1b3 Zoning Ordinance AmendmentsCITYOF
CHAN NEN
{90 CiO, Center Drive, PO Box' 147
Chanhassen, Min,esota 55317
Pho,e 612.937.1900
General Fax 612. 937. 5739
' Engineeri,glax 612.93Z9152
Public SafeO, Fax 612. 934.2524
II~b www. ci. chanhasse,.mn, us
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Scott Botcher, City Manager
FROM: Planning Department
DATE' May 14, 2001
RE'
Zoning Ordinance Amendments
SUMMARY
Staff is proposing changes to standards in the parking and loading section of the
ordinance to eliminate conflicts between the city ordinance and state requirements
(handicap parking) as well as conflicts within the city ordinance (drive isle width)
Sec20-1124 Required number of on-siteparMng spaces (1)OO One (1)
handicapped parking stall shall bc placed for cach fifty (50) stalls. Handicapped
parking spaces shall bc in compliance with thc Uniform Building Code and state
la;:'. Accessible park#tg spaces shall be in compliance with the Minnesota State
Building Code.
Discussion: The State Building Code requires handicapped parking stalls be
provided for each 25 parking stalls. The zoning ordinance requires one stall for
each fifty stalls. The State Building Code regulates handicapped parking. The
amendment will not state a standard but will reference the State Building Code.
Section 20-1118 Computing requirements.
20-1118(a) **Aisles which arc not between two (2) rows of ninety degree angle
parking spaces may bc twenty two (22)fcct wide.
There is a conflict regarding minimum drive aisle widths. Section 20-1011
requires that a minimum width of 26 feet be provided for two-way traffic in
business, industrial or office districts and 24 feet in multi-family districts. It is
staff's recommendation that drive aisle widths meet the standards in section 20-
1101. To eliminate the conflict, staff is recommending the deletion of the
section.
PLANNING COMMISSION UPDATE
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on April 17, 2001, to review the
proposed ordinance amendment. The Planning CommiSsion voted unanimously
to recommend approval of the proposed amendment.
3e Ci~. of Chanhassen. A growing communi~, with clean lakes, quality schook a charmin~ &wntown, thrivini businesses, and beautiful ~arks. A ~reat ~)lace to live, work, and /)lav.
Scott Botcher, City Manager
May 14, 2001
Page 2
RECOMMENDATION
"Staff recommends the City Council approve the following code amendments:
Delete section 20-1118 (a) "**" and the corresponding note.
Delete the first sentence of $ec20-1 !24 (1)09"
ATTACHMENTS 1. Amending Ordinance
2. Planning Commission Minutes of 4/17/01
g:\planXbg~zoa 4-17-01 parking.doc
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 20 OF THE
CHANHASSEN CITY CODE, THE ZONING ORDINANCE
The City Council of the City of Chanhassen ordains:
Section 1. Section 20-1124, Required number of on-site parking spaces, hereby
amended by deleting (1) f. and replacing it with the following:
Sec. 20-1124 Required number of on-site parking spaces (1)(f) One (1) handicapped
parking stall shall be placed for each fifty (50) stalls. Handicapped parking spaces shall be in
compliancc with thc Uniform Building Code and state law. Accessible parking spaces shall be
in compliance with the Minnesota State Building Code.
Section 2. Section 20-1118, Computing requirements, hereby amended by deleting
the (a) ** footnote as follows:
**Aisles which are not between two (2) rows of ninety degT'ce angle parking spaces may be
lu'enty two (22)feet wide.
Section 3. This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and publication.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Chanhassen City Council this
2001.
of
ATTEST:
Scott A. Botcher, City Manager
Linda C. Jansen, Mayor
(Published in the Chanhassen Villager on )
Planning Commission Meeting - April 17, 2001
Aanenson: The City Attorney did review these so, I understand where you're having a little bit of
ambiguity and maybe that can be enhanced by adding the word basement somewhere in the drawing or
another word that defines the space that we're trying to talk about.
Blackowiak: Alrighty. Well with that, can I get a motion.
Sacchet: Yes Madam Chair. I move that we, the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City
Council of the following code amendments, as defined with the added that it's, then it is considered in
the story definition. And I would ask that staff puts a reference to the drawing. Kind of link the two
together a little clear, because the drawing does explain it. The language if we have hooked in the
language, that would be fine. That's my motion.
Blackowiak: Okay, is there a second?
Sidney: Second.
Sacchet moved, Sidney seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval to the City
Council the following code amendments, (with clarification by the City Attorney of the term
basement):
Section 20-1 Definitions, add:
Body shop is an establishment primarily engaged in the repair of auto bodies, automotive painting and
refinishing.
Standing Seam Roof is a deck roof consisting of flat metal joined by.vertical or overlapping seams.
Story means that portion of a building included between the surface of any floor and the surface of the
floor next above it. Or if there is no floor above it, then the space between the floor and the ceiling next
above it and including a basement used for the principal use. If the height (H) of the basement is more
'than 12 feet at any point, of if the height (h) is more than 6 feet for more than 50 percent of the perimeter
of the building then it is considered a story. This definition refers to nonresidential properties only.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 7 to 0.
Blackowiak: This will go to City Council with our comments on the definition.
PUBLIC HEARING:
CONSIDER AMENDMENT TO THE CITY CODE CHAPTER 20, WETLAND BUFFER
STRIPS.
Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item.
Blackowiak: Okay commissioners, any questions? Uli.
Saechet:. Yeah Madam Chair, real quick question. So the purpose is that we control the amount of
impervious :surface. I mean that's how it says in your language. Now, we run into that before is a deck
impervious surface or not so basically we won't get into that swamp anymore? Deck is part of it and
that's that?
Planning Commission Meeting - April 17, 2001
Generous: Well a deck is a structure and a structure must meet the setback.
Sacchet: Okay. Okay.
Generous: A playground equipment would be a structure. That would have to meet the.
Sacchet: Okay, even if it has holes for the water to go through.
Generous: Right.
Sa¢chet: I just want to make sure we're clear about that, thanks.
Blackowiak: Okay. Any questions?
Sidney: Yes Madam Chair. I guess I should have looked in the code book but, like if somebody would
want to put in a volleyball court or something of that nature, an asphalt paved portion and by the buffer
strip, is that considered a structure or how do we address something like that?
Generous: They don't come to us for permits on that.
Aanenson: I don't believe that for the sand structure, sand blanket, something like that.
Sidney:. Pardon?
Aanenson: I don't believe for a sand blanket you'd need a permit. You need a permit if you're putting in
a fence. A dog run. That sort of thing.
Sidney:. Something like that would be okay to do?
Aanenson: Yes.
