2b. Minutes 1
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
i REGULAR MEETING
FEBRUARY 24, 1992
Mayor Chmiel called the met' to order at 7: O .. The meeting was opened
y meeting t d 3 p.m g p ed
with the Pledge to the Flag.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Chmiel, Councilman Mason, Councilman Workman, Councilman
' Wing and Councilwoman Dimler
STAFF PRESENT: Don Ashworth, Roger Knutson, Todd Gerhardt, Charles Folch, Paul
' Krauss, Kate Aanenson, Sharmin Al -Jaff, Todd Hoffman and Scott Harr
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Workman seconded to
approve the agenda as amended by Councilman Wing to add the following under
' Council Presentations: discussion of item 1(b) which was deleted from the
Consent Agenda. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None.
CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Workman seconded to approve
the following Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's
recommendations:
c. Progress Valley Mini- Storage Facility, 1900 Stoughton Avenue, Gary Brown:
1) Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Allow Screened Outdoor Storage as an
Interim Use Permit in the Business Fringe (BF) District, Second Reading.
2) Approve Interim Use Permit to Allow Screened Outdoor Storage.
' e. Approval of Contract for Forest Cover Inventory Project Between the City and
Lance Anderson.
g. Resolution #92 -26: Set Liquor License Fees for 1992.
j. Adopt Resolution #92 -27: Urging the State of Minnesota to Expand the Funding
for the State Outdoor Recreation Grant Program and Resolution #92 -28:
Urging the Expansion of the Federal Land and Water Conservation Fund
(LAWCON) Program.
11 I. Approval of Accounts Payable.
j. City Council Minutes dated February 10, 1992
Planning Commission Minutes dated February 5, 1992
Park and Recreation Commission Minutes dated January 28, 1992
Public Safety Commission Minutes dated February 13, 1992
All voted in favor and the •otion unanimously.
1
,City Council Meeting - February 24, 1992
1
A. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ESTABLISHING REQUIREMENT THAT NON- CONFORMING
RECREATIONAL BEACHLOTS OBTAIN A NON - CONFORMING USE PERMIT AND ESTABLISH
PERMIT FEE, SECOND AND FINAL READING; AND APPROVAL OF SUMMARY ORDINANCE FOR
PUBLICATION PURPOSES.
II Public Present:
Name Address
Steve Decatur 6645 Horseshoe Curve
Dennis Baker 9219 Lake Riley Blvd.
1 David Tester 3897 Lone Cedar
Ivan Underdahl 7502 West 77th Street
Bernard Schneider 7501 West 77th Street
' David Hempel 3707 So. Cedar Drive
Kevin Eidie 3719 So. Cedar Drive
Randy & Raymond Smith 429 Pleasant View
Greg & Barb Hedlund 748 Lake Point
1 Susan Conrad 6625 Horseshoe Curve
Arthur & Phyllis Bufferding 620 Carver Beach Road
Jerry Kortgard 3901 Glendale Drive
1 Michael Ryan 3850 Maple Circle
Steven Erickson 3850 Leslee Curve
Kamer Van... Non - Resident
Mark Rogers 3851 Leslee Curve
Jim & Jane Hendrickson 9131 Lake Riley Blvd.
Bob Hebeisen 3601 Ironwood
Max & Chuck Erickson 3621 Ironwood 1
1 Tom Merz 3201 Dartmouth Drive
Terry Johnson 3898 Lone Cedar Circle
Francis Faber 3471 Shore Drive
1 Bill Turner 3501 Shore Drive
John Merz 3900 Lone Cedar Circle
Jerry Ahlman 3896 Lone Cedar Circle
II Tom & Mary Allenburg 6621 Minnewashta Parkway
Zoe Bros
Councilwoman Dimler: Item 1(a) is the second and final reading of a zoning
1 ordinance amendment concerning non - conforming recreational beachlots. I pulled
this item for a few reasons. One was that I wanted to find out here on the
permit fee to make sure that that's just a one time. Okay. Also, I wanted to
get some comments because it does need a 4/5 to pass, is that correct? I wanted
to get some comments from Mr. Workman who wasn't here the last time.
' Councilman Workman: Would you like my comments now?
Councilwoman Dimler: Yes.
1 Mayor Chmiel: Being we're discussing it, we'll take your comments at this time.
Councilman Workman: Well, what would you like to know Ursula?
1 ,
2
1
City Council Meeting - February 24, 1992
Councilwoman Dimler: Give me your wisdom on it.
Councilman Workman: Well I apologize to probably a majority of the room for not
being here. I don't think you would have cared to have me in the room the night
I wasn't here. It was an interesting meeting to not be at. I did read up on it
and do a little bit of homework and some of you called and helped me out with
it. Here we are again kind of trying to take care of problems that arise that I
think the Council would sooner not have to take care of. And depending on who
you talk to, you get different perceptions of what the problem is and why do we
have the problem. Is the City the problem? Are beachlots in general the
problem? I think staff would say yes, that beachlots themselves are problems.
It would appear Ursula that needing a 4/5 vote to pass the ordinance which was
discussed on February 10th will not occur so maybe this is all a bit
anticlimatic. I originally started out thinking because the difficulty perhaps
of trying to figure out what was going on in 1982, it seems like a very long
time ago, would be so difficult and that in fact it was maybe too far gone for
us to fairly decide what did exist. And there's probably still some truth to
that. Realizing that we don't probably get, realizing that getting the 1991 at
this point is probably an opportunity out the door, I started to question what
are the options and what really do we have then if we pass what we have tonight
and that would be a permit system for all beachlots and Paul, you can tell me
does that include the beachlots that don't have any boating rights on them?
Paul Krauss: Presumably to document it we should probably do that. Whether or
not you're charged for it would be open to some question.
Councilman. Workman: And maybe Paul and maybe Roger can tell me or tell me if
I'm right or wrong that then what we would have after tonight is 1982 ordinance
with the City now basically in the permitting business of who has a boat and who
doesn't have a boat or which associations have how many boats and we would in 11 effect be taking on or looking at each individual beachlot on it's own. Is that
correct? As they come in for permitting.
Paul Krauss: Yes. You would have the ability to evaluate each beachlot as they
came before you with their permit request.
Councilman Workman: And when we got to that point and I've mentioned this to
some people that then what we have is we have a system that could become -
political in a sense. If in fact we don't know what was there precisely in
1982. It then becomes a matter of our judgment as to what was there and what
wasn't there. Whether it's documented by aerial photographs or memory or
covenants or other, am I correct?
Paul Krauss: That's true. However, that's the case right now. The ordinance
right now relies on a 1982 standard because that's when these became non-
conforming. We don't have a forum before the Planning Commission and City
Council to resolve that which we would have with the permit process. Our only
recourse at that point I would assume is to file a complaint and have it
resolved elsewhere by the court ultimately.
Councilman Workman: Well I guess then that brings up my next question then 1
maybe to Roger. Where does the permitting process, and I don't know if anybody
in the room has a problem with the permitting process as much as they have to
where the baseline is, 1982 or 1991. Maybe most people feel we need a system
3
`City Council Meeting - February 24, 1992
1
somehow but what does that leave us Roger as far as legal. I think we had a
11 situation where there was a potential court case and the Judge said no, we're
not going to look at it. Take it back to the City so once we get the system in
force, what does that do for the beachiot?
