wondering what we can do to make it a little more interesting
because the xvest elevation looks great. The rendering you had, and I'm assuming that was kind of from
the southwest. It looked great but I am worried about, as you come from the east and are driving west
35
Planning Commission Meeting - February 20, 2001
along Lake Drive. what you're going to see. I'm just wondering if staff's concern is, or am I just offbase
on this or.
Victor Perlbachs: I think, ifI mightjust add that I think as you're coming up Lake Drive, you're looking
up. You're going to see, you're going to be screened by the neighboring buildings and some of the
natural vegetation I think that's down here. And you really won't catch much of a view of that side of
the building probably from that perspective. Unless you were right on the site itself.
Aanenson: Would you like our opinion?
Blackowiak: Yes please.
Al-Jarl: \Veil Lot 7 sits at a substantially higher elevationl Here's Lot 7. It sits at a substantially higher
elevation than this parcel. Lot 1, Block. This is the Andreas Building right here. And one of our
concerns was, as you approach heading west, this elevation is going to be clear in fl'ont of you.
Hopefully between the landscaping as ,,',.'ell as the projecting columns you would be able to introduce
some variation. Our ordinance allows variation through architecture but also landscaping. And staff
believes that by incorporating a mix of both, landscaping as well as the columns, you will be able to
break up that wall. Now when we first started it ,`,`,as just a blank ,`','all and we believe that we have been
able to make quite a bit of progress.
Sacchet: If I may jump in. Do you think there's enough of a variation in that wall to actually accomplish
what you're trying to accomplish?
Al-Jaff: As compared to tile previous. Let's use tile previous building as an example, the answer is no
because with this one you have windows wrapping all around. You have the canopies at entrances.
There is contrast with the color variation so you have more variation with this one than you do with this
olle.
Sacchet: On the other hand that one is further set back. I guess that wouldjustify relaxing a little bit that
criteria, but then again my question is, do you think considering it's further back, and 3,es it's less
architectural interest than the building that's closer to tile street, you know to Lake Drive, does this
satisfy what you were trying to accomplish in terms of adding interest?
Al-Jaff: I believe if we add the landscaping and with the projecting columns, yes.
Sacchet: And would it be a reasonable assumption to make that with all these additional trees that are
required on the property that...quite a few more back there as well. Because I think ultimately the trees
is what's really going to make a difference. More so than those 4 inch whatever's. Not to put those
down. If you're a couple hundred feet away the 4 inches aren't going to make much of a difference.
AI-Jaff: There's...you can always improve it.
Sacchet: Well I don't mean to put it on you to figure out what is the number...more we have to decide
here.
Blackowiak: Yeah, and I realize it's a totally different use of the buildings too. I mean that's something
to consider as well but I just want to make sure that as you drive down the street and, that we're getting
what we want and that it's going to look nice and it doesn't have to be a duplicate of what's on the corner
36
Planning Commission Meeting - February 20, 2001
but yet ! think we still need to make sure that we're getting something that's not going to be an eyesore
and people are going to say gee. You know why didn't you, so. Alrighty.
Sacchet: Got a question. Since we have trees and we have those 4 inch protrusions, what else could we
do? I mean what else could we possibly do to make this thing more interesting? I mean I don't know. If
anybody has a good idea, I would like to ~know. Awfully quiet. Based on that we can assume we did
what we can, right?
Blackowiak: Well I don't want to get into architecture of it, but maybe a ~lifferent color. I mean there
may be some options. I don't know that, and that's all I'm going to say and I don't want to specify what
those should be because that's not my job. But I'm just saying, if we've explored it, if the staff is happy.
If the applicant's happy, then okay. I'm a little more comfortable. I just want to make sure we're getting
a good product and that's my concern.
Burton: Any other questions for the applicant?
Sidney: One quick question. What is the material of the columns that you're, the projections on the
board here? Is that the rock face?
Victor Perlbachs: Oh it is the two colors of rock face and then the square 2/3 of the way up to the top is
that center so.
Sidney: Okay.
Burton: Any other questions? May I have a motion to open the public hearing?
Sacchet ~noved, Blackowiak seconded to open the public hearing. The public hearing was opened.
Burton: Anybody would like to address the Planning Commission on this project, please approach the
podimn.
Kind moved, Sidney seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed.
Burton: Okay, then we're onto comments. Anybody like to start?
Kind: Sure Mr. Chair, I'll start. ! think it's an attractive building. I like, especially what would be
considered the fi'ont, which is that, essentially that west elevation. I think it's very nice. It was helpful to
see that 3 dimensional draxving and that gives you a good feel for what it's going to be like. I agree with
staff. I'm somewhat concerned about that east elevation but I think the applicant has made a nice effort
to address our concerns and having the medallions and kind of breaking up the space with the color
changes. I think it does a nice job of that. ! ~vould definitely like to see the landscaping increased on that
side, and I guess that would be my question of staff. Are you comfortable that what the landscaping
buffer requires for that would be sufficient for breaking up that wall? Okay. And that condition we have
in here for approval, which is number 25. And that just talks about the north and south property line.
Sacchet: 27.
Kind: 27. I guess to 27 I'd like to add something about increasing the landscaping on that east side. So
other than that I think it looks like a nice project.
37
Planning Comlnission Meeting - February 20, 2001
Burton: Anyone else?
Sacchet: Yeah, I have two comments. I at first was a little uneasy with this because of the parking
situation and the tree situation but seeing that it's very clear what tile use of the building is going to be,
and it appears that it's going to stay that use for a while. For a long xvhile, it doesn't seem a very
transient thing that's going to go in there. I think it makes sense. It's with the conditions that are there. I
do like that, this condition number 27 is kind of open ended because I'm, I do think that east side looks a
little dismal. Quite dismal. Very dismal. But with putting a little more thought into it, I don't know
from the architectural side there is much more we can do. But certainly with the landscaping and since
there's quite a number of trees that will have to be added, I think that that will help overall. That's my
comment.
Burton: Thanks. Other comments?