Sidney:. Really?
Black0wiak: I don't think I'm, you asked specifically asphalt. Paved.
Sidney:. Definition of a structure.
Aanenson: This ordinance is addressing structure setback. We started going down the path of
impervious. This ordinance doesn't talk about this. This is strictly talking about accessory structures.
That's a separate issue.
Sidney: So structure is not, doesn't encompass then an asphalt, paved or anything like that? I guess I'm
trying to understand when you say structure.
^anenson: No. No. I think the building code defines a structure as something over 2 feet in height or a
foot and a half in height or something.
Sidney:. Oh okay, like a fence.
Planning Commission Meeting - April 17, 2001
Aanenson: You may need a permit because you're increasing your impervious surface but that's separate
from this topic right here.
Sidney: Okay, so it's more focused toward decks and sheds and things like that?
Aanenson: Correct. Swingsets, because we have that come up all the time. Someone wants to put,
we've had people that do batting cages in the buffer strip so there was ambiguity in the language
regarding what's a structure and what's a setback. What can and cannot be in the primary, secondary
setback. The buffer strip, excuse me and the setback. So that was the intent of trying to clarify this. It's
separate from the impervious calculation. But when a deck is attached to the house, it's considered part
of the principal structure and that must meet the setback.
Sidney: Does the city, or do we have any protection against like what I was saying, if somebody wants to
put asphalt right down into, no you're saying?
Aanenson: Well, then we would look at the impervious. The impervious. You know we've had people
that want to do woodchips and a batting cage or a dog run or something like that...case by case basis.
Claybaugh: I guess what you're referencing is two different things. For the setback, that's pretty much a
stand alone requirement and depending on what they're putting in, they may or may not have to conform
to the hard cover requirements.
Aanenson: Correct.
Claybaugh: So that's where the language for the impervious surface is, okay.
Blackowiak: Any further questions? Okay, this item is open for a public hearing. If anybody would like
to come and make comments about this item, please step up to the microphone and state your name and
address for the record. Seeing no one, I will close the public hearing. Commissioners, why don't we
start down at this end this time. Do you have any comments?
Karlovich: I don't have any comments on this one. It looks straight forward to me.
Blackowiak: Okay.
Kind: Madam Chair, I do have one question I thought of as we were going along here. I looked up the
definition for accessory use or structure, and it says it means a use or structure subordinate and serving
the principal use or structure on the same lot and clearly and customarily incidental thereto. If I had a
swing set, I'm not sure if I would be allowed with that definition to put it in the buffer strip or not. I
guess I would have to assume no.
Aanenson: No. Not in the buffer.
Generous: And that's in the wetland setback.
Kind: I shouldn't say the buffer, I'm sorry. In the setback. In the wetland setback.
Generous: You can't encroach in that. That's an accessory structure.
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
WORK SESSION
MAY 14, 2001
Mayor Jansen called the work session to order at 5:35 p.m.
COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Jansen, Councilman Labatt and Councilman Peterson
COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: Councilman Ayotte and Councilman Kroskin
STAFF PRESENT: Scott Botcher, Todd Gerhardt, and Bruce DeJong
PUBLIC PRESENT: Steve Berquist
A. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TASK FORCE.
Scott Botcher presented the staff report on this item and stated that council needed to decide the make-up
of the task force and if the Council wanted that to be part of the ordinance. Councilman Peterson stated
he was comfortable with the make-up of the committee as presented by staff, but was concerned with the
Mayor being on this committee along with everything else she is involved with. If she could commit to
everything. Mayor Jansen stated she would welcome volunteers but would be on the task force initially
to get it started. Councilman Labatt expressed concern with equal representation from the business
community, i.e. the hotel industry. The big hotels being represented equally with the smaller hotels.
Mayor Jansen stated she would like the Economic Development Task Force in ordinance form. Scott
Botcher suggested having an annual outside audit for the group and stated that the item would appear on
the agenda at the next City Council meeting.
·
B. PLANNING COMMISSION/PARK & RECREATION COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS.
The City Council members agreed on appointing Bruce Feik to the Planning Commission. Mayor Jansen
asked if the council wanted to make a decision on the Park and Recreation Commission appointments at
the City Council meeting with only 3 council members present. Councilman Labatt said he would like to
make the decision. There was discussion of the different candidates. Mayor Jansen stated she would
like to see more community involvement and possibly creating shorter terms to allow more people the
opportunity to serve. Councilman Peterson stated he didn't disagree with the idea of cycling new people
in when there was a large number of candidates. Councilman Labatt stated he was in favor of staying
with the people with experience on the commission.
C. QUARTERLY FINANCIAL REPORT.
Bruce DeJong explained the report to the council and passed out the investment report. He stated
revenues were down slightly because single family building permits were down, but that a large
commercial project had brought up the revenues. He stated that interest earnings were likely to be down
this year because of the economy.
DISCUSSION OF THE AGENDA.
Chanhassen Work Session - May 14, 2001
Mayor Jansen stated that item l(i) would need to be pulled off the agenda as it needed a 4/5 vote to pass.
Mark Anderson from Lundgren had requested that item 1 (f) be pulled from the Consent Agenda for
discussion.
Councilman Peterson stated he would like to discuss the process for the library review and that the
Planning Commission be involved in the process. He also stated he had gotten calls regarding the high
water on the area lakes and asked if the city had a no wake ordinance. The City does not have a no wake
ordinance. Todd Gerhardt explained that enforcement would be a problem with Carver County only
having one water patrol available for the whole county. Councilman Labatt said the City should talk to
the County about hiring more water patrol for Chanhassen. Mayor Jansen stated she would favor more
signage and education versus more enforcement. Councilman Peterson asked if you could enforce
without an ordinance. He stated he would like to discuss this item at the City Council meeting. Mayor
Jansen asked if the city needed a stricter ordinance or more enforcement.
Councihnan Peterson and Mayor Jansen discussed the process for the library, and whether public
hearings would be held at the Planning Commission. Todd Gerhardt stated that all site plans require
public hearing. Councihnan Peterson was concerned that prior to this all public buildings were exempt
from having to go through the city review process. Todd Gerhardt stated that this was a new regulation
that all site plans receive public hearings.
Mayor Jansen adjourned the work session at 6:30 p.m.
Submitted by Scott Botcher
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 14, 2001
Mayor Jansen called the City Council meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was opened with
the Pledge to the Flag.
COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Jansen, Councilman Labatt and Councilman Peterson
COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: Councilman Ayotte and Councilman Kroskin
STAFF PRESENT: Scott Botcher, Todd Gerhardt, Roger Knutson, Bruce DeJong, Kate Aanenson, and
Matt Saam
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None.