Roger Knutson: If I could just take a couple minutes and explain. If you do
nothing, if you pass no ordinance this evening, the so called '82 baseline will
still be in effect. You passed an ordinance in 1982 that required all
recreational beachlots as defined in your ordinance to come in and get a
conditional use permit. To the extent the beachlots were organized and existing
prior to that date, they're grandfathered in. To the extent they have expanded
' inappropriately or illegally, we can make them cut back to the size they were in
'82. The purpose behind this ordinance, staff has had a difficult time
determining, there have been conflicting testimony in certain cases as to what
was out there in 1982. We did an inventory, city staff did an inventory in 1982
' on a particular date so we have that information as of that date. Boats could
have been in repair. They could have been on the lake when the inventory person
came by. We have complaining neighbors that said, ah -ha. Back in 1982 they had
' x. Now they have y. They've increased. So something. The purpose behind this
ordinance was to get everyone it's opportunity to come before the Planning
Commission for the hearing and ultimately in front of this Council and to
register their beachlots. To establish a non - conforming use. What their rights
' were. To establish what was out there in 1982 as best we can. If someone comes
forward and said I had 6 boats and one of the neighbors said 8. Or 4. They
wouldn't say 8. Say 4, whatever it is. Then someone's going to'have to make a
decision and give them a permit. Said alright, we'll decide this once and for
all so we know what the rules are. We'll decide it informally so we don't
hopefully have to fight every one of these things out in court or struggle with
each one independently when someone called and said, our neighbors are violating
the rights that were there in 1982. It establishes the process. If you do
nothing, we're back at 1982 and we'll enforce the 1982 ordinance to the best we
can.
II Councilman Workman: Is that what the courts want us to do? Is that what that
Judge wanted us to do?
Roger Knutson: No.
' Councilman Workman: Is he saying that we were lacking?
Roger Knutson: No. The Court, the Judge said nothing about the City of
Chanhassen. The Court said simply, a private person did not have the right to
II bring an action to enforce our ordinance. Only the City can enforce it's
ordinances. That's all it said. We do have an obligation and resources
permitting to enforce our ordinances and if you don't like our ordinances of
1 course we should review them.
Councilman Workman: Just as we don't have the right to enforce covenants.
-
II Roger Knutson: That's correct.
Councilman Workman: Well, something tells me that there's getting to be too
II many boats on the lake because of the increased agitation I guess of a lot of
4
1
City Council Meeting - February 24, 1992
the neighbors out there. I guess I wish we could make a clean sweep decision
and get it all over with because I know it's going to take an awful lot of time
and effort, both on the homeowners associations and staff and then Councils and
probably Councils into the future. To try and come up with that and I feel a
little uncomfortable with that because how do you compromise those kinds of
things and we become the Judge and jury and it puts an awful lot of pressure on
us as to what you had back in 1982 when we were all much younger. So it
wouldn't appear, again I don't know that it really would have appeared as though
on February loth the decision was made not to go with 1991 but with 1982 and not
a whole lot that I'm going to say or do tonight will change that. I think we're
going to, and I think this Council has proven that they can work in compromises
as well as most and that's probably the best place to leave it at the 1982 and
then to have those associations or beachlots come in and we can take care of it
later. I don't know that there's really any other decision to be made.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. '
Councilwoman Dimler: So basically you're saying our hands are tied and it will
be 4 to 1 and so we can forget a substitute motion. '
Councilman Workman: Well I guess you know, I looked at both 1982 and the 1991
and there are an awful lot of beachlots that are pretty much in compliance and
have been and so you're going to punish one side or the other in a sense and it
is difficult to tell the people who are in compliance that you know, you screwed
up. You followed what you thought were the rules and so you get more
- than maybe you should or could have if you were a little bit more greedy. So
it's really tough to tell that and it's going to be just as tough if we have to
tell somebody that has more than they're supposed to have that you can't. But
maybe that's why we're talking about this because maybe there are too many on
there and that's something we can look at in greater detail.
Councilman Wing: I think a key word Tom is...saying cooperation and that's the
real key issue for staff here. I certainly intend to give the benefit of the
doubt where necessary.
Mayor Chmiel: I think basically what you said Tom is right on the button. We
didn't really create it as such and the city is the only one that basically
enforces the ordinances and by having a conditional use segment within here, it
certainly gives that opportunity. ,
Councilman Workman: Roger if I could maybe get you to elaborate on
grandfathering. So if a homeowners association did not have their covenants in
effect before January 18th, or whatever, 1982, they are probably, what if a
beachlot came into existence in 1983 and said we're going to have 10 boats here?
And that's in their covenants.
Roger Knutson: '83 and that's after the ordinance was passed.
Councilman Workman: Right. 1
Roger Knutson: They have no rights. Unless they've gone through the process
and received a conditional use permit, they're an illegal use.
5
City Council Meeting - February 24, 1992
II
Councilman Workman: So then you tell me or try to give me an idea how many
II boats based on what calculation would ° they get.
Roger Knutson: For 1983?
II Councilman Workman: Yeah.
Roger Knutson: None. Unless they came through and asked for a conditional use
II permit and qualified for it.
Councilwoman Dimler: In 1983 they'd come under the ordinance.
II Roger Knutson: Yes.
Councilwoman Dimler: They wouldn't need a non - conforming.
II Roger Knutson: Well if they didn't have a conditional use permit. They started
in 1983 and didn't have a conditional use permit, they're operating illegally.
II They have no non - conforming rights at all.
Mayor Chmiel: So they would come in for a conditional use permit.
II Roger Knutson: If they qualified, fine. If not...
%
Councilman Wing: Just a comment on that line. Just the information I received
I today, I was asking about covenants and a member of Planning Commission back in
1982 commented that Lotus had registered their covenants with the City or County
or State. Whoever was the case and that they in fact were binding in the 1982 j
I ordinance. Or they were included and inclusive with the '82 ordinance. Lake f
Minnewashta did not register covenants so those covenants were not binding and i
that was pointed out today to me and I don't know the factual background. Mr.
Ashworth or someone that was here maybe knows more about that but there had been
II a registered set of covenants with one lake and another lake had not and it made
a big difference because one set was included in the ordinance and one wasn't.
That's the way he had read it. If it pertains here at all.
II Councilman Workman: To carry it a little further, if in 1983 the beachlot came
into existence and they did get a conditional use permit, what was the
I calculation that the city would use to determine how many boats they had?
Roger Knutson: If they came into existence in 1983 and...conditional use
permit, this ordinance has nothing to do with them.
I Councilman Wing: They're in compliance.
II Roger Knutson: They're complying and your conditional use permit spelled out
how many boats they could have.
II Councilman Workman: Okay, but how many boats could they have Paul? Take the
number of lots and divide it by? Or number of acreage.
Paul Krauss: No, there's a formula in the ordinance that it's based on the size
II of the beachlot that they're entitled to.
,
II 6
II
City Council Meeting - February 24, 1992
Kate Aanenson: Maximum of 5. 1
Councilwoman Dimler: So in 1983 this wouldn't affect them at all what we're
writing here today. ,
Roger Knutson: No. If they started in 1983, this ordinance has nothing to do
with them.
Councilman Wing: It's only grandfathered lots we're discussing.
Roger Knutson: The ordinance that existed prior to our, excuse me. Reachlots
that came into existence prior to the adoption of your '82 ordinance, those are
the ones that would be affected.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, and I want to bring up one more point about maybe ,
waiving. We're talking about a fee here not only for boats are we? We're
talking about everything on that beachiot just for their existence is what
you're saying. That they have to have a permit to exist or one year after we
adopt this ordinance they have to cease all activity? That's the way I read it.
Kate Aanenson: No, the permit's to establish what they have. What they were
grandfathered in with. Whether it be picnic tables or anything else. We're
trying to establish what was there that wouldn't comply witb the ordinance.
What they came in that wouldn't meet the existing ordinance.
Councilwoman Dimler: So you're not talking just about boats here is what I'm
saying.
Kate Aanenson: Whether they have swimming rafts. All those sort of items,
right.
Roger Knutson: The answer's yes. ,
Councilwoman Dimler: So waiving the fee for people that don't have mooring
rights is not appropriate?