Blackowiak: No, I agree pretty much xvith what's been said. I do like tile building. If we Call beef up tile
east side a little bit, more power to you. i mean that would be nice. I think the landscaping will
definitely help. I like the idea of proof of parking. Even though my husband's in the asphalt business,
you don't have to put it there. You know leave it green so yeah, I like that.
Sidney: A few comments. I'm okay with tile plan. I agree with Deb's comments about seeing if we
call't add a, well add to condition 27 about increasing tile amount of landscaping. I don't think the
building is glamorous but. well on that side but ~ think more trees would help.
Burton: Okay. My comments are tile same so luckily going last I don't have to add an,vthing. So I'm
open to a motion.
Sacchet: Yes Mr. Chair. I make a motion that the Planning Commission recommends approval of Site
Plan #2001-01 for a 26,040 square foot office warehouse building to be located oil Lot 7, Block 1,
Chanhassen Lakes Business Park 7'h Addition as shown on the plans dated received January 19. 2001,
subject to the following 27 conditions. With tv,;o fixes. Number 3, add silt fence along the northerly
property line and add a rock construction entrance to northerly driveway for the duration of construction.
That's with the idea that it gets taken down promptly when it's over. And then number 27, the applicant
shall introduce additional architectural relief along the east elevation of the building as well as more
landscaping. More trees. How do I say that?
Kind: Add additional landscaping?
Sacchet: And added further landscaping. The meaning is certainly clear.
Kind: I'll second that and I have a friendly amendment.
Sacchet: Please.
Kind: I'd like to add condition 28 which is similar to the one I added to the previous applicant and that is
that tile interior portion of the U shall incorporate the same building materials used on other exterior
elevations. It was not called out on the plans, because it's a reasonable assumption but I like to spell it
out.
38
Planning Commission Meeting- February 20, 2001
Sacchet: It's a reasonable condition. I accept that.
Burton' I'm sorry.
Kind' I seconded it.
Burton: Okay. Sorry. I'm not catching these seconds. Any other discussion?
Sacchet moved, Kind seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of site plan
2001-1 for a 26,040 square foot office warehouse building to be located on Lot 7, Block 1,
Chanhassen Lakes Business Park 7th Addition, as shown on the plans dated received January 19,
2001, subject to the following conditions:
1. Revise the plans to remove the concrete stoop from the public drainage and utility easement.
2. A 20-foot wide private utility and maintenance easement is required over each of the storm sewer
lines and the proposed water line from Lot 8.
3. Add silt fence along the northerly property line and add a rock construction entrance to the
northerly driveway for the duration of the construction.
4. The maximum slope for any handicapped parking or drop-off spot is 2%. Revise the
handicapped.parking spot on the west side of the building to comply.
5. Each of the access drives must be enclosed in a private easement. Also, include a concrete
driveway apron on the northerly access drive.
_
6. The developer shall apply for and obtain a permit from the Watershed Distric"t.
7. The applicant shall report to the City Engineer the location of any drain tiles found during
construction and shall relocate or abandon the drain tile as directed by the City Engineer.
8. Revise the site plan to comply with the maximum drive entrance width of 36 feet. The driveways
should correspond with those shown on the grading plan.
9. The applicant shall provide detailed storm sewer sizing calculations for a 10-year, 24-hour storm
event prior to building permit approval.
10. Add a stor~n sewer schedule to the utility plan.
11. On the detail sheet, add City Detail Plate Nos. 2202 and 3101.
12. Prior to building permit issuance, all plans must be signed by a professional civil engineer
registered in the State of Minnesota.
13. The existing water stub to the lot is 8" in size. As such, an 8" x 6" reducer is required.
39
Plalming Commission Meeting - February 20, 2001
14. A 20-foot wide private utility easement shall be recorded for the water line which extends into
Lot 7.
15. Revise the grading plan as follows:
a. Shoxv tile location of the existing driveway off of Upland Circle for Lot 4, Block 1,
Chanhassen Lakes Business Park 7th Addition.
b. Show the location of the existing street lights on the east side 'of Upland Circle.
16. Frill Park and trail dedication fees shall be paid in accordance with ordinance requirements.
17. One ground low profile business sign is permitted per lot. Tile area of the sign may not exceed
80 square feet and a height of 8 feet. Also. one xvall mounted sign per business shall be
permitted per street fl'ontage. Tile total display area shall not exceed 15% of the total area of the
building wall upon which tile signs are mounted. No sign may exceed 90 square feet. All
signage must meet the folloxving criteria:
a. All businesses shall share one monument sign per lot. Monument signage shall
be subject to the monument standards in the sign ordinance.
b. Wall signs are permitted on no more that 2 street frontages.
c. All signs require a separate permit.
d. The signage ,:,,ill have consistency tln'°ughout the development and add an
architectural accel~t to the building.
e. Consistency in signage shall relate to color, size, lnaterials, and heights.
f. No illuminated signs within the development may be viewed fi'om the
residential section south of the site.
o Back-lit individual letter signs are pe~Tnitted.
h. Only the name and logo of the business occupying the unit wilt be pe~xnitted on
the sign.
i. The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to erecting the signs on site. A
detailed sign plan incorporating the method of lighting, acceptable to staff shall
be provided prior to requesting a building permit.
18. Building Official Conditions:
a. a. The building is required to have an automatic fire extinguishing system.
b. b. The east portion of the north xvall must be of one-hour fire-resistive construction
as it is closer than 20 feet to the property line.
c. c. The building plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed
in the State of Minnesota.
d. d. The owner and or their representative shall meet v,,ith tile Inspections Division as
soon as possible to discuss plan review and permit procedures.
19.
Fire Marshal conditions:
a. PIV (Post Indicator Valve) will be required on the fire service water tine coming into
the building. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location.
b. A 10-foot 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
40
Planning Commission Meeting- February 20, 2001
ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters.
Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1.
c. 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 si=ons. Pursuant
to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division Policy #6-1991, and
Section 904-1 1997 Uniform Fire Code.
d. Comply with the Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division regarding
premise identification. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention
Division Policy #29-1992.
e. Comply with water service installation policy for commercial and industrial
buildings. Pursuant to Inspection Division Water Service Installation Policy #34-
1993. Copy enclosed.
f. Comply with the Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division policy
regarding maximum allowed size of domestic water service on a combination
domestic/fire sprinkler supply line. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire
Prevention Division Policy #36-1994.
o Comply with the Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division policy
regarding fire hydrant installation. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire
Prevention Division Policy #47-1998. Copy enclosed.
h. Comply with the Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division policy
regarding notes to be included on all site plans. Pursuant to Policy #4-1991. Copy
enclosed.
i. Submit radius turn and dimensions for parking lot access to the City Engineer and
Fire.Marshal to revie~v and approve.
20. Only shielded light fixtures are allowed as required by OrdinanCe.
21 .The site plan fails to show the trash enclosure location. The dumpsters must be
screened by a wing-wall and doors with siding and trim to match the building.
Current state statutes require that recycling space be provided for all new
buildings. The area of the recycling space must be dedicated at the rate specified
in Minnesota State Building Code (MSBC) 1300.4700 Subp. 5. The applicant
should demonstrate the required area will be provided in addition to the space
required for other solid waste collection space. Recycling space and other solid
waste collection space should be contained within the same enclosure.
22.Rooftop equipment and mechanical equipment must be screened from views.
23.The applicant shall enter into a site plan contract with the city and provide the
necessary financial securities as required for landscaping.
24. The applicant shall revise landscape plan to meet minimum requirements of
overstory tree plantings for boulevard and parking lot landscaping.
25. Applicant shall revise landscape plan to meet minimum requirements for buffer
yard planting along the north and south property lines.
41
Planning Commission Meeting - February 20, 2001
26. The city may require installation ~?'the additional pc,'/cb?g spaces whenever a need
arises.
27. The applicant shall introduce additional architectural relief and additional
landscaping along the east elevation of the building ."
28. The interior portion of the U shall incorporate the same building materials used
on other exterior elevations.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 5 to 0.
PUBLIC HEARING:
REQUEST FOR A LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT FROM RESIDENTIAL-LARGE LOT TO
RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON DOGWOOD LOTS 1-10,
BLOCK 1, SUNSET HILLS ON LAKE MINNEWASHTA AND LOTS 1-$, BLOCK 1, GETSCH
ADDITION AND A PORTION OF LOT 2, BLOCK 1, ZIMMERMAN FARMS 1sT ADDITION,
CITY OF CHANHASSEN.
Public Present:
~fl nle
Address
Scott & March Vergin 7311 Dogwood Road
Amy Adamson 7331 Dogwood Road
Barbara Freeman 7431 Dogwood Road
Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item.
Burton: Any questions for staff?.
Sacchet: Yes Mr. Chair. It talks about this, how many lots is it? Number of' lots specifically, and then
the south one it says a portion of Lot 1, Block 1. I got a little bit o£problem with that. A portion o£, that
seems not very specific.
Generous: Well, the portion of that parcel that's westerly of an imaginary line for the extension of
Dogwood Road. It shoxvs up better on the location map which is the second page of the report. There's
the line that extends down fi'om the end of the cul-de-sac. That's not there. That's just an arbitrary line
drawn on a map.
Sacchet: So at this point that square is part of the whole stretch.
Generous: Right. It's part of the property to the east.
Sacchet: Okay. Okay. So the portion we're talking about is.
Generous: Westerly of that line.
42
Planning Commission Meeting - February 20, 2001
Sacchet: Is that clearly enough defined so it can't be misunderstood?
Generous: Well that's why I tried into the recommendation west of a southerly extension of Dogwood
Road.
Sacchet: West of the southerly extension of Dogwood. Now that you explain it I understand it but to be
honest before I didn't. Okay.
Generous: And I don't know exactly how that happened. I think that's h6w it was broken up. It was an
extension of that line.
Sacchet: Okay. Well I understand it now. In the table of the lot sizes, the front is that last lot, that's
300. That's not 30 is it? The table on page 2.
Generous: Well on Dogwood there's only 30 feet of frontage.
Sacchet: Oh, because that's only hoxv much is actually on the road?
Generous: Yeah.
Sacchet: That's why 30 feet. Okay, because it's like the corner.
Gellerous: Yes.
Sacchet: On the cul-de-sac.
Generous: Exactly.
Sacchet: Got it. Ah'ight, that answers my questions. Thanks.
Bm~ton: Any other questions?
Kind: Yes Mr. Chair. Uli was talking, it's the same lot that Uli was talking about, is cun'ently zoned,
that's the Zilnmerman Farms 1st Addition. Is currently zoned rural residential.
Generous: Correct.
Kind: And the guided land use is rural large lot. So that particular lot is in sync.
Generous: Correct.
Kind: Complies xvith what our intent is. So theoretically we could leave that one lot out, because that
one does comply.
Sacchet: So why would we want to include it then?
Generous: Well it was because the rest of the property is guided residential low density. I was just
trying to ~nake them all.
43
Planning Commission Meeting - February 20, 2001
Sacchet: Be consistent.
Generous: Right.
Sacchet: Because that's the purpose of the whole exercise, aMght.
Burton: Other questions?
Kind: That's it.
Burton: Bob, would this have any adverse affect on any of the current residents that's rezoning?
Generous: No. The land use amendment alone, it will bring their land use in to compliance with their
zoning that exists, except for the rural residential.
Burton: Okay. Any other questions for staff?.
Kind: Yes. I guess I do have one more. I just wanted to make it clear that. because I'm assuming that
these lots are subdMdable with the current zoning, which is residential single family and that changing
this land use has no affect on whether they're subdividable or not.
Generous: Correct. They would have to comply with ordinance requirements. There's some steep slope
issues out there. They would have to provide urban services to subdivide fm'ther.
Kind: Because another option to bring this in compliance, the land use and the zoning would be to
change the zoning to rural residential, in which case they...2 '/_, acres.
Generous: ...non-conforming. 3"es.