CONSENT AGENDA:
Mayor Jansen: Are there any council people who have items on the agenda that they would like to have
pulled for discussion or any changes to the agenda? The consent agenda.
Councihnan Peterson: Madam Mayor, I'd move that we remove 1 (i) on the consent agenda.
Mayor Jansen: We're tabling l(i). And then we did get a request to pull for comments and discussion
1 (f). So if I could have a motion to approve the consent agenda please.
Councilman Peterson moved, Councilman Labatt seconded to approve the following Consent
Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations:
a. Resolution//2001-21: Approve Proclamation Declaring the week of May 20-26, 2001 as
National Public Works Week.
b. Resolution//2001-22: Receive Feasibility Report; Call Public Hearing for Quinn Road, Project
01-02.
c. Resolution//2001-23: Receive Feasibility Report Amendment; Call Public Hearing for
Extension of Utilities to Dogwood Road, Project 00-01-1.
d. Resolution//2001-24: Approve Addendum to Feasibility Study for Century Boulevard; Call for
Public Hearing, Project 97-1C.
e. Resolution//2001-25: Approve Plans & Specifications for Century Boulevard Street & Utility
Improvements; Authorize Advertisement for Bids, Project 97-1C.
g. Approve Revision to Consultant Services Contract for the Wellhead Protection Plan, PW379.
h. Approve Consultant Agreements for Construction Inspection Services, PW135.
j. Arboretum Villages, Pulte Homes:
City Council Meeting - May 14, 2001
1)
2)
Approval of Final Plat
Approval of Development Contract/PUD Agreement
Approval of Supplemental Agreement for Extension of West 78th Street
k. Approval of Bills.
Approval of Minutes:
- City Council Work Session Minutes dated April 23, 2001
- City Council Minutes dated April 23, 2001
-Board of Review and Equalization dated April 23, 2001
- City Council Minutes dated May 3, 2001
Receive Commission Minutes:
- Planning Commission Minutes dated April 17, 2001
m. Approval of Contract for Architect's Services with MS&R, Library Project.
n. Approval of Employee Incentive Program.
o. Resolution #2001-26: Approval of Fee Schedule for Misdemeanor Offenses.
Resolution #2001-27: Approval of Amendment to Resolution Authorizing Condemnation of
Easements, BC 7 & BC 8 Project.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 3 to 0.
FJ
AWARD OF BIDS FOR BC-7 & BC-8 UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS; PROJECT 00-01
(CONTINGENT UPON APPROVAL OF ITEM 1J).
Mayor Jansen: We have Mike Anderson here from Lundgren Brothers who would like to speak to this
issue.
Mark Anderson: Thank you Honorable Mayor, members of the council. It's Mark Anderson and I'm
with Lundgren Brothers. We're talking about the sanitary sewer easement that runs through an Outlot K
of Longacres. It's a piece of property that Lundgren owns. We have been in discussions with the staff
regarding the alignment of this easement for many, many months, going back into January where we
wrote our written objection to the current alignment. We also attended the open house. We've had a
number of meetings with staff and so forth. The problem is at this point that we're under the opinion that
the alignment that you have is probably the most costly alignment to the city and also that which is the
slowest in terms of getting the result. It seems as though the city wants to build this project right away.
Have it bid and have it start. Unfortunately, you can't build on it until you have an easement and at this
point I do not have approval from corporate to grant that easement. So you want to proceed but you can't
proceed and I would like to see if we can't try to hammer out some sort of compromise. The problem
that we have is that the current alignment has a component to it that hurts the usability of the land. And
with that there, there are compensation awards associated with that because we're in condemnation mode
here. You people have served us with a condemnation on this. It has another 60 days to run. Until that
60 days is up you can't use, you can't come onto the land. You know we'd like to settle this matter very
quickly. Come to an agreement on the alignment and just move forward with it, but at this point we've
not been able to do that with staff. Every attempt that we've made, we've hired our engineer. We've
City Council Meeting - May 14, 2001
done alternative alignments. Every suggestion that we have made has been rejected. We thought we had
an approval before this matter was approved by this body for the condemnation. I was here that night. I
had faxed a letter to your engineer who assured me that everything was okay and so I did not make a
comment that night and then it turns out that there were a number of objections made to our letter and we
ended up back in the same place, which is a point of disagreement so. I would expect that you'd want to
move ahead and keep your process moving with bids but I would ask that, if this body could keep the
negotiations going with us so we can see if we can't resolve this amicably for both the city as well as
Lundgren. Thank you.
Mayor Jansen: Thank you. At this point Mr. Botcher I had faxed or e-mailed to you some of these
questions and if appropriate, having maybe staff give a little bit of background for council, though Steve
is no longer sitting here.
Scott Botcher: He got paged from work so he stepped out.
Mayor Jansen: Oh okay.
Scott Botcher: I've shared those with Matt and Kate. I guess they're willing to address what they can off
the list.
Matt Saam: Sure. Mayor, council members. First off I should say Teresa Burgess, the City Engineer
who's on maternity leave has worked intimately with this project. I've picked it up in her absence so I'm
not in tune on all the issues like Kate is but I would say that the proposed alignment that is shown, Teresa
has worked on and we believe it is in the best interest of the city. I'll touch on just a few of the issues
Mark brought up. Cost. In the e-mail you had mentioned something about moving the road alignment, or
excuse me, moving the sewer alignment up to be in line with their proposed road for their plat. If we
would do that the sewer would need to be deeper. Typically speaking deeper sewers cost more and right
now the sewer aligmnent which goes through their property is approximately 10 to 18 feet deep. If we
would move it up by their road, I'm sure it would be 20 to 30 feet deep. Significant cost savings is
shown by the current alignment. And then also the construction time that Mark touched on. If we would
move the alignment up into the road, the sewer would have to be deeper, as ! said. That would lead to a
longer construction time. Obviously it takes longer to dig deeper. There's other issues. Bigger trenches,
that sort of thing so those are a couple of the reasons that I see for the proposed alignment being in the
best interest of the city.
Mayor Jansen: Okay. Council, I don't know if you have any additional questions or information that you
would need at this point. I'm confident that staff has worked diligently with Lundgren's representatives
and I would feel comfortable moving this forward and again if there's any negotiating that still needs to
occur, I'm confident that staff will work closely with Lundgren to get that accomplished. Any additional
comments from council?
Councihnan Peterson: No, I would agree.
Mayor Jansen: Okay. IfI could have a motion then to approve this agenda item.
Councilman Labatt: Move approval.
Mayor Jansen: And a second?
City Council Meeting- May 14, 2001
Councilman Peterson: Second.