Kate Aanenson: We're taking all of the beachlots. If that's your question is
whether we're taking, whether they have boats or not, we're taking all of the
beachlots. Some of them do not have boats. Some of them just have swimming.
We will still be inventorying those. Yes.
Councilman Wing: Considering that this is an attempt to clean up this entire 1
incident, why not even waive the license fee at this point. We're sort of
requesting it and I would feel comfortable simply waiving the license fee for
these permits in this case. I don't think we need to impose that upon them. 1
Councilman Workman: Or does that make it more binding?
Roger Knutson: It makes it neither more binding or less binding. 1
Mayor Chmiel: Alright.
1
i
City'Council Meeting - February 24, 1992
Councilwoman Dimler: I'd go for that. From what I've heard, you want to ask?
Mayor Chmiel: Well, Michael.
Councilman Mason: I assume this $75.00 fee is a one shot deal that the
association pays right?
•
Kate Aanenson: Right.
' Councilman Mason: And I would assume that the City, I mean essentially what
we're saying, and I'm not saying whether I'm for or against it right now but if
we're waiving that fee then the City is not getting back any of the time that
they put in to researching this. Going out to the beachlots. I mean somewhere
these people went to the beachlots got paid. It came out of the city budget.
Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah.
Councilman Workman: $75.00 isn't going to make that up.
Councilman Mason: But every little bit. !dell, okay. That's fine but I just
hope we're all thinking about all that down the road too.
Mayor Chmiel: And I think in this particular case, this is unusual
' circumstances that haven't come up too often at all. So in this particular case
I too would feel comfortable enough with waiving that.
Councilman Wing: Mr. Mayor, I at this point then move.
'
Mayor Chmiel: As you all know, Y 1 kn w, I look for those dollars every time.
Circumstances come up, you have to be a little bit applicable to whatever it is.
Councilman Wing: Do you have another comment? Unless Ursula has a comment, I'd
just move passage of 1(a), zoning ordinance amendment with one adjustment to the
waiving of the fee.
Councilwoman Dimler: Plus I also wanted to, I want to make sure, absolutely
' sure that if we go with the 1982 and staff goes out and works with these non-
conforming beachlots, that if they want to, if the people don't agree with
staff's decision, that they have the absolute right to have recourse to Council.
' Mayor Chmiel: They have that even just.
Kate Aanenson: That's the process. They'll go to the Planning Commission and
then the Council. You'll make the final determination.
Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah, but I want them to understand that they have that.
Mayor Chmiel: But they also have that opportunity to get on a phone and call us
as well.
11 Councilwoman Dimler: And with those understandings then, I would move approval
of item 1(a).
11 Councilman Wing: Second.
8
City Council Meeting - February 24, 1992
Mayor Chmiel: It's been moved and seconded to include the waiving of the
license fee. Prior to the adoption I would like to open it up to the floor. If
anyone would like to come forward. We've had a lot of discussion on this at
both the Planning Commission as well as City Council. If you've had an
opportunity to come forward, I'd appreciate it again. But if you could limit it
to just a few minutes, we have reviewed all the Planning Commission timeframe.
Minutes that we've read. The opportunities that we've sat at the Planning
Commission. So with that I'd like to open it up and if you do come forward,
please state your name and your address. Is there anyone at this time?
Steve Decatur: Can I make a brief comment? 1
Mayor Chmiel: Yes. Please come forward.
Steve Decatur: If my voice lasts. Steve Decatur, 6645 Horseshoe Curve. Also a
member of the Chanhassen Water Quality Task Force. I'd just like to go on
record as saying I see this as a strong support for improved public safety and
water quality on our area lakes in taking a strong measure in putting your vote '
of confidence behind the Planning Commission to go and arbitrate this process
and decide what is equitable for all parties. That's really all I have to say.
It's a re- endorsement of what the Water Quality Task Force is all about and I
thank you for it.
Mayor Chmiel: Thanks Steve. Anyone else? If not, I'll call the question.
Councilwoman Dialer moved, Councilman Wing seconded to approve the second and
final reading of Zoning Ordinance Amendment establishing a requirement that Non -
Conforming Recreational Beachlots obtain a Non - Conforming Use Permit with the
condition that the permit fee be waived; and approval of a summary ordinance for
publication purposes. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
D. APPROVAL OF WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF STORM WATER 1
PONDS WITHIN 200 FEET OF A CLASS A WETLAND, CITY OF CHANHASSEN.
Councilman Wing: Mr. Mayor, I just wanted to make staff and planning cognizant 1
of this. Lake St. Joe is very environmentally sensitive area and I just want to
verify that this wetland alteration permit, I don't wish to stop it at this
point but I just want to make sure that what the engineer crew is doing on
Minnewashta Parkway has the approval of or has met with some thought from
Bonestroo. Being they're doing our surface water management and concern about
runoff into lake quality. I want to verify what we're doing in this alteration.
. Is it in conjunction with Bonestroo and that they've reviewed it and looked at
it and support this issue. I think it was discussed once before but I don't
recall the outcome of the item.
Paul Krauss: Charles, I've got some overheads.
Councilman Wing: Paul, it's not necessary even to discuss it. I just want to
verify that...
Paul Krauss: Charles and I did visit the.site with the project engineer, Bill
Engelhardt and with Ismal Martinez from Bonestroo. And Bill had some
9
1
City Council Meeting - February 24, 1992
inclusions for storm water clean -up originally and they were further refined
based upon the comments we got from 8onestroo and they're in the final plans.
Councilman Wing: Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Very good. Okay. You also had item (d).
Councilman Wing: (d) was what we were just discussing.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, you wanted to discuss (b) as well. The deleted item.
Councilman Wing: If you choose to do that at this time.
Roger Knutson: Mayor, are you going to vote on (d)?
Mayor Chmiel: Not yet. We'll go back to it because I assumed he was discussing
(b) and as I was looking at (d), I see where he's coming from.
Councilman Wing: Item 1(b) really belongs under Council Presentations if that's
alright. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Can we get an amended agenda to put item 1(b) onto the
Council Presentations?
Councilman Wing: I did that as the intent originally.
Mayor Chmiel: Did you request that? Okay, I missed it then. Thank you. Okay.
Item (d). Can I have a motion?
Councilman Mason: So moved.
Councilman Workman: Second.
Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Workman seconded to approve Wetland
Alteration Permit for the Construction of Storm Water Ponds within 200 feet of a
Class A Wetland, City of Chanhassen. All voted in favor and the motion carried
unanimously_ •
H. RECEIVE FIVE -YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT FOR STREET RECONSTRUCTION
PROJECTS_
Councilman Workman: I don't know about you'all but I don't know if I'm ready
for this. I'd like to keep the good people of Chan Estates, most of them are
very good citizens. I guess what I'd like to do is try and maybe, I don't know
what I want to do maybe. We're dropping a big bomb of $1.15 million on this
' neighborhood. Now that doesn't mean I don't think it doesn't need it and I
think some of these people are starting to have been over the past couple of
years, getting the idea that maybe this is coming. How can we notify that
neighborhood of the impending doom a little bit better without just saying here
it is next year, or is it 1992? Is it 1992 for them or it is 1993? '92 -'93,
that's this year folks. I think we need to, and I know we're all meeting on
Saturday morning. Maybe we can take this item and I know some people over there
II and I had intended to maybe get them a copy of this memo. I don't know that
1 10
1
City Council Meeting - February 24, 1992
they know what their Council is up to tonight. I would like to better, maybe we
can have Charles go door to door or something. But somehow so we can maybe ease
this on them a little bit easier or I don't know if you'd go ahead and ask them
if they want this done or not but I would feel more comfortable approaching it a
little bit differently.