Kind: Yes, so it makes more sense to go the other direction.
Sacchet: I have another question if you're done.
Burton: Go ahead.
Sacchet: How does that work when we give a different zoning to two parts of the same lot, because
that's effectively what you are doing here? If we say that only the southwesterly portion or we call it
southerly extension of west of the southerly extension of Dogwood, part of that lot is in that zoning.
Generous: If you left it large lot you mean?
Sacchet: Well, I'm not quite understanding how that works when at this point the lot of record is that
thick long chunk and now we're designating a part of it as something separate than the rest. How does
that, doesn't that create conflicts or possible confusions?
Generous: Well you'd have to develop them differently. The stuff that' s currently guided, guided for
large lot would have to comply with the 2 ½ acre minimum lot size. The rest of it could go to 1 to 4 units
per acre. Because it's guided low, residential low density.
44
Planning Commission Meeting- February 20, 2001
Sacchet: Then do we know xvhether the owners are fine with this?
Generous: Yes.
Aanenson: There are people here tonight on this issue.
Sacchet: Okay, I'll wait and hear any comments we get.
Aanenson: This is one of the neighborhood meetings Bob did a couple nights or so.
Sacchet: I would like to hear from the neighborhood. Or the owners preferably.
Blackowiak: Mr. Chair I guess I have a question, now that you are talking about this a little bitmore. So
help me out here. This lot, Zimmerman Farms 1st Addition. In other words we have a lot that... So it's
that plus that, okay. And that's what I was thinking. And so we're trying, and you want to have, can you
have two different zonings in one lot? You can. I know, and you're just making me think and I have to
~valk through it in my head. I don't know, I like that. I'mjust, huh. Okay. I'll listen to the comments of
the neighbors.
Burton: Well then let's open it up for public hearing. Can I have a motion?
Sacchet ~noved, Kind seconded to open the public hearing. The public hearing was opened.
Burton: Anybody like to address the Planning Commission, please approach the podium and state your
name and address. '
Barbara Freelnan: I'm Barbara Freeman and I live at 7431 Dogwood. And my property is Lot 7, which
originally was 7, 8, 9 and 10, and ! guess I just want clarification. Ifthat;s changed to loxv density, does
that mean that I can have up to 4 units on that property?
Generous: You'd have to go through the subdivision process and then we would determine. You need a
lninimum of 20,000 square feet per lot xvith 90 feet of lake frontage, 90 feet of street fi'ontage.
Aanenson: Plus sewer and water. First step.
Barbara Freeman: Well I don't plan to build 4 houses.
Generous: The zoning's already in place for you to do that. This land use amendment doesn't impact
that. Had we rezoned the property, proposed rezoning to rural residential, then you would be restricted in
the number of units you would potentially get.
Barbara Freeman: Another question. I'm not sure what the extension of Dogwood is that you're talking
about.
Generous: It's an imaginary line just to show where there's a separation between land uses.
Barbara Freeman: You are not planning to extend though?
Generous: No.
45
Planning Commission Meeting - February 20, 2001
Barbara Freeman: Okay. Those are my questions, thank you.
Burton: Thank you. Anybody else like to discuss this one?
Maren Christopher: Ijust, you know to her question. I'm Maren Christopher and I live at 7311
Dogwood Road. Could Crimson Bay Road get extended if the Brandt's, who are not here tonight, have
said they want to sell off this other portion of their properU,. This is where they live. This is where their
house is. This is just all farm fields and they want to sell that and divide i't into other lots. If that
happens then could Cl'imson Bay Road end up coming through and connecting to Dogwood?
Aanenson: I can make a comment on that. When Crimson Bay went ill, that discussion was held. Tile
council made the decision at that time not to connect those two streets. I'm not willing to make that
recommendation. Tile traffic, the City Engineer may. I doubt it. Someone would have to go in and
acquire additional right-of-way. The City wouldn't be tile one to participate in getting that right-of-way.
Someone developing the property because we do not have the right-of-way to make that happen so I'm
not sure what the will of the city would be to make that happen. There are other alternatives with
Westwood coming in, providing an additional outlet onto 41, which may be another option.
Maren Christopher: I think what most of us are concerned about, anybody can speak for themselves but I
think most of us are concerned about all of this property and all of the talk about it being developed. And
we live ill this really quaint, little xvhimpy area with a rural road and I guess we're all just a little nervous
about everybody selling off and the gentleman that lives here we heard has ah'eady sold and they're
planning to develop his. We heard that the church may sell back this portion. Tile big house here, the
guy that owns that is possibly keeping some acreage here, 5 or 6. He's not selling this property that he'd
want to develop across the road fi'om our's and I think that's just, it just makes us nervous. Changing all
the zoning. I don't know, that's what I think we're mostly nervous about.
Aanenson: Maybe I call respond to that. At the neighborhood lneeting that Bob held, probably over a
month ago, Teresa Burgess was at that meeting too talking about that. We understand and that's why the
street wasn't connected. Tile uniqueness of that Dogwood area. Similar to what we have in Carver
Beach. It is a unique area. We also have some septic problems up in that area. We are providing, if the
Pulte project goes through and tile council approves BC-7, BC-8 extension to Westwood Church, there
are pending development parcels. Parcels that want to petition for sewer and water. Does that mean
sewer and water will come down there? Possibly. It's not our intent to change the character or force
anybody to develop but we do have some problems that we're trying to address and given our alternative,
and the best alternative is to provide municipal services. Speaking of Teresa, and I believe this was
conveyed to the neighborhood, that we understand the uniqueness of that road that they're on right now.
We want to preserve the character of what's up there. It's heavily wooded. It's a very unique area and
we want to work with that and since it is a dead end street at that end, trying to provide another access,
another alternative for development potential in that area.
Burton: Okay, thanks. Anybody else?
Jennifer Newell: ... I'm just wondering. I'm Jennifer, 7550 Dogwood Road. And I'm just wondering if,
what direction do you think city water and sewer would come in if they start? Okay, if it comes to tile
church.