Resolution #2001-28: Councilman Labatt moved, Councilman Peterson seconded to award the
bids for BC-7 & BC-8 Utility Improvements; Project 00-01 per staff's recommendations. All
voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 3 to 0.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS:
Mayor Jansen: Moving on on the agenda, we are at visitor presentations. Council time allows for
residents at this time to bring motions or issues forward for council consideration, though no discussion
would occur on those issues this evening. If there is anyone present who would like to speak to the
council, they can approach the podium. I am going to assume that there is some interest in the current
status of our council member Kroskin and that announcement xvas in fact in the paper last week that we
have been, xve have received a letter of a temporary leave of absence as he works through some issues
and I am currently actively xvorking on bringing this situation to as quick a resolution as we can
accomplish so that tile city moves forward with our business. And I'm seeing a great deal of cooperation
in that regard and should have some updates as we move forward. But with that, if you could state your
name and address for the record.
Steven Berquist: My name is Steven Berquist. I live at 7207 Frontier Trail and it's indicated here that
you need a reason for my coming to speak before you tonight. Tile topic that I'm going to speak on is
honesty and integrity. My speaking before you this evening will be one of the most heart wrenching
things I've ever done. I come before you to put into the public record my concern for this community
and my concerns for the integrity of this city council.
Mayor Jansen: If you'll excuse me for one.
Steven Berquist: In last w, eek's Lakeshore News and Chanhassen Villager a letter written by Councilman
Labatt.
Mayor Jansen: Excuse me Mr. Berquist if. Excuse me.
Steven Berquist: In it he asked for Mark Kroskin's resignation.
Mayor Jansen: Could you cut the microphone please.
Mayor Jansen asked that the council take a short recess at this point in the meeting.
Mayor Jansen: If there is anyone else who would like to speak under visitor presentations on a separate
topic, you can come to the podium and state your name and address for the record. Seeing no one,
moving along.
APPOINTMENTS TO THE PARK & RECREATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING
COMMISSION.
Mayor Jansen: Do I have a motion council?
Councilman Peterson: Steve, you're better at pronouncing tile name than I am.
City Council Meeting - May 14, 2001
Mayor Jansen: We have one Planning Commission appointment and two Park and Rec Commission
appointments.
Councihnan Labatt: Well I'll take the Planning Commission first. I move that we appoint Bruce Feik to
the Planning Commission.
Councihnan Peterson: Second.
Councilman Labatt moved, Councilman Peterson seconded to appoint Bruce Feik to the Planning
Commission. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 3 to 0.
Mayor Jansen: Can I have a motion for the two Park and Rec Commission appointments please.
Councihnan Labatt: Just preface with a quick statement. While I was itl the minority at tile work session
discussion about this, I was in favor of earlier stability and not make any changes but was in a minority
since I can only pronounce one guy's name I'll say it. So I move that we approve Jack Spizale and
Tho~nas Kelly.
Councihnan Peterson: Second.
Councilman Labatt moved, Councilman Peterson seconded to appoint Jack Spizale and Thomas
Kelly to the Park and Recreation Commission. All voted in favor and the motion carried
unanimously 3 to 0.
LIBRARY BUILDING REPORT, BARRY PETTIT, MS&R.
Mayor Jansen: I think I saw Barry Pettit. Yep, there we go. We have the representatives from MS&R
with us this evening. Hello.
Barry Pettit: Hi. We've got an interesting presentation. We haven't a clue what we're doing. This is
really shooting from the hip and so I'm not sure.
Councihnan Peterson: This is non-billable time then?
Barry Pettit: We're just here for the heck of it, you know. And the reason I bring this up, or start the
presentation, whatever it's going to be in this fashion, is we actually, we don't have a lot to show but we
want to give you an update and we're actually excited about what we have to show, although there's not
much here. But to get to where we are actually is a lot more effort than you can imagine. It's more about
internal dialogue and conflicts and design, and it's kind of the way we work as an office, but I do think
what has jelled out of what you're going to see is important. We were going to draw on it but we won't
now. What we have is we have two site plans, and actually they're really quite similar. One to the other.
They may not look that way but we're excited about where they are. About how they break down. How
they work on the site and this is where we're going to go forward from these. We've got a building
committee meeting tomorrow to go through this in more detail but we thought that we'd give you an
overview of how the building is strategically going to sit on the site. It's a big deal obviously when you
figure that out because it begins to inform so much more of the work that comes together. So having said
that, we don't have another clear thing we can put over this? The last time that we were together with the
council, I think the big issue was the fact that the building was going to try to come out and engage the
street and the idea that that is so much about the planning that Chanhassen is about. Trying to get the
City Council Meeting- May 14, 2001
character of the buildings come out to thc street as opposed to sit back and create either great front yards
or parking lots. And so we're trying to create the same idea. I think some of the key strategies here, first
of all as you can see we've gained an extra 87 parking spaces which is exactly what we need with this
building size right now. So it's 87 more than are on the site. Where we've gained that is we've extended
the slight parking deck. This dashed line right here really represents the edge of the parking on the upper
lot right now. We've extended the parking deck over that and then there's parking underneath. What
that does is it forms, if you will, sort of an architectural edge to the site. Sort ora gateway in from
Kerber. We've got primary handicap parking underneath here. It will be covered. It gets us into the
building which is here. And then we have a, down from the deck is a stairway that comes down to this
courtyard and basically drops you off at the logia, covered logia that takes you into tile building. City
Hall is here. We define an internal courtyard if you will here with a drop off. Giving opportunities also,
I think one of the pluses xvith this is the opportunities it gives for city hall to change over time as well. If
it expands. I know there was a conversation one time that city hall had some plans to actually reorganize
internally xvith a new entry that xvould come in in the center of the building and tile stair would ascend up
into tile main body of the building. Those kind of opportunities. Again then the extension ora turn
around in tile parking along there. The xvay this building breaks down it's, one of the other things that is
really critical is that it's sort of, the large sort of collection area is very high ceiling, very open simple
space. Great light coming in. Both daylight. Then also the lighting, tile natural lighting. The way that
works. This is basically the children's area off on this wing. Children reading room. Children's reading
room that sits out on this flint if you will. Bearing in mind that the elevation difference from tile fi'ont
door, which is about here, to probably down here is as much as 7 or 8 feet. So tile building does kind of
just come out on this level as tile grade drops axvay. So that at this corner this outdoor area that we're
contemplating actually sits up on this flint. It can be an outdoor reading area w, ith a railing around it.