Mayor Chmiel: I think you're half right there. I think some things should be
discussed with those area residents and I think that some kind of informational
meeting prior to even discussion of these total dollars. Knowing exactly what's
going to take place and what would happen. And the assessments would come in
eventually but I think just keep them informed, knowledgeable as to what we're
proposing and how we plan on addressing this because it is a bomb for a lot of 11 people to just say...but it is. It's a vast amount. of dollars that are going to
be that and I don't even know if we even broke it down to that other point but
maybe you'd like to address that Chuck.
. Charles Folch: Yes, thank you Mr. Mayor. Basically this preliminary CIP that I
presented tonight, it's just strictly for informational purposes at this point
in time. Just to give you some time to think about things. See where we're at.
And the idea of having a neighborhood meeting is a very good idea and that's
something we do intend to take on. As we get closer to actually getting into
the preliminary stages of a potential project but at this point in time, as
I mentioned in my staff report, we don't know what this CIP along with future
sewer and water CIP's or storm water management program or what financial impact
these programs will have on the city and where we're at. Those will basically
define what type of, or help define what type of an assessment policy we can
establish for street reconstruction projects. I'm sure most of the people in
the Chan Estates area are aware that this is coming sometime in the future. It
may be next year. It may be 5 years down the road but it's going to come but
the important key question that we can't answer for them at this point in time
is what it's going to cost me. So until we have those numbers, I don't think we
could really have a productive neighborhood meeting. Until we could give them
fairly representative numbers as far as what they're looking at, then they can
decide for themselves is this something I really want. Is it worth it to me?
Councilman Workman: Yeah, the numbers are very important and I can bet you .
dollars to donuts, wherever that phrase came from, that if you ask the
neighborhood if they wanted new roads and sewers and curb and gutters and we're
going to be assessed $1.15 million, I can tell you dollars to donuts what they
would tell you. So that's what I mean. I don't know if you go in there and ask
them, hey can we do this for you because nobody_really appreciates it or looks
at it as a favor. But the way this looks like, it looks like we're maybe 2 or 3
months away from doing it and I know there's been some ripples through that
neighborhood because they've kind of had some inklings but I guess I would
just, I guess I'd like to table this right now until we can maybe talk a little
bit below the surface on how to attack it a little bit more subtley on Saturday. '
I don't know if you guys can fit that on the agenda Saturday.
Charles Folch: In fact we're not, staff is not asking for an approval of this
agenda. Basically it's being presented for your receipt tonight. It's quite
possible too, depending on how our overall City Capital Improvement Projects
look financially to us in a couple months that even -this schedule may have to be
revised before we even go back and start talking to neighborhoods because it's ,
11 1
i
City'Council Meeting - February 24, 1992
quite possible this might be too much to take on also. So we're not asking ing for
any approval tonight. It's just basically your receipt. Basically on record as
having received this preliminary report. There's no approval action necessary
or anything like that.
Councilman Wing: I also wanted to pull this item Mr. Mayor and I echo Tom's
concern and sentiments except I guess I even become simpler in my thinking. The
fact that this document exists. The first thing I did today was open it up and
quickly page through to make sure Shore Drive wasn't on it and then I reached
for a hankie and I went, oh thank goodness I don't have to deal with this. I
realize that this could be a year, 5 years, 10 years down the road but the fact
that Dakota is kind of a priority area along with others, I think either in the
City newsletter or the Villager, just a comment that this exists. It's in the
thinking process. At least alerts the people that these things are coming along
`and kind of starts to set the stage a little bit because these are going to be
critical issues and we don't want to go through some of the problems we've had
in the past. So I'd like to see this get public notification, even though it's
not formal. It's not official at this point. That's my own opinion.
Mayor Chmiel: I think as you indicated in here, that the pertinent information
will be known in April for the determination. Okay. I don't think we have to
move on that one do we Roger?
Roger Knutson: No.
II .VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: None. •'
APPOINTMENT TO YOUTH COMMISSION.
Don Ashworth: The Council had previously asked that this item be advertised.
We did advertise. The Council has interviewed with the candidates. One of the
candidates has a problem with Mondays and again has not been able to be
' interviewed by the City Council. Staff is recommending that you make the
appointment for both the youth and'the adult representative tonight. You have
copies of the resumes for the various individuals who are seeking that
nomination.
Mayor Chmiel: Any discussion? We have two, or three people that have applied
and one has had an opportunity, or not had the opportunity to get in by the name
of Tim Clark. Tim I've sort of known over the years. He is a youth minister
who deals with teenagers on a constant basis and does have a professional
experience in relationship to this. I find that Tim has got a long resume as if
any of you have had the opportunity to look at. He also of course does reside
within our city. We also had the other question of a teenager to be appointed
to this. And this would be a youth for 2 years and the adult would be for 1
year. Excuse me. Yes, 2 years and 1 year. That's right.
Councilwoman Dimler: Mr. Mayor, we did interview a young lady and I don't
remember her name. Don, do you happen to know?
Councilman Workman: Heidi Halverson.
Heidi Halverson: Right here.
12
City Council Meeting - February 24, 1992
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, sure. Thank you. 1
Councilman Workman: Mr. Mayor, if I can make a motion?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes. ,
Councilman Workman: I'd move to approve Heidi Halverson and Tim Clark.
Councilman Wing: Second. ,
Mayor Chmiel: It's been moved and seconded. Any other discussion? ,
Councilman Mason: I don't know Mr. Clark at all. This is a very impressive
resume. It's a little hard, I didn't get a chance to talk with him at all and
it was maybe 10 -15 minutes a time and we're all very busy. I'm not disputing
that in any way but.
Mayor Chmiel: The only reason I said Tim is he worked with my kids in grade
school and did an exceptional job. He really takes the time to listen, which I
feel is a case of necessity in this. And has done a real excellent job and has
had all very positive responses from people who have work with him. So that was
one of my reasons.
Councilman Workman: And I know Jay Johnson to be very involved with youth and
we all know him to be a good person. My leaning, and I know who Tim Clark is.
Not maybe as well as I do Jay but it's a new face so something to me as a new
opportunity doing something on a commission is all. That's kind of how I broke
it down. I know them both to be good people. ,
Mayor Chmiel: Yes.
Councilman Workman: But that's how I arrived at my. 1
Councilwoman Dimler: And I do think we should move on this because they've been
waiting since November for us to, I would love to interview Clark but we don't
have time.
Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Wing seconded to appoint Heidi Halverson
and Tim Clark to the Youth Commission. All voted in favor and the motion
carried unanimously.
NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE CHANHASSEN BUSINESS CENTER ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
WORKSHEET.
Kate Aanenson: This is a formality. It's pretty straight forward as part of
the EAW. Technically you can't approve it until you have the 30 day comment
period which expired on February 6th. We've attached in the memo comments that
we received from the Met Council, the PCA, the Department of Natural Resources
and the Historial Society. Even though their comments look like we missed a few
things in the EAW, I want to make clear that during the development contract and
into the process, all those items were addressed and we relayed that information
back to them and we informed them that all their items had been addressed and
13
City Council Meeting - February 24, 1992
II
that we put their comments as a part of the EAW. So what we're asking for them
II is that your recommendation that a negative declaration for an EIS.
Councilman Workman: 5o moved. `
II -I
Councilman Mason: Second. 1
Mayor Chmiel: Thanks. I agree. I agree fully. I think that a negative
II declaration is a necessity for this. The RGU on this is.
Kate Aanenson: Us. City of Chanhassen.
II Mayor Chmiel: The MPCA are the people who are going through, excuse me. The
Metropolitan Council are the people who review this and come up with the
conclusions. Are there any requirements for the MEQB on this?
II Paul Krauss: The EQB hasn't, no. The EQB serves as the disperser of the
information. They don't.
II Mayor Chmiel: Alright but it's published in their Monitor.
II Paul Krauss: It was published., yes. And directly mailed to the list that we
get from EQB and I don't remember.
Kate Aanenson: About 25 copies had to go out.
'Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the EAW and make
a negative declaration for an Environmental Impact Statement for the Chanhassen
I Business Center. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
APPEAL THE DECISION OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS DENIAL OF VARIANCE
REQUEST FOR A 6 FOOT FRONT YARD VARIANCE, 801 PONTIAC LANE. PAUL NAAB.
II Sharmin Al -Jaff: Just some background on this application. On August 5, 1985
the Board of Adjustments and Appeals approved a variance to build a deck 24 feet
II from the property line. This is a corner lot. It requires 30 foot setbacks for
a front yard. Today the applicant is requesting to enclose the deck and the
purpose is to enlarge the living room. We surveyed the area within 500 feet.
I We found out that this is the only case where the applicant is requesting to
encroach into the front yard setback. We couldn't find a hardship. The
residence is being used as a twin home which is what the intent was for that
parcel of land. Approval of this variance would create a precedence and we are
II recommending denial of this application. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Mr. Naab, would you like to either concur or come up forward and
' please state your name and your address and indicate what your.
Paul Naab: Yes, I'm Paul Naab and I live at 801 Pontiac Lane. I'm right down
II the road here a mile. I've got a red house, a red car and I married a redhead.
It's pretty easy to identify my house when you're driving by. In 1985 when we
bought this property, we had a pasture across the street. It is now a full
development with over 55 homes so there was intensification as far as traffic
il noise was concerned after we had our deck built. And there's a correction here
I
II 14
II
City Council Meeting - February 24, 1992
that I don't know why but we requested in 1985 a 4 foot variance and the deck
was built in accordance to that. All we want to do now is enclose a portion of
that deck. Not all of it. It's a 10 x 12 enclosure so that the roofline will
tie in with the house. Now we have a problem because we live in the Chaparal
Association. We must have their Architectural Committee approve it first before
we can come to you folks. This was discussed, the precedent situation was
discussed and it was felt that there may not be more than only one other request
that might ever surface in connection with an enclosure. There are two kinds of
houses in the association. Homes like mine where the living room comes off to
the side of the house. The other homes have the living room facing the rear of
the lot and they would never have a variance problem. Now some of the
statements that are made in this examination of our property, it says that the
variation was not based on a desire to increase the value or income potential of
property. Well, we definitely know that we will increase the value of our home
because we're going to be spending between $6,000.00 and $8,000.00 to do this.
It said we created our own hardship by building the deck where we did but if we
had run our walkway to the back of the house and put the deck at the south side,
we'd be shutting off our bedroom. So the only place we could have the deck is
off our living room as it's built. I know our neighbor put a deck on the rear
of his house but after he did so he never used it. There was too much wind
coming up this hill. South wind in the summertime and this is our principle
problem is trying to get use out of it because of the weather in Minnesota and
we get a lot of south wind and if we had a glass enclosure here, we'd get much
more use out of it. I took many pictures of this property mhich I would like to
pass around to the Council but I would also like to mention that we planted 25
amber maples along the property line which when they're full grown will close
off the view of our house from the street to quite a bit of an extent. I took a
picture of a similar row of amber maple that is located 3/4 of a mile south on
TH 101. I'd just like to pass this picture. Now as a matter of brevity, I know
that the real problem here is intensifying the ordinance by creating an
enclosure on a deck so my argument is simply this. Between our house and City
Hall on Kerber Blvd. are 3 homes that are closer to the boulevard than we will
be and I've took photographs of these homes and I have the addresses on the back
of the picture. One is 760 Big Horn Drive and Kerber. One is Saddlebrook CV,
corner lot. 900 Saddlebrook CV, corner lot and I don't know what CV means. And
840 Saddlebrook Pass and I would like to pass these 3 pictures because these �.
homes are already there and they have been built since my home was built. And
last but not least I took an aerial photograph of my property. My house is in
the center. Two of these homes that are closer to the boulevard are visible in
the top of the picture and the others are just views from my neighbors south of
me, to the east of me and across the street. In addition to this, it was noted
that you had difficulty trying to consider approving a variance at Fox, what the
heck was it here? Fox Hollow I believe it is which was an undersized lot and I
read the entire proceedings in connection with that and I'm inclined to feel
that we're not comparing apples with apples in this situation because I have a
lot of room between my home and the Kerber Blvd. curbing. If you add 36 feet
from my house to my property line and add an additional 23 feet from the
property line to the curbing of Kerber Blvd., the property which belongs to the
City of Chanhassen, there's a total of 59 feet involved and my 10 foot deck
reduces this to 49 feet which is ample room considering there's no one until you
go clear across the road. As a matter of brevity, I do believe that I'm talked
out and I don't want to belabor you with a lot of other arguments here. I
appreciate your consideration, or reconsideration.
15 1
II City Council Meeting - February 24, 1992
I Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Did everyone have the opportunity to look at all of
this? A few more pictures yet to go. Okay. Now that we've had the opportunity
to review the photos as well as to listen to Mr. Naab. We'll open it up for
discussion. Let's start on the far end this time. Mike.
II Councilman Mason: You always start on the far end this time Mr. Mayor. I want
to hear of course what the rest of the Council has to say. That's a cop out.
I At first blush the structure's already there so what difference does it make if
you put more onto it? But I drive by there every day and I'm looking at the
pictures and I'm speaking here and I'm trying to envision it. And it certainly
will change the way things look there. I mean a deck doesn't, is not anywhere
near as obtrusive as an addition is. Of course the other side of that is that
the variance was already granted and Roger, could I get just a real brief
history on, and this was called an intense. You have to get another variance to
1 build on a variance that's already there?
Roger Knutson: A variance is granted for a very specific thing. You don't get
I a blanket variance to fill...your side yard or your front yard. It's granted in
this case it was for a deck. That means nothing but a deck and the only the
deck that was brought before the Board of Adjustment or the Council, if it got
up this far. That's all you can do because you said a deck is different than an
II enclosed living room as far as you know cutting off, dealing with light and
space.
' Councilman Mason: Okay. I'm inclined to deny the variance but before I say for
sure one way or the other, I do want to hear the rest of the discussion. You
know this is one of those that I feel as a Councilmember I'm in a lose lose
1 situation here. It's a tough one. It's a real tough one. On the one hand you
look at what Mr. Naab wants and I certainly don't blame him for that. I'd want
that there too. That's a very busy street. But then the issue does come up, if
this one is granted, what happens next time and next time and next time so I
1 want to hear what other people have to say.
Councilman Workman: Looking from this aerial I don't know if you know Mr. Naab
I has a, you're going to have a little runway back there on the back.
Councilman Wing: Really, what for?
11 Councilman Workman: For his plane. I don't feel uncomfortable approving this
variance at all. In fact I used to live over in this area and I drove by there
and his yard is mowed and basically done by the association. It's always in
II good shape. You know when I drive by, twin homes are a special kind of place,
as are quads and when you drive up Powers Blvd. and Saddlebrook and they've got
the twin homes there and you can see them around the pond, they've gone and what
they've done, this homeowners association has covenants and it's got a
homeowners association. The one in Saddlebrook, I don't know that they even
have an association...for himself so this half maybe laid sod and this one maybe
didn't or did seed and then they've got a chainlinked fence splitting them and
II it looks like, twin homes are kind of intended to look like one unit but in
Saddlebrook they kind of don't because they don't have an association to do
that. I'm waiting for one of them to paint the other half different than the
II other. But this to me, without going out because I know we've compared this
variance request to other corner lot decks. This is still a long way away first
16
1
City Council Meeting - February 24, 1992
1/
of all. Second, the deck is already there and I don't know that I would call
that an error. The deck. '
Councilman Mason: I'm not saying putting the deck in was an error.