46
Planning Commission Meeting - February 20, 2001
Aanenson: It's coming in this way down Tanadoona. The church has looked at a couple different
alternatives. You're right, there are people looking at these properties for further subdivision. If there's
property that's subdivided.., so there are other alternatives we're looking at.
Jennifer Newell: ...Okay, and so when you do...transferring it down the road.
Aanenson: There are other alternatives too... I would recommend, there are plans in place with the city
engineering. You might want to check with that too.
Jennifer Newell: Alright. With this changing of what we've got here is not going to affect the land
across the street from us, is that correct?
Generous: Correct.
Saam: Correct.
Burton: Anybody else?
Sacchet moved, Kind seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed.
Burton: Discussion.
Sacchet: Yeah. I think it's important to put your. concerns to rest what, we're not really changing
anything. What we're doing is we're lining up two aspects. One is the land use and the other one's the
zoning so that they actually are the same. Right now they're not the same. As a matter of fact they're in
conflict with each other so that's why staff bring this up and makes this PrOposal that we make these
things match up. I mean it's not going to change really what's out there. It's going to line up the zoning
and land use with each other. That's my understanding what we're trying to do and as such I think it's a
good thing. I'm a little uneasy about this south lot. This big lot where we end up having one quarter, the
quarter by the lake in one zoning and the rest is another. I can see for consistency purposes how it make
sense to do that. So I'm a little unclear what I would recommend for that south lot but other than that I
think it's a reasonable thing to do. It's cleaning up something that is obviously in conflict with each
other.
Burton: Anybody else?
Blackowiak: Mr. Chair, I agree. That south lot is really giving me fits right now. I guess philosophically
I'm not in agreement of splitting a lot into different zoning. It just doesn't make sense to me in my head
because to me that almost is, it's almost like making a development decision for a property owner. I
mean if a property owner wants to come in and develop a lot and get, request a certain zoning, I almost
think it would be easier to work with that person and look at the entire lot and see how everything best
fits together. But to give part of the lot one zoning and part of the lot another zoning, I don't know if that
makes a lot of sense to me. So I would almost think that we could, well I would be maybe more
comfortable totally excluding that Zimmerman Farms 1st Addition lot and just leave that as is because at
this point it does meet current zoning. It is in concurrence with the land use so at this point I don't see
the real need to change that because we're splitting a lot and I guess I just don't.
47
Planning Commission Meeting - February 20, 2001
Aanenson: Just for the record, that lot is owned by Dee Brandt. She did speak to me. She didn't have a
sitter for tonight and couldn't be here. She supported the staff report. I just want to make that part of the
record.
Blackowiak: Okay.
Aanenson: She's aware of the split.
Blackowiak: Yeah. Well that's fine. I'm just saying that personally, I mean it's one lot so why are we
starting to split it dow'n regardless of what the property owner wants. I mean, I don't know.
Sacchet: And where do we draw the lille? I roe. an right now the line is lined tip with middle of that dead
end circle there that if we xvould potentially at some point want. the idea came up if it would be
connected to the Crimson Bay Road, then tile line would be drawn twice. It would have to be what? 10-
20 feet further over to the east. So that's why, yeah.
Btackowiak: And I also would like to say that I really would not favor the extension of Crimson Bay
Road because I think that's going to open a whole new can of worms, especially with Westwood Church
going in. People would be using that as an opportunity to access Highway 5 and not get on Highway 41
and the traffic would just, it would just be unbearable I think for those neighbors so I would say, for what
it's worth, I knoxv we're not talking about extending Crimson Road right now but boy, I sure would not
favor any plan that xvould facilitate that because that just xvould be so bad for the neighborhood. And I
don't know about that Zimmerman Farms lot. I think I prefer ahnost to leave it out.
Kind: I'll go next. That was where I was going also was to leave off the Zimmerman lot because that
one does comply and I think it makes sense for the rest to be changed to residential low density so I
support that proposal fi'om staff with the deletion of the Zimmerman Farms.
Burton: LuAnn.
Sidney: I guess I agree with the staff report. I'm looking at the shading on the staff report here and
looking at what's west of Dogxvood and what's east and I guess I don't have a problem w-ith that. Split it
along there as the zoning.
Burton' I agree with LuAnn. t'm not concerned about rezoning the southern lot. The owners all had
notice of the public meeting and notice of this hearing. The owner of that lot supports this. Nobody
spoke out against it. I'm not aware of any reason of concern fi'om the lot about this rezoning. In fact the
owner supports it and it may even be beneficial to the owner if we do it. And I don't it's odd that a
parcel could have two zoning designations so I think it's fine the way it xvas. And I support the staff
report too. So we need a motion.
Blackowiak: Well I see where this is going to fall.
Sacchet: I think a little more discussion because I'm kind of in the middle. I can see it go through for
consistency and I can see holding up because it splits the lot. So we kind of have a tie as a matter of fact.
I'm undecided when it comes to this. Because I don't want to be a detriment to the owner of that tot by
not including it iii this zoning. But then on the other hand I share the concern.
48
Planning Commission Meeting - February 20, 2001
Burton: It would most definitely be a detriment if it wasn't rezoned, wouldn't it? Because this gives
them the opportunity to develop more parcels.
Generous: They'd get at least 2 lakeshore lots.
Burton: Right. Otherwise they could not.
Aanenson: Correct.
Kind: By leaving it, it could not be subdivided.
Btuxon: You'd only have one lakeshore lot. You could have 2 if you redo this.
Sacchet: So it xvould be a detriment to the current o~vner if we don't include it at this point?
Aanenson: Yes.
Kind: But depending on what your point ofviexv is. It could be a detriment to the lake to subdivide it
and add another lake lot.
Sacchet: Yeah. but you could'say that's kind of unfair. Everybody around it gets it.
Kind: Not to the south. Those are all large lot.
Sacchet: They're all large lot?
Aanenson: They'll probably never have sewer and water.
Burton: Well how are they guided?
Kind: Large lot.
Aanenson: They're on septic and wells.