The kids can get out on that and read and have story times and so forth. This also is an internal story
room can be a special piece that architecturally different in terms of it's form but also in terms of maybe
a little bit more playful with respect to color and so forth. The other parts of the building is a loxver
elevations. Building heights along the sides so that we, that we are a little bit more compatible with the
scale issue. Human scale issues on this side. Higher building and then breaking this fagade up so it's
Ioxv as well. And I'll just show you real quick, how the building breaks up oil the interior. And both
these plans are very similar in this way, and these are just very general breakdowns on how they work.
Again the meeting room is out in this area so it becomes one of the key, the first sort of design piece as
you see. The meeting room can be used on off hours when the library is closed or when the library is
open it can be used by a lot of different folks so it becomes a much more ora public area than just use for
the library. And so the idea that that would be out at the fi'ont door because it's use is beyond just a
normal library use. Staff area is back in this area. Service comes off of here. Children's is off to this
edge with a children's story time room and the basic collection is off on this pall of the building so you
have lounges and periodicals and reading and so forth along the perimeter of the building. Coffee shop is
oil the inside. Teen area for young adults and so forth would be a little bit, would be put back in a corner.
Still very visible from the interior but it always works nice if they feel like they've got their own space.
That's the way that breaks down. Again, this is the patio. There's probably about a plus 7 feet above tile
sidewalk there.
Councilman Labatt: Barry, can you give me a scale of that hallway leading to the circular reading room.
The corridor.
Barry Pettit: It's 12 feet wide.
Councihnan Labatt: 12 foot. And why 12 foot and why not a little bit wider so you could have a little bit
more?
City Council Meeting- May 14, 2001
Barry Pettit: We chose a module that was going off some skylights and some bay extensions. It certainly
can be wider than that. Given the use of the room, it's not a lot of people constantly flowing in. It's
either a lot of kids trailing in or a lot of kids trailing out. We may even study making it narrower and
lower so that it comes down to a kid's scale. It may only be a 7 foot ceiling. It may be very narrow and
that's the idea of almost this sort of special passageway that brings them to a story room. So it's still up
in the air in terms of what it really becomes. Does it become a room or does it become in essence ahnost
a secret passage? But the point of it is, it all leads to that room out on the point. Let's see, what else?
The idea too that with the stairways here we're sort of excited about the potential of that. The stairways
coming off the deck has really almost a sculpted kind of piece and so that when we see that, the railing
design, the stair itself, the orientation of it is slightly rotated and the way that the lighting would work
along that and again the intricate detailing, ornate detailing of the railing that the stair becomes a special
object in the space itself. And then into the building through the logia. And the critical issue is being
able to see the idea of entry from either side. So that works out pretty well there. Now the other.
Scott Botcher: Barry, can I ask a quick question?
Barry Pettit: Sure.
Scott Botcher: The tan stuff is all concrete, correct?
Barry Pettit: Right now it's just generally showing surface but that's what it means.
Scott Botcher: Okay. How much green space is left with that plan?
Barry Pettit: This is, you know I think the calculation, maybe going back to this, I think this calculation
is still about 40, it probably works out to be just about an acre in this area. But I think it's a good point. I
forgot to mention is that basically what we've done then is concentrated the green space out here. It also
gives us an opportunity to extrude this building out in the future it needs to do that, and that's a very easy
transition structurally and economically. But that's a good question about the tan being concrete. The
tan stuff right now represents not necessarily concrete but away from the lawn. At the last public
meeting a lot of examples of some of the possibilities of what this tan stuff could be other than concrete
were brought up and were reacted to pretty well. And you can see things that began to erode out of here
that, whether they become planters in here or just trees in a grid within this area and so the whole level of
development that needs to come in on this. Now one of the hybrids of this, and actually it could be a cool
idea. You've got to bear with us on this, is the kids reading room. Now this is our abstracted maple leaf
and we're sort of fascinated by it. It's sort of a, the idea would be that there's a series of, you get a series
of solid planes connected by glazing. So the form actually would become some abstracted maple leaf,
which is you know the symbol of the town, and then the views out would be sort of scenes or cracks in
the wall if you will. Again it's an idea that we just started playing around with and it needs more. We
either retreat from it or try to refine it. But it's part of the, whether or not it's the maple leaf or whatever
form it ends of taking, it's this piece out here is kind of a little jewel out on the comer. An identity piece
for the library. So it's kind of an interesting opportunity again as we need to play with it and find out
how abstract it gets and where it goes. So that was that. Now the other idea that was kind of interesting,
it looks a little bit more rigid but I'm kind of excited about this one too. And this is where the building is
basically a very simple rectangle and it's a very high volume. The little blue areas are skylights in it. It's
a great open space. Light coming in both in terms of clear story as well as windows on the perimeter.
Great natural and great artificial lighting. A very sort of powerful space in terms of it's scale. And what
happens along West 78th then is a series of small buildings that project off the light to break the scale of it
City Council Meeting- May 14, 2001
down and that do a couple things. Number one, the xvay the green space starts to work weaving in and
out of the building. Then again the idea that the scale at West 78th is ahnost, it almost becomes village
like. A series of smaller buildings as it moves along the street. Again the same idea that we would do a
little outdoor patio. Again about 7 feet above the corner. Bring that out to the edge. Railing around it.
People being able to come out there and read on nice days. In this case, let's see. We'll just jump to this
one. This shows the way it breaks down. In terms of a meeting room, entry. Coming off the deck in
about the same way throughout the area. So that's your very highly active public area. Staff works in
behind, children's story room, reference area and reference on line with entry. Collection. Young adult
back in here. Quite study. Periodical. And then we don't know what that is but it's a pretty cool idea.
So we've got no problem with that. It's an opportunity for something. But I think the idea is that we're
fascinated by the idea of almost a villagescape if you will that's along the street. A series of smaller
objects that are extended offthe main body of the building. Again, as we said, the diagrams are very,
very similar. One from the other. There's just a difference in sort of if you will some of the perimeter
expressions and how we scale the building down and how we break it up into smaller pieces. And that's
kind of where we sit right now. This is what we're going to spend time with the building committee
tomorrow. Focusing on this. The problem we have internally is we're...puts us a little bit behind in
schedule. It's not uncommon for us to run into points along the way where internally we struggle with it.
We need to come to grips with that and I think we'll figure that out soon and then pick up the pace. But
we're excited about both schemes. It's a big building and I think it's interesting to note that as you can
see, it's basically probably 2 lA times the scale of city hall and it's all on one level. And the critical thing
with that is how do you break that down so it's notjust target score. Ho~v do you break it down in parts
that also function well as a library so that there's efficiencies with the staffing and so on and so forth and
security issues, and then the idea of the intimacy of it. Interesting balance for that. So that's kind of
where we are.