Councilman Workman: No, no. That was my word, not yours. But what I always 1
try to use in these situations, and I do miss being on the Board of Adjustments,
for different reasons, is if we can help somebody try and improve what they have
so they can stay where they have without impacting even moderately, the view or
maybe the shape or the general appearance of the neighborhood, then I like to go
ahead and do it and I think this is a good example of that. For him to go
because I did have a question about it because he does have a very large area in
the back of the yard. Why not go back there? Well then he has a deck going off
of his bedroom. Then he's got the guests and everybody going through his
bedroom to get to the chip dip and whatever else. So maybe it's a bad situation
because the deck is already there but I don't see this, without going outside of I/
really what he already has there to go up and make a nice looking enclosure. I
don't have really a problem at all or a concern.
Mayor Chmiel: Richard.
Councilman Wing: I'm already on record with the Board of Adjustments as having
denied this and my reasons at that time is we were looking at a low deck versus
a small house which was significant to me. The low deck didn't bother me there.
I guess the past variance to begin with. Why it was necessary to grant a
variance for such a large deck and then that bothers me because that variance
now is being asked to be intensified into this additional room and based on
prior denials I just felt it was the fairest for all of us to as we did, to
deny this. On the other hand I found Mr. Naab delightful and respectful and
when we denied it he didn't storm out threatening us at the next election like
often happens. He left me with a positive feeling towards them and their intent
here so I guess I have to stand on my record but I agree there are some options
here.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Ursula.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. I do believe that it will definitely have a visual
impact but I don't necessarily think that that will be a negative impact. I
think it might be a positive one. Also, I think that the noise level has
intensified on Kerber Blvd. without a doubt due to circumstances beyond their
control and especially the City has allowed more building and development and
therefore I think that does limit the pleasureable use of their deck. I favor
granting this variance because I don't see it as encroaching further into the
setback and I see no reason that that would be detrimental to the city. So I
favor granting.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Rather than to reiterate everything that's been
said, I too did basically abstain because I thought that this is a case by case
situation with an existing structure already in place. And even though the
intensification is going to go in addition to that, it still aesthetically is
not going to be displeasing as far as appearance. During the summertime with
the amber maples that Mr. Naab indicated he was going to put in, would screen
that in itself although during the wintertime of course the leaves are off and
17
•
1
City Council Meeting - February 24, 1992
it's still visible. But how many times will you drive by and really pay that
Y Y Y P Y t
much attention to it? Or even walk by and look at it. The other aspect I
II always look at is the fact that, the positive for me because that means a dollar 1
or two more taxes for the city. I'm always looking for the buck. But it is. To
me I guess the 4 foot setback that was granted previously and it's there. It's ff
II existing. I think it would probably add a little more aesthetics to that
structure. To the building in itself so therefore I think I'd move along to
that standpoint. But with that, I would ask if there's anymore discussion.
1 Councilman Mason: I just want to make, and I don't even know that this concerns
this request but Councilman Workman made a comment about moderate impact. On
whether you would go to approve or deny a variance and that comes down to that
1 question and maybe this is why we do do it a case by case. But one Council's
definition of moderate impact could be entirely different than another
Council's, as we've certainly seen happen here in the past. And maybe that's
something that we don't need to waste these people's time with but maybe at a
work session or something, those are some things we should be talking about.
That's it.
II Mayor Chmiel: Okay.
Councilman Workman: I would move the front yard variance request of Paul Naab.
1 Mayor Chmiel: Be granted?
Councilman Workman: Didn't I say to move the approval of the front yard
variance request?
Mayor Chmiel: Better. Thank you.
I Councilwoman Dimier: Second.
II Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Disler seconded to approve Variance
Request #85 -16 for a 6 foot front yard variance. All voted in favor except
Councilman Mason who opposed and Councilman Wing who abstained. The motion
carried with a vote of 4 to 1.
Councilman Mason: Are you voting on this one?
1 Councilman Wing: I would have voted if it was a tie.
Mayor Chmiel: 3 to 2?
Councilman Workman: 4 to 1, it was a yes.
Councilwoman Dimier: You're was a yes.
Councilman Wing: By not voting, I'm comfortable with where it went. The
majority rules.
Councilman Mason: I'm comfortable with the results but I don't know, I have
trouble granting variances.
1
18
•
City Council Meeting - February 24, 1992
Councilman Wing: Well I'm on that Board you assigned me to and I am too. I
guess I'd like some direction from Council on what they would like to do.
That's a good point.
Councilman Mason: Maybe after I've been here for 2 years instead of 1 I'll feel
a little more comfortable with a variance request. .
Mayor Chmiel: Very good. Before I move on, I'd like to just back up. There's
someone here who didn't realize that we had the Visitor Presentation portion and
somehow missed it. I'd like to extend to them that opportunity to come forward
at this time. As you all know, this is something we can't do anything with.
It's just a presentation. We're more than willing to listen to what you have to
say.
VISITOR PRESENTATION:
Jacie Hurd: Thank you very much. I appreciate the right. My name is Jacie
Hurd. I live at 6695 Horseshoe Curve. I'm also the President of Lotus Lake
Homeowners Association. I have a concern regarding a reconsideration of the
zoning ordinance amendment concerning the mooring of motorcraft which took place
on February 10, 1992. It was Section 1, Section 627(b). I'd like to state that
I'm not representing an option for or against the change but I am simply
questioning the process that occurred. As a riparian owner of lakeshore on
Lotus Lake I was never notified of the amendment. The changg made in the
language of the amendment on February 10th allowing non - riparian boat owners to
moor boats on city lakes seems contrary to the intent of the ordinance. As I
question whether due process was observed, as no members of the Lotus Lake
Homeowners Association were notified of this change, I ask that this amendment
be reconsidered and put up for public discussion at the next meeting. Thank you
very much.
Councilman Wing: Well Mr. Mayor, as you know, we made a change that Roger
recommended and it was somewhat definite. And then you considered it would be
appropriate to make another slight change which didn't seem to make much
difference. But then somebody brought up the issue that I have my own boat at
my home and I happen to have one boat. But I let a friend keep it there.
Another friend keep his boat there on my property but nonetheless by allowing a,
shall we say public boat on my property, I've intensified the lake use. If ever
you own, right now the way Roger had it worded, you have to own the boat in
front of your home on your property registered to you and it's pretty clear cut.
You can't have your friends and neighbors, people off the lake keeping their
boat at your home. It was really fair, it was originally put that way to be
fair as I understand it to the other neighbors and to keep the boat count down
which had been a big issue in this debate. So by doing what we did in good
faith, you allowed me to invite my friends to keep their boats at my home with
no restrictions and I guess I'm seeing that as an intensification. I for one am
clearing going to say no this next summer because I see the ramifications of it
now. And I don't think anybody cares the way it was written as long as there's
no complaints but if there are complaints there's teeth so I would guess, based
on this last comments, I would having voted in the affirmative of that, consider
a reconsideration of that particular portion of that ordinance. Maybe a little
more information and background of what the pros and cons are but I do think it
definitely does encourage intensification and welcome intensification and I
19 1
1
'City Council Meeting - February 24, 1992
•
1
think that's what we're trying to avoid here. And as a property owner I would
concur that maybe, I didn't copy that. So if you were willing to consider
reconsideration, having voted in the affirmative, I would support that.
Councilwoman Dimler: Mr. Mayor, if I may comment too that one of the reasons
II with what we just went through for the beachlots, non - conforming beachlots, that
was intensifying use but in view of the fact that we had just intensified the
use for private homeowners, I didn't think it was quite fair to restrict the
beachlots. We seem to be punishing them.
Councilman Wing: Kind of talk out of both sides of our mouth.
Councilwoman Dimler: Yes.
Councilman Wing: So you picked up on the fact that we did?
Councilwoman Dimler: Right.
Councilman Wing: Okay.
Councilwoman Dimler: And you introduced it.