Blackowiak: My point is, wasn't this the glitch ordinance amendment? In other words, we were
supposed to go through and figure out what didn't comply and rezone all those things that didn't comply.
Kind: This cmnplies.
Blackowiak: Here we have a lot that I don't think is in any question non-compliant. ! mean everyone
agrees it complies with what it's zoned right now so why are ~ve changing? Aren't we supposed to just
go and clean up things that don't comply and then, is it our job to be proactive and rezone? I don't know.
I don't think it is. I mean my understanding was this was glitch ordinance. Or not glitch ordinance, but
you know, does it make sense. Is the land use consistent with the zoning? If it isn't, clean it up.
Otherwise I mean why.
Burton: If we didn't include this the owner of that southern lot could come in and ask for a rezone.
Aanenson: Absolutely.
49
Planning Commission Meeting - February 20, 2001
Blackowiak: Right. Right.
Burton: Then I'm fine.
Blackowiak: See I think that they should actually come in and ask if it's not in, you know what I'm
saying? If it's in compliance, I say we leave it. I mean I don't think our job is to be proactive in
changing things if they're in compliance. Without a coinpelling reason.
Sacchet: If I can clarify something. If we don't include that Zimmerman Addition piece, that lot would
be bundled in with the large lots on the south. The Crimson Bay. 1' mean it would be tike an island to'
itself. It xvould just, we would draw' the line over the north of that lot where the two zonings butt into
each other. Run it on the south and yeah I think that should be, I think that'for me settles it. I would then
sa3.' not to include it.
Btwton: Okay.
Blackowiak: And if they want to come back in and petition for rezoning, then so be it. Then we-look at
it lllOl'e, yotl kllOW overall as a single lot as opposed to a lot with two different zonings.
Sacchet: So are xve ready for a motion?
Kind: Mr. Chair I'll make a motion. I move the Planning Commission recommends approval of Land
Use Map Amendment of Lots 1 through 7, Block 1. Sunset Hill on Lake Minnexvashta and Lots 1 through
5, Block 1. Getsch Addition, fi'om Residential-Large Lot to Residential-Low Density.
Blackowiak: I'll second that.
Burton: Any discussion?
Kind moved, Blackowiak seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of Land
Use Map Amendment of Lots 1 through 7, Block 1, Sunset Hill on Lake Minnewashta and Lots 1
through 5, Block 1, Getsch Addition, from Residential-Large Lot to Residential-Low Densit3,. All
voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 5 to 0.
PUBLIC HEARING:
REOUEST FOR A LAND USE AMENDMENT FROM RESIDENTIAL-LOW DENSITY TO
RESIDENTIAL-MEDIUM DENSITY FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7305 GALPIN
BOULEVARD, PID/425.0101300 AND 25.0101600, CITY OF CHANHASSEN.
Public Present:
Name Address
Bob Shultz
Doris French
Jan Maryska
Jeanne Gilbertson
2166 Baneberry Way
2189 Baneberry Way West
2175 Baneberry Way West
2170 Baneberry Way West
50
Planning Commission Meeting - February 20, 2001
Matt Bosin 7757 Buttercup Court
Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item.
Burton: Questions for staff.
Sacchet: Yeah, two questions. Access to the property. Would that be from that private street to the
townhouses there?
Generous: Baneberry Way West would be the future access of the site. And I attached right at the back
of the staff report there's a little private street.
Sacchet: So the access would be fi'om that side?
Generous: Yes. There's a barricade up and this road would be extended in the future.
Sacchet: Well I'm confused, what about that's, it's a private street.
Generous' Right.
Sacchet: That has no bearing? That's still the access for it?
Generous: Correct. That's what We worked out as part of our review of the overall development of that
area. - ·
Sacchet: Now in terms of how much of that is in the Bluff Creek watershed, you said it's about a third.
Generous: -No, that was an estimate. It would actually be up to the developer to come in and show us
where that line should be.
Sacchet: Because that's my main concern with this is, with this Bluff Creek watershed aspect, there is
the density transfer element.
Aanenson: Correct.
Sacchet: So if we say we change this from low density or medium density, can then the developer come
in and get a density transfer on top of that? And say, and then in the end it becomes effectively high
density?
Generous: Well the actual building may be but the density transfer is only for the units that they could
have provided had the overlay district not been in place. The creek actually runs north of the south
property line so there's some undevelopable land south of that and there's some undevelopable land
north of that.
Sacchet: So wouldn't that be better to leave it Iow density and then with the density transfer, it could
become medium density? Because if you make it medium density now, then ~vith the density transfer it's
effectively becoming high density.
Generous: We have no ordinance that permits that.
51
Planning Commission Meeting - February 20, 2001
Sacchet: Explain please.
Aanenson: It's the same situation as Pulte. You can't do a density transfer in the low density so if they
come back in and we say we're not going to let you do the density transfer, then ~ve're back to where we
are. Where you can't use the tool.
Sacchet: You're saying we cannot do density transfer with low density?
Aanenson: Correct.
Sacchet: We can only do it with medium?
Aanenson: Correct. Because you only have three zoning options in low density. Tile 15,000 square foot
lot, the 11,000 minimum, average 15 or twin home. You can't do...which is more than likely what it
would be.
Sacchet: So, I should probably pass it on but. So if we do make this medium density, I'm trying to
follow this logic. Then we make it possible that there can be a density transfer based on the context of
tile Bluff Creek..
Aanenson: Your question is, if there's x amount of upland area, and they want to transfer, could they
instead of putting 6 units on there, could they now put 12.
Sacchet: Right. I mean it seems like we're going in one direction ah'eady as much as we probably want
to go and then they can go another xvhole couple of steps that direction based on the transfer on top of it.
Aanenson: The other resolution is to do what we recommended two years ago and that's to amend the
PUD ordinance to allow, in the low density, which was our recommendation. That's in the glitch that's
been held up.
Sacchet: To actually allow density transfer to low density?
Aanenson: Correct. For some circumstances in the Bluff Creek district or the like.