Scott Botcher: One of the things that I thought we were looking for was some direction from the council
prior to tomorrow's meeting with the building committee to get a sense of, you know is either one of
these appropriate or acceptable to you. If so, which one? And if they're both dogs, then you say that as
well.
Mayor Jansen' Actually I've got a couple of questions. And I had a meeting conflict for the last building
committee meeting so maybe I missed something as this left council and ~vent back to the public hearing
and has reached this point. But I thought where we were going in the meeting two meetings ago in the
building committee ~vas bringing together some of the key components that council had commented on
appreciating, and I'm not seeing them here. This seems to be straying towards aligning the building
along West 78th Street. It's taking more of the green space. It's adding more asphalt than I had expected.
And maybe to come at it from what I had expected was that the feedback had been to take the building
and align it closer to city hall but along the Kerber Boulevard position so it would have been tucked up
closer to city hall so we had more of a connectedness between the two buildings instead of just two
completely removed, looking like scattered buildings on the site. And instead of asphalt, going to the one
plan where we had more that center court, and I think it was Mr. Peterson, Councilman Peterson that had
liked that center court feeling between the two buildings, and I know public comment also had centered
around that court and how do we make that a functional component. The other feedback had been
looking for the street alignment and the pedestrian friendly feeling and that was Councilman Labatt's
concern. Aligning it to Kerber Boulevard so that we would have that feeling of that pedestrian look that
we're encouraging our private developers to come forward with. I'm seeing this havin.g moved away
from all of those components that we had spoken about including in a final plan, and I see a few building
committee members kind of nodding their heads. So I'm not sure if I missed something.
City Council Meeting- May 14, 2001
Barry Pettit: Okay. Well to answer a couple of those, and Pat you can jump in as well. One of the issues
was that we had a building that was a little tighter to West 78th and one of the issues was to retreat a bit
from that so that we've got a fair amount of green in the front. And that's what both these plans
recognize. Is pulling back a little bit, not significantly but I think it was more of a incremental retreat if
you will. And as opposed to getting right on, I think this is the setback here. So not going right up that
setback line but again a little bit more green. So that was number one. The issue was, the issue on
Kerber was a little bit the same as to retreat a little bit back from that and not get right up to the setback.
And what we've done along this, along Kerber is a lot of transparency with the building in terms ora
reading area out at the edge of the building and obviously openings back in the staff area and again, in
this scheme and then obviously the object formed by the story room. So there's a lot of variety and a lot
of interest along Kerber as well. So it's not, I'm not sure ifI read you right but it sounded like you were
concerned that that might be too hard of an edge.
Mayor Jansen: Not that it's too hard of an edge, but that now the building is extending into the green
space instead of being more aligned perpendicular to Kerber. It's now more aligned perpendicular to
West 78~'. So now it's extending into the green space. We've lost some green space. It's not as close to
city hall as we had originally discussed so there really isn't that connectedness between the two which I,
you know prior building committee meeting had been to maintain some sort ofa connectedness to those
two buildings and the adjacency versus having it out on the comer. I didn't hear any sort of an appeal
from the public that that was something that they definitely wanted to see, and council if anything was
trying to move it closer to city hall. Maintain the green space and have your alignment to Kerber.
Anybody who wants to jump in, if I'm off base to what you were expecting to see.
Councilman Peterson: No, you've articulated most of my position. If you augment your summary with,
you know I think having that common area in the middle of the two buildings somehow is I think in my
eyes very valuable.
Barry Pettit: The big covered area?
Councilman Peterson: Not the covered but some kind of a courtyard. I mean I haven't decided what it
would be yet but I like when you started talking about it, it got my attention in a positive way.
Mayor Jansen: So that it's more of a gathering area between the two buildings versus it being an asphalt
turn around. So that there's more green space there versus.
Scott Botcher: And that's the trade in this plan. I mean you've traded the courtyard for a cul-de-sac.
Barry Pettit: And I think, in terms of, it's sort of peeling these issues away. One of the issues in terms of
proximity, when basically in a way sort of have a ground zero at a point like this where we're bringing
people down from the ramp. Bringing people into the city hall and then of course the library so there is a
distances say from this covered area to the front door of the library. It's probably in the neighborhood of
50 feet. So in giving you a sense of scale, it's not that huge ora distance and so we're trying to negotiate
bringing all these people together but not necessarily physically connecting. The other thing that we
struggle with is, we don't have a sense of what happens in the redistribution of real estate inside city hall
once the library moves out. Who winds up moving into that? Where does the new front door to some of
those people become? Do the seniors still enter from the same place if it shifts down to the other side.
For example, if this becomes the sort of concentrated entry, then to some extent no matter how we handle
this, it's pretty difficult to find an appropriate way to weave both the buildings together.
City Council Meeting - May 14, 2001
Mayor Jansen: Well and I guess I'm not looking to weave them together as much as have them closer in
proximity to each other instead of this one out on the corner. Having it closer to city hall versus
spreading out into the green space and have.
Barry Pettit: Okay, I see. The issue is, okay a couple things. One of the issues with a green space like
this is it becomes just that. Green area. It's not like it's a usable green area simply because of the nature
of the dimension of it.
Mayor Jansen: Well it would be park space. I mean it will end up being planted. I'm not referring to it
as necessarily a fiat field.
Barry Pettit: Right. So but you know what I'm saying. It doesn't become really, this isn't like where
we're going to have any kind of an activity up in this kind of area, unless it grows dramatically. But we
were, I guess one of the things we're saying is, we were quite certain that out' marching orders were to
get this out to 78t~, more.
Councilman Peterson: Away from 78t~.
Barry Pettit: No, out to 78th. Again leave.
Mayor Jansen: No. Actually not. It wasn't to bring it out to 78th. It was to align it to Kerber and our
discussion about stepping it back a little was to step it back a little from Kerber so that you'd have a little
planting area to soften that pedestrian area. That's where we were talking about increasing that setback a
little bit. It wasn't that xve were trying to reach out to the corner. We were trying to push it back to city
hall. The whole conversation was around, I don't have.
Barry Pettit: Per our recollection or our walking axvay from the last council lneeting it seemed, or the last
council presentation there was kind of 3 or 4 different opinions all the way around which is kind ora
cross section of kind of the public forum and all the other kind of forces that play here. The scheme that,
this actually, the bulk of the building has retreated from West 78th further. This is, as far as what we'll
call the southwest scheme as far as all the schemes that had the library down in this corner. This is about
the furthest back from West 78th Boulevard. The bulk of the building. What we have done is, and again
it kind of pops back up to mark this with a differentiated or a unique piece. What you're saying though is
just the entire building would move out making it much more...