Councilman Wing: Well Roger wrote that ordinance for a purpose and then Mayor
Chmiel picked up on the fact that we wanted a little more flexibility.
II Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, the only flexibility that I looked at is because of a son -
in -law and his daughter living in an adjacent to his home and they did not have
those lake rights. Under that particular circumstance, that's what I really
picked up on. And it's probably a one in a blue moon that that's going to
happen but nonetheless because he doesn't have a boat on his property, I didn't
see why the allowances couldn't be granted for a blood relative to utilize that.
By allowing a friend to come on, that's a complete different circumstance.
Although there are two whereas before with his there were none. Now it's only
being put to one of which it.would normally be.
Councilman Wing: If we went with the original ordinance as proposed by Roger.,
nothing ever gets said. If there's a complaint, then we could act on it and it
would have to be enforced. The odds of a complaint would be just about nil is I
think what we decided. And where'd we go wrong Roger? I mean the original one
had teeth and then I really supported Mayor Chmiel in his interpretation but we
are increasing intensity at that point which maybe is inappropriate.
Roger Knutson: I'll let you decide what went wrong. I don't get to vote on
that. Just so we're clear. That language you're talking about was not a
change. That's been in your ordinance for years. You can only have a boat in
11 front of your own house and I think that's.
Mayor Chmiel: That's registered.
Roger Knutson: Yeah. About 2 or 3 years ago that was put in. Then the change
was, well why can't I have my brother -in -law's or friend and give up the rights
to one of my boats so therefore it would be equal? And the decision was made
1 20
1
City Council Meeting - February 24, 1992
that that was appropriate and you certainly have the discretion to change your
mind and reconsider.
Mayor Chmiel: I would like that. I would like to have a little more discussion
with other people before I would bring that up for a reconsideration at this
time.
Roger Knutson: Since the ordinance is, I believe been published?
Paul Krauss: Well we were just checking on that...
Roger Knutson: The process I'd probably recommend, you wouldn't have to.
Considering the stage you're at in it, would be if you decide you want to undo
that or consider seriously undoing, of bringing the public back into it,
although it's a little more painful, I'd recommend that you go back to the
Planning Commission. Hold a hearing there and bring it back up here.
Councilwoman Dimler: To me the question is, did we violate the due process by
reconsidering? I'm not real sure. Did we Roger?
Roger Knutson: I'd have to review the process. ...you did not technically
violate due process. As far as I know you didn't. '
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. That would be my concern.
Roger Knutson: But this Council's been very strong in giving anyone an 1
opportunity to be heard that wants to be heard and you go out of your way to do
that more than anyone I know. So if you feel more input is appropriate, of
course you can do that by sending it back to the Planning Commission and then
bring it back up here.
Councilman Wing: Don, can I just clarify this? Also, one of non - riparian lots
commented that, it was an older gentleman who did not have a boat but his son
did and so he was going to let his son have his spot at the non - riparian lot,
which is the same thing. I mean we had requests for this easing up of this and
then, as I mentioned, the Mayor quickly reacted and I thought appropriately. If
we say lake registered in Minnesota to the property owner in front of his home,
that's very restrictive. And I'll accept that as a homeowner. I think that's
in the best interest of the lake. And then you're saying I can't have my
daughter keep her boat there or I mean it's that restrictive. Or if we put in
the word blood relative or are we still talking intensification? That's the
issue here. Alright. Okay. ,
Councilwoman Dimler: And I have one question too. Do we have a limit on the
number of boats that a private homeowner can have in front?
Roger Knutson: Yes. 3 I believe.
Councilwoman Dimler: Based on square footage? Front footage? -
Roger Knutson: Per lot...
1
21 11
1
City Meeting - February 24, 1992
Councilwoman Dimler: Well then it seems to me that would be simple by saying
it can be a blood relative's boat without intensification of the useage.
11 Councilman Wing: Then I'd go for the 2 for 1 also. If you are allowed 3 boats
and you choose to have a relative, blood relative and then you give up your
third boat. Right now there's a 2 for 1 basis which someone brought up.
Councilwoman Dimler: Not allow any intensification.
II Councilman Wing: I'm allowed 3 now. And let's say I allowed my daughter to
keep her boat there. That would count as 2 boats. I would be happy with that.
Frankly I'll go along with anything. I mean this is going to affect me and I'm
pleased...whatever's passed.
Mayor Chmiel: Alright. We'll move right along.
DIRECT STAFF TO PUBLISH A NOTICE FOR NOMINATIONS FOR A SENIOR CENTER ADVISORY
COMMITTEE.
Councilman Workman: So moved.
Mayor Chmiel: Paul, do you want to just touch briefly?
11 Paul Krauss: The next item on your agenda is consideration of plans and specs
for the senior center. The Senior Commission is trying to pull the strings
together so that when the doors open they can hit the ground running. There's a
desire to have a working group outside the Senior Commission proper. The
specific task is the well being and furtherance of the senior center. This
group would also have the ability to go out and put the touch on people in the
community to volunteer efforts and funds and that not for the senior center.
And after reviewing a lot of different senior centers, it was felt an advisory
board would be the best way to do that. Several members of the senior
commission met with myself and Councilwoman Dimler to discuss the make -up of a
senior commission and the the attempt was made to make sure that it's a wide
variety of folks. Some Senior Commission, City Council rep, business people,
church people, school people, as well as over time probably increasing members
support basis. The Chan Senior Club was also given a seat on this because
they're going to be one of the primary users. So with that we'd recommend that
you tell us to go ahead and publish it and get you some names.
Councilwoman Dimler: I just have one. It seems to me that there's 12 members
recommended here instead of 11 as the report says.
I Paul Krauss: There is and I know you wanted an odd number.
Mayor Chmiel: We should have an odd number.
t Paul Krauss: Well possibly we could do that by going.
Councilwoman Dimler: Well we've got, if you add up the 1, 3, 1, 2, 2, 1, 2 it
comes to 12.
Paul Krauss: Would you be comfortable adding•a third senior citizen at large
1
22
City Council Meeting - February 24, 1992
•
that's likely to be a user?
Councilwoman Dimler: Make it a 13 member committee then, yeah.
Mayor Chmiel: That's fine. I don't have any problem. '
•
Councilwoman Dimler: That's fine with me too.
Mayor Chmiel: Can I have a motion? ,
Councilwoman Dimler: I'll move approval, or Tom already did. So I'll second.
Mayor Chmiel: As amended?
Councilwoman Dimler: As amended, yeah. 1
Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Dialer seconded to direct staff to public
a notice for nominations for a 13 member Senior Center Advisory Committee. All
voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
APPROVE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR A SENIOR CENTER.
Paul Krauss: I think you're all aware that we've been working hopefully '
diligently towards getting the senior center plans developed and bring them
before you. When this project was originally conceived of, ttie HRA was working
with a ballpark cost estimate using tax increment funds of about $175,000.00 for
that. I'm pleased to say that by using hopefully a sharp pencil on this and
we're finding the plans at great length with the senior commission and trimming
some things here and there, we were able to come in with a cost estimate lower _ II
than what we had originally thought.. Depending on, and this is an estimate of
course. Projection of what the bids are going to come in at and there's always
a chance that we may do better but we have to wait and see. We think that we're
getting a center that really provides for multi functions. We tried to think
ahead and see what kind of.activity the Senior Commission and the senior
center's going to want to offer and this space can accommodate most of that. We
have Bert Haglund who's the project architect here tonight who can give you a
brief run through of how the center lays out. I guess I'd ask him to come up
and do that very quickly so that you can get a feel for that.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, fine.