Sacchet: That would make more sense here to me personally. But I've talked enough.
Aanenson: That's an option.
Burton: Other questions?
Kind: No. That was my same question.
Blackowiak: Well I guess I have a couple questions Mr. Chair. In the staff report it says that when
Walnut Grove was being reviewed the city stated the Hennessy property should be developed as a
townhouse project. Does the city and ciD, staff still believe that?
Aanenson: Yes. That should be consistent. Again, if you look at the topography of that, you've got the
creek running through it. It's a pinched piece of property. You've got 2 homes backing onto a collector
52
Planning Commission Meeting - February 20, 2001
street. Really for the benefit of the property it should orient and give you better access back through the
subdivision.
Blackowiak: So maybe the back of the, you're saying the back of the homes go towards.
Aanenson: Right, put the buffer back on Galpin and then that creek comes up here. Most of this is in the
Bluff Creek overlay district.., create a better buffer there.
Blackowiak: So what would be then your ideal density in that? ! mean let's say that we have a density of
transfer in a PUD that you can use in the residential low density case. What are you looking for in there?
Aanenson: Total number of units? I don't 'know what the exact acreage upland is. I couldn't Say without
looking at it. If you wanted us to come back and give you some more detail'on that, that's probably.
Blackowiak: Yeah, because it sounds like what you were saying about you being able to use the density
transfer tool and the PUD for low density residential, is really xvhat we're looking for in this because I
don't want to get into a situation, like Uli said, where you can have a medium density designation and
then they can use the density transfer tool to bump it up higher than we had anticipated or higher than we
hoped to develop. So I think we may need to take a look at this a little more closely so we don't get in
something we don't want to get into.
Sacchet: If I may add another question to this. Obviously this is a PUD next door.
Aanenson: Correct.
Sacchet: But is that density there relative to medium or is it relative to high?
Aanenson: 5.7
Generous: It's medium, 5.7.
Sacchet: It is medium. Because that's what I was going to say, if it's already high there too then it
would be.
Aanenson: Correct, but the question is, what's the ultimate unit mix so I think we can spend some time
looking at that, but that's why we recommend the medium because the other's 5.7. But does that mean
this ends up being 8, and that's what I hear you say your question is so...
Kind: I have the exact same concern. I think we should look at amending the PUD ordinance as another
way of addressing this issue.
Aanenson: Again it's product driven. I mean if it's a townhouse as opposed to a stacked unit, that's
going to affect some of these but we'll take a look at that. If you want to table this, we're the applicant.
Burton: Well should we get some comments?
Blackowiak moved, Sacchet seconded to open the public hearing. The public hearing was opened.
53
Planning Commission Meeting - February 20, 2001
Burton: Anybody that would like to address the commission, please approach the podium. State your
name and address.
Doris French: I'm Doris French and I live at 2189 Baneben'y and what I'm wondering about was the
road. The road's owned by tile association. Maintained by the association. If there's a development put
in at the end of the road, is that...
Aanenson: They'd have to do an association. Somehow work that out. Be part of the association.
Generous: Share tile cost for maintenance and clean-up and all that, yeah. But they would have to Pa5'
for the extension as part of their development.
Doris French: That was my only question.
Matt Bosin: Good evening. I'll try to make this short and sweet. My name's Matt Bosin. I live at 7757
Buttercup Court. I'm actually the President of the Walnut Grove Townhome Association. My concern is
of the same here. Is in regards to that road. Not only the extension and whether or not, it's obviously
that parcel of land is an island. You're saying access is mainly coming fi'om our private road. That road
is designated at 15 miles per hour. There's kids, dogs, you knoxv and now you're going to put another
sort of section there. I'm a little concerned about that. I mean in regards to shared cost because it's a
private road. You knotv the association, our association dues go towards maintaining that road. That
goes is ah'eady narrower than a COmlnonly city street. That's why tve have no parking on it. On the
street at all. And also, I mean there's 168 units in there now. My concern is that if it becomes destined
for medium density, that it would be townhomes or something of that nature and the faCade of whatever
was the developer, would be close to what exists there now. Because if it's completely different, you're
talking, if you're talking 8 units. 12 units, however many units you're talking about in that land, it would
just look odd. Then is that road, Baneberry West going to extend into Galpin?
Gel'lerous: No.
Aanenson: No. That's why it was extended.
Matt Bosin: Because obviously out of that developlnent, with they're coming right down that private
road to try to catch Arboretum Boulevard.
BuF[on: That won't happen.
Matt Bosin: Those are my concerns. I sort of agree with what I'm hearing here is that it be low density
PUD. I don't want to see it go from medium and then have a developer come in and all of a sudden come
for a variance and say, I want it high development. Until there was an actual plan there, I don't see the
need to, without further investigation, rezoning or so forth here. Thank you.
Burton: Okay, thanks. Anybody else?
Sacchet moved, Kind seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed.
Burton: Any more discussion or I think we kind of had...
Aanenson: We'll waive our 60 day.
54
Planning Commission Meeting - February 20, 2001
Burton: Do you want to make a motion?
Sacchet: Move to table.
Blackowiak: Second.
Sacchet moved, Blackowiak seconded to table the Land Use Map Amendment request for the
property located at 7305 Galpin Boulevard. All voted in favor and the motion carried
unanimously 5 to 0.
NEW BUSINESS.
Breton: Kate, any new business?
Aanenson: Thank you. Did you get this in 3,our packet?
Sacchet: Yes.
Aanenson: Great. There were two articles. I'm hoping that you, if you haven't had a chance to look at,
tile one on architecture on...
Blackowiak: Tile photos?
Aanenson: Public libraries and park buildings and how important they were. And then there was a ~eat
reticle on design guidelines too so if you get a chance. I 'know you just got it and you have a lot of other
reading material but this is a good magazine and I hope you get a chance, at least glean it a little bit.
Breton: Okay, thanks.
Aanenson: I want to tell you on the March 6th meeting we do have a variance and a couple of code
amendments. Again those are precipitated by landscaping requirements.