Mayor Jansen: What we had actually talked about when we got back to the building committee was that
we had one council person that would like the building sitting here with the courtyard. We had another
council person that liked it aligned on Kerber. You didn't have anyone voice wanting it smack dap in the
corner, so the building committee we talked about taking this building. Swinging it around and we could
get that courtyard feel that council was liking and the community was liking, and also align it closer to
Kerber so that we're also getting that pedestrian feel because the diagram that I'm recalling from the
building committee had this right up in here. Closer in proximity and in fact you were at that point
drawing something of a tower.
Barry Pettit: With a possible like, right which.
Mayor Jansen: And one and a half stories instead of all on one. And I don't know why we gotjust this
little extension instead of having the building sitting up here. See what I mean? The building shifted
10
City Council Meeting- May 14, 2001
down. It sounds like we lost something then in the translation about what we were trying to align to but I
don't remember any conversations wanting to bring it out to West 78tl' Street.
Barry Pettit: My concern is that we wind up getting in kind of a position where we sort of, we neither
have really very much that is usable here other than just simply green. So it's a visual green. It's not a
usable green. And then we've closed this down and it sort of becomes less but it's not really very usable
either. Sort of, in other words we've diluted both ideas.
Scott Botcher: I don't know if you can say that. To me it depends on what goes in there. If you go in
there with Craig's idea of a courtyard, it can be very, very functional and I think one of the difficulties
here, and I think you guys have, I think you're right. There's been an attempt to strike a balance between
having the downtown West 78th attributes, which is, it's got validity. And the usability of the space to
have that commonality between the buildings and the entire campus and you know I think you've made a
decent attempt with the children's, it looks like a lady bug to me but that children's thing there, and then
whatever design you like. And you've got the 4 pods that stick out of the other one. I think that's what
you're really trying to do and I think you've made a good effort at that. I think maybe what it does to me,
and I'll just keep going back to it, and I'il admit it's been a sand burr in my saddle since I saw it is that
cul-de-sac's a divider and you talked about well, is that going to be the entrance to city hall on the
southeast corner? I mean you might as well just put a street through there because that cul-de-sac is
simply asphalt dividing. It's not drawing anything together. It's not commonality. It's simply there for a
single purpose and I'm not sure that's a good trade. I tend to agree with Craig.
Barry Pettit: One of the issues that, and everybody sort of backing up for a second. One of the issues
that we, and one could take, eliminate a cul-de-sac and somehow make it loop around here. One of the
issues that we talked about early on is the inherent difficulty in the site in getting to the front door. And
the difficulties are topographical and you have parking on both sides at both levels. So you basically
have 4 different parking lots for what really is not that big of complex per se. And so the question comes
back to, maybe, the ultimate question is how critical is it to get a car near the front door. Drop people
off. Whether it's bad weather. Whatever the deal is and if you say that's not a big deal for us, then we
revisit. Then it may be just as simple as saying the turn around kind of retreats back into here and just is
what it is.
Scott Botcher: 1 would argue that most of the parking spaces you have there, even with the cul-de-sac are
going to be about the same distance to the front door if the courtyard is there.
Barry Pettit: What the cul-de-sac does, if we cul-de-sac it, does incorporate parking around here.
Scott Botcher: Is that a good thing?
Barry Pettit: Well it's sized for...
Scott Botcher: I'm just, for the council. Then we've got a parking lot inbetween the two buildings.
That's a worse thing.
Mayor Jansen: Yeah, exactly. Yeah.
Barry Pettit: Well you know again, I guess the concern is that if you know that you've got 4 different
places to go find the lot, a place to park, is that just an acceptable part of this ensemble and there's no
ll
City Council Meeting - May 14, 2001
place to say hey look at. I'm going to go drop you off because I'm going to go look for parking. That
kind of thinking. That doesn't matter to us at all.
Mayor Jansen: Or can you incorporate it into the other side so that that's becoming a drop off on the
west side instead of just leading right in.
Scott Botcher: Along with the drop box.
Pat Mackey: There is a drop off aisle here. There are two comments which are kind of relate together.
We've been talking about the courtyard and a lot of the massing, the orientation of the building this way
is in just that effort to define a courtyard here. If you have a building aligned this way, you don't really
have, you don't have two things and this gets at my second point. You don't really have a defined court.
You've got a corner and you also don't have a single front door, which has really been a struggle here.
We've been trying to get a singular point of entry roughly on whichever plans we've been going with,
about in this area. Roughly equally accessible from 3 different parking lots and that's been kind of the
trick. To put tile building anywhere north of there you're knocking all tile parking which you've just
heard, so it is certainly your comments and the comments that we've heard here are, can be incorporated
in but it's just, it's part of, we're trying to keep a definition to the courtyard and the singular...
Scott Botcher: Now does this site plan include the appropriate number of parking spaces or is it build
short?
Barry Pettit: No this one, the 87 are nexv spaces in addition to whatever the count is right now. Plus 8'7.
Scott Botcher: Okay is that xvhat you guys are recommending based upon?
Barry Pettit: Right.
Scott Botcher: So if we wanted to go short, as we've talked about in some of the building committee
meetings, we could actually lose some of the spaces.
Barry Pettit: Sure. That's xvhat you do. If you want to go short, you lose some spaces. And it xvas talked
about in the future that possibly a deck could make that. Move off the upper lot here and go over the top
of that.
Mayor Jansen: And have more ora proof of parking for a later date if we need additional.
Scott Botcher: Part of what xve have noxv, and the library for what it is, I mean I would expect this library
to be far more attractive to all sorts of people than our current library is just because it's the stadium
issue. You know if they build it they will come but we've spent a lot of money on trails and multi modal
transportation facilities and the density of our community is north of 5 and sort of up fi'om here and
around and part of the theory is that if you're a scoot short of parking, you make it just a little bit tight,
we can maybe encourage people, especially in the summer time and certainly not in the winter time, to
use these trails. To use these things.
Councihnan Peterson: And particularly if there's a courtyard where you can sit and gather.
Scott Botcher: Absolutely. Hang out and have...with the kids. Absolutely.
12
City Council Meeting - May 14, 2001
Barry Pettit: And that has been your point and I personally agree with you but what I've found.
Scott Botcher: Cool.
Pat Mackey: But what we've also talked on in the building committee meeting and in the, to some extent
in the public meetings but mostly in the building committee would be if the capacity of the library and
the visitorship of the library increases as it's projected to, as we suspect it will, how much of a risk do we
want to take at being short of parking lots 6 months after opening?
Scott Botcher: No question.
Mayor Jansen: Right. Let's do this. Since we're trying to just give you input from a council level. We
are going to be losing Councilman Labatt. He has been paged into work so why don't we maybe share
our comments with you and I'm hearing some rather major concerns with these two layouts. So it may
take some effort on behalf of the building committee working with you tomorrow to maybe incorporate
the comments from the council this evening and hammer out the details there. So you know Craig, I
don't know if you want to just maybe recap your key points.
Councihnan Peterson: The only thing that I'd add to it, and you asked the question how important is
parking to the door. You'd think that I'd say it's real important. Well I'm not because ! don't think it is.
I'm thinking the integrity and the integration of the building to the site is more important than the parking
to the door. Because that, if you have a building that's inviting and a parking lot that is integrated, you're
more willing to take a walk. So I don't think you should design the building with that as a significant
focus. And I can be swayed, and already am kind of swayed towards moving the building from the center
as I was a month ago to the side. I think if we still maintain the integrity of the courtyard, pull away the
cul-de-sac from being the center point, you know I think you'll go a long ways to saying, getting me to
say wow and that's where I want you to get me.
Barry Pettit: Okay, fair enough.
Councihnan Labatt: Could you go back to your interior layout real quick, showing the.
Barry Pettit: Either one of them or both?
Councilman Labatt: Preferably this one.
Mayor Jansen: And in that you've missed some of the discussion, we're basically completely shifting
where the building is so as to the intricacies of the interior, that will change as they're moving the
building. Just FYI.
Councilman Labatt: Okay. Briefly, as long as it's going to change, the walls are going to change, where
are you going to have the computer center and all that stuff inside? What's your plan for that?
Mayor Jansen: I don't think we're at that point yet, are we?
Barry Pettit: Just real quickly. Computer room or data room is as viewed today is usually pretty small.
Typically just it will be back in the staff area.
Councilman Labatt: Okay, but what about for.
13
City Council Meeting - May 14, 2001
Barry Pettit: As far as the user computers?
Councilman Labatt: User computers, yeah. Yeah, information center or computer information center.
Barry Pettit: Yeah, the only thing usually we try to keep that somewhere closer to the staff area,
reference area so there's more control on it, but again that's another level of breakdoxvn that xve're not to
yet.
Pat Mackey: Another thing too is in a new freshly built from zero library, a center is really something
that kind of happens to older buildings for computers. Nexver buildings are, it's really spread much more
equally throughout. They'll have banks here and there.
Councihnan Labatt: But that's in the plan?
Pat Mackey: Absolutely.
Barry Pettit: This is really broad brush in terms of breakdown.
Mayor Jansen: The direction that we've given currently, in case you want to add to it, is to take the
building. Move it back closer to city hall. Align it more with Kerber versus it's current alignment to 78th
and reduce the cul-de-sac if not remove it altogether so that there's more of a green gathering space
inbetween.
Councihnan Labatt: What about, now I realize that the parking is being expanded upstairs. Now that
whole area up there is pretty much city vehicles right now. What are you taking into consideration on
that?
Pat Mackey: Part of that for that to work is going to be a policy issue that says if city staff and so forth,
in order to make the parking most efficient, the closest parking most efficient for the library would mean
that xve're going to have to encourage city staff to be here rather than here. And actually city staff
wouldn't be misplaced. These lots up here represent existing city staff and given the nature that it's now
plowing through what used to be the edge of the parking lot, a few additional spaces. 9 additional spaces
before you get to this dotted line and what would be designated library parking. If that was a policy
issue.
Councilman Labatt: Okay.
Mayor Jansen: Are our comments consistent with what you'd like to see have come back?
Councihnan Labatt: Sure.
Mayor Jansen: Okay. I remembered you liked that Kerber alignment.
Barry Pettit: I'll give you one little diagram ifI can find a piece of the page that you're on, and this is
just FYI. When we did the Ridgedale project, for those of you who are familiar with Ridgedale library.
That xvas sort of the library side. This was sort of the courts side and then the parking lot was out here.
And this was going to be, you know there was a big round tree thing there and so on and so £orth and that
was going to be the great public plaza. And it was probably ahnost the sole, one of the key singular
14
City Council Meeting- May 14, 2001
driving forces for remodeling that was to get rid of that plaza because it became so inhospitable in most
of the times of the year. In terms of all the realities that our weather brings to these areas. So I just offer
that out there. There are plenty of great outdoor plaza's that are small. No question about it and this
would be one of them. But it's, you just have to be a little bit guarded on romanticizing what it really can
be as a reality of sort of where we live. That's what led us away to a lot more formal courtyard defined
strictly between two buildings.
Scott Botcher: I guess maybe the downside is that we all know what a cul-de-sac can be.
Barry Pettit: Pardon?
Scott Botcher: We all know what a cul-de-sac can be, and I guess that's probably the down side.
Councilman Peterson: Well you know that being said, we should remove the baseball and softball parks
and the beaches and everything else.
Barry Pm'tit: Well yeah, and those are those uses for those perfect times and so forth and, but it's. And if
the position is to retreat on the cul-de-sac and puli that out of this, that's not a big deal as long as
everybody knows, really understands the consequences, then that's not a problem.
Mayor Jansen: And just really creating more the drop off'space over on the west side as you're working
on that.
Pat Mackey: What the cul-de-sac is is trying to get back to that parallel parking lot layout that...
Mayor Jansen: Understood. Okay. Okay, I think if we've given you clear direction as to where council
stands, then appreciate your making the presentation tonight and we'll leave it up to the building
COlnmittee to maybe pound out some of the details with you so, thank you. Appreciate your time.
Barry Pettit: Thank you.
Mayor Jansen: We have a situation where we are going to be losing Councilman Labatt tonight because
lie has been paged into work. I don't know if I should word it as an emergency but he has a work
emergency where lie does have to leave us and that leaves us without a quorum so, Roger shall ! be
adjourning the meeting at this point or do I do a continuation for the rest of the agenda?
Roger Knutson: I think adjourning the meeting would be appropriate. And I assume the rest of the items
on the agenda will be put on your next agenda. They're not going away.
Scott Botcher: If there's anything on here that we need to deal with, primarily the financial stuff that was
in your packet, Bruce and I might very well get going on some of that stuff. It will still be on your
agenda but we may do some prep work between now and then so we're not killing 2 weeks.
Mayor Jansen: Okay. And then we're also then moving the, okay. Alright, ifI could have a motion to
adjourn please.
Councilman Labatt moved, Councilman Peterson seconded to adjourn the City Council meeting.
Ail voted in favor and the motion carried. The City Council meeting was adjourned at 8:03 p.m.
15
City Council Meeting - May 14, 2001
Submitted by Scott Botcher
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
16