Burton: Excuse me, can you guys go out in the hall please.
Aanenson: Then so xve will have a meeting then on March 6th. And the just a reminder, the March 5th
you're ~neeting with the City Council at 7:30. I'll send you another e-mail just to remind you.
Blackowiak: Please do.
Aanenson: They will be interviewing. I think they're going to break down the interview for filling the
one vacancy now, because there's a time crunch to do all the interviews and then maybe wait 2 weeks
and do the vacancy for the commissioners that expire. Filling Craig's seat first. Getting those interviews
going and then do the additional interviews that need to take place. So, we're setting those up.
Kind: So no decision has been made there?
55
Planning Commission Meeting- February 20, 2001
Aanenson: No. But it is scheduled for their next council meeting. As part of their xvork session they
would be doing interviews, but the critical one they're trying to get filled is the vacancy one and then the
other ones don't actually become void until April 1~t but we'll get those undervcay too.
Blacko~viak' So will they use the same pool of applicants that we've ah'eady interviewed?
Aanenson: Yes. Then on the February 12th meeting, Pulte yeas tabled til March 12th. The Crestview
subdivision was approved. That was the lot off of Galpin.
Kind' How about Benson? The variance.
Sacchet: That was approved.
Kind: All approved?
Aanenson: Yes.
Generous: They limited it to a rambler.
Sacchet: Oh they took it down from tile tower?
Aanenson: Yeah. to a rambler. Meeting all the setbacks,
Generous: Setbacks with tile impervious surface variance.
Sacchet: That makes sense.
Kind: \Ve considered doing that too.
Aanenson: That's all I had.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Uli Sacchet noted the Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting
dated January 16, 2001 as presented.
OPEN DISCUSSION.
Kind: I have a couple items for' open discussion. Lakeshore setbacks. It's come up a couple times
recently xvhere the neighboring structures are so much further back that you just couldn't possibly meet
the average between them. I'm wondering ifvce should take a look at the language of our ordinance for
that so that, so we have some clarity on ;vhat to do there. Painted block is another thing I'd like staff to
take a look at it. As to whether that's allowed in our city or not. I couldn't find anything in the
ordinance book about it and that was pm1 of my rationale for inside the U. Making sure that that's rock
face block and not just painted cinder block. Because the new CSM buildings on Lake Drive East have
painted block inside there and I couldn't find anything in our' ordinance that actually prohibits that and
I'm wondering if we should take a look at prohibiting that. Let's see. Oh, also in om' ordinance book
there's, I couldn't find anything where vce put this limitation on tile Ashling Meadows. That it can only
use the upland for lot size calculations and you cannot include wetlands as a part of your lot. I couldn't
find any ordinance in there that says that.
56
Planning Commission Meeting - February 20, 2001
Aanenson: If you look under density, there's a net and a gross and it tells you what the definition is. If
you look under the definition section of net and gross density.
Kind: Does it say in there that you cannot use the wetland?
Aanenson: Yes. Also in the comprehensive plan, when xve went through our code amendment with the
Met Council, because some communities count densities on gross. We're one of the few that do net and
we specifically leave in our comp plan for the Met Council, we took out right-of-way. Public. If it's
private, it counts with your density, and wetlands.
Kind: Okay. I'll maybe give you a call and find, because I couldn't find it in there and I saxv that staff's
recommendation xvas for that and the applicant was willing to do it so I think it was great but I just
wanted to make sure that we have that in our ordinance. And then the other question I have is, We have
out' staffthat's 15,000 square feet and then the next size up from that is 2 ½ acres. Can we have
SOlnething inbetween?
Generous: You can have a 1 acre RSF.
Kind: Is there such a thing? I mean could we create something like that?
Sacchet: There's no reason why it has to be limited to.
Kind: To one or the other. Itjusf seems like a huge difference between tile txvo, and I'd be interested in
staff's perspective.
Aanenson: If it's something xvhere you're putting municipal services, I just don't think that's going to
happen based on the land values. The xvay the current.zoning says is We allow the compression of the 1
pet' 10 still applies if you're outside the MUSA. You can go as small as 15,000 if you-can get the 2
drainfield sites. So there is flexibility. We've seen some that are under 1 acre. The rest in an outlot until
such time as they can get services. But for a 1 acre, you can certainly do it. I think in these lots, if you
look at the average on this one, which by the way was the staff's recommendation to do a straight
subdivision. That suggestion wasn't made by the developer. And I think he agrees there were problems.
That if you looked at that average lot size, which I don't have in front of me right now, those were larger.
Again it depends on...
Kind: They're all 20,000 or more.
Aanenson: Right, and the prototype of those homes, you can see the one he put up there, are a little bit
bigger. Not always 60 x 60. That one was what? 40 x 80? Yeah, so again a little bit different so they're
coming itl with a different style. Again they're trying to get different market points too. But yeah, I
think they were a little bit larger. Maybe closer to 20 average.
Kind: That's it. Okay.
Sacchet: A question is that Whitetail Cove thing, is that gone or is it going to come back?
Aanenson: The applicant is working with the developer to take that entire property out. If he could, they
have a contingency they would like to keep it as one lot. The developer. If he can find a buyer for the
one lot then it would remain as one lot.
57
Planning Commission Meeting- February 20, 2001
Sacchet: Get a quantity discount for getting that big of lot.
Aanenson: An expensive one lot.
Blackoxviak: That's a nice lot.
Aanenson: Very nice lot.
Sacchet: In the same context.
Aanenson: So excuse me, just a follow-up. So i think their contingency runs out somewhere in August
so if it doesn't get sold it will probably come back for a subdivision.
Sacchet: In the same context, our resource depmXment on a few things, like in this context also and one
of the other things we looked at tonight, are there any aspects we need to Nook into based on the points
that were found by the Paulson's?
Aanenson: I don't believe so.
Sacchet: Sure appreciate your support.
Burton: Okay, an?thing else?
Chairman Burton adjourned the Planning Commission meeting at 9:35 p.m.
Submitted by Kate Aanenson
Community Development Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim
58