Bert Haglund: Good evening. As Paul mentioned, we really got started with the
planning of this, by that I mean the design of this last, late November -early
December and since then we've been able to finalize the design and draft the
drawings and specfications and now here are ready to go out for bids. The
Senior Commission when they met last Friday approved the plans and specs that
you have before you as well as I believe you have also a copy of the project
schedule and the estimated construction cost. So again as Paul mentioned, I
have a drawing with me. I think I'll find an easel back here and put them up on
there.
Paul Krauss: While Bert's doing that, I should point out too that we were able
to use Block Grant funds on the architect's fees so that we were able to absorb
23 1
1
' City Council Meeting - February 24, 1992
that cost that way.
Councilwoman Dimler: While he's doing that, do you have the money from TIF?
Paul Krauss: I have to depend on the money manager for that but he assures me
that yes I do.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, good.
Paul Krauss: The TIF plans were also amended recently to accommodate the
construction. -
Councilwoman Dimler: Great, thank you.
Bert Haglund: First of all, just to get you oriented. You may already realize
' but this here is the existing lower level plan as it is today. And the area
that is shaded in here is the area that's actually going to be remodeled or we
expect...remodeling. It includes the space that is unfinished here...end is
open. It also includes what now is being used for storage. And that space is
going to be reconfigured as well. So that's the area that we're talking about
seeing construction. The plan itself has ended up. Here what I'll do is just
walk you through it as though you were coming into the center. At the west end
of the building, the existing sidewalk that comes up to that end of the building
will remain as it enters and approches the building here. There's currently a
door going into the building here which is going to be removed and replaced by a
II } 'window. Instead you'll enter the building here in what will be a new vestibule.
That's actually an addition to the building so that end right here is being
added. It will have the appearance, the same appearance as the entrance over on
this side of the building. So it's meant to be compatible. But you would come
into a rather large vestibule, the back of which would be used for coats. Coat
storage and boots and that sort of thing. The front entrance door and also this
door into the center from the vestibule will be on a power assisted door opener
so that is someone's disabled or an elderly person can just push a button and
the door will open. So that's a feature that the seniors really appreciate. So
from the vestibule you would enter into what would be the largest open space.
Just a single large open space here. To the left would be an office and that
office has a window next to the entrance here so that a program coordinator and
that that's sitting in here will see people coming and going. This open space
is divided into two areas essentially. This first part here is a carpeted area
and then this part over here has a vinyl flooring. There will be a total wall
that when you go from that direction to this direction up and then another one
in this direction over here to potentially make that a separate room so that you
11 could have two activities going on at the same time. This one has vinyl
flooring because this is envisioned as being used for arts and crafts, that sort
of thing and has as a part of that room, a work counter, a sink and some storage
cabinets. Also fronting onto this case will be some display cabinets.
Continuing down here, this corridor if you will, we'll come to a room right here
which we're calling a coffee nook. It isn't a kitchen per se but it is a place
where there's a sink. There's storage cabinets, there will be a microwave, set
up coffee. That sort of thing. That will be a coffee area which has a pass
thru into this spot right here. Then continuing further, we have here a set of
toilets. Mens and womens. And as we come down this direction there's a water
fountain here. And we continue down this corridor further, there's another door
1 24
1
City Council Meeting - February 24, 1992
here to the outside for exiting in an emergency. There's a window here which
will be taken away and replaced by that door. That will serve as a second means
of egress from the senior center and also from the library where we will put a
door here from the library into that same small corridor so they can have...
Then down at the very end, you have this area...storage where we can figure that
so we'll put a dividing wall in it separating it roughly into a third... On
this side this will be for senior center storage and some other city storage and
on the other side will be a storage room. This will be strictly library
storage. So they'll have their own storage space and not share with others. I ,
think that really covers the main features of the plan. Are there any
questions?
Councilwoman Dimler: I just want to make sure that we're not creating a 1
variance situation with that addition of the foyer. Has that been looked into?
Paul Krauss: It all goes towards the west side of the building. It's no closer 1
to the street.
Councilwoman Dimler: No problem, okay. 1
Mayor Chmiel: I guess I had a few questions Bert. ...fire code with that door
swinging back into the foyer, is that an acceptable swing?
Bert Haglund: This door here?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes.
Bert Haglund: This door here should.
Mayor Chmiel: Should swing to the out rather than going into the room. ,
Bert Haglund: Yes. With as many people as you can have in this space, the door
has to swing in the direction of travel that you're exiting. 1
Mayor Chmiel: Putting on that additional portion, on that far side where they
come in and hang up their coats, is that really necessary for that part? 1
Bert Haglund: Well as Paul mentioned, there are a lot of uses that this space
is looking to serve. Already it's a very small area trying to accomplish all
that we need. And as we walk through the programming, the activities and square
footage, it's our opinion that this is a really essential part of the project.
That without this we would have to take away some other space inside of the
building. And there really isn't enough space to afford that. 1
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, the question I have with the existing door. Can't that be
used as such now rather than put that back to the back side? ,
Bert Haglund: Well we would very much recommend that there be a vestibule as
you enter into...a vestibule or as an air lock. Especially in the winter that
can create a very uncomfortable state if you had a door just open directly to
the outside with people coming and going. So although from a functional
standpoint, strictly function. Yes, you could come and go through that opening.
But again, we would really recommend that a vestibule be part of that. 1
25 1
1
,City Council Meeting - February 24, 1992
Paul Krauss: If I could say a couple of other things. The vestibule is
designed with the long term goals of the ultimate construction for City Hall
which has a mate to this wing on that side of the building. At that time it's
envisioned that that vestibule be turned into a function like this one which is
an entrance hallway and we would reoriente things. One of the ways we 1
economized on cost in this center. Our original thinking, or some of the
original thinking was that the bathrooms should be where the existing stairwell
is and public safety. We found out that a couple things. That that was a
fairly expensive rennovation to make. It hindered access in the near term
between the upstairs and the downstairs. That's not that important right now
but it's probably going to be more important to use the space that way in the
future. But the cost of that was, we had to stick to bathrooms in the main
space. We're just losing sufficient ground to do what we need to do. One of
the goals here was that we had to accommodate the Chan Senior Club. Their card
tables and they have drawn upwards of 48 people and we've just barely fit them
in with the room this way so there really wasn't a whole of room to squeeze
11 anything out.
Mayor Chmiel: In using the lighting, I'm assuming this is going to be energy
efficient lighting as well?
Bert Haglund: Yes.
•
Mayor Chmiel: Is there any rebates that we can get from No Smoking Please
Company? NSP. And getting some of those rebates going through some of the
processes that we're going through with the energy efficiencies contained
within. I know there are some programs that are there.
Bert Haglund: Yes. And we are specifying energy saving ballast lamps for the
lighting.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. I guess that was probably about the concerns that I had.
I guess I looked at the total dollars and it was just absolutely knocked me off
my chair for the total dollar expenditure from what we're going into. From what
I had anticipated it was going to be. I envisioned $75,000.00, maybe $80,000.00
total cost and we've far exceeded that total amount. But I know we do need this
I kind of a center and I guess I'm looking at that overall cost. I'm sure that
when we probably go out for the bids, because we've got an awful lot of duct
work with our air contained within the facility. Our electrical is still there.
HVAC portion is there as well and the only thing you're going to have to do, as
I looked at the drawings. You're going to have to, it's my understanding that
chip our in order to get the water to the toilet facilities.
11 Bert Haglund: We'll have to remove a portion of the existing floor to serve
these plumbing areas and the toilets...
II Mayor Chmiel: Is there any overheads that we have that we can connect from that
rather than having to do that?
Bert Haglund: Well actually, what we've done is about the most economical we
could because the sewer line in fact runs diagonally from this point like this
and we're virtually sitting right on top of the sewer line and their plumbing.
So we realized...
26
11
City Council Meeting - February 24, 1992
Councilwoman Dimler: One other concern I have is that with the amount of
dollars that we're spending in relation to what we thought we were going to
spend, this may not always be a senior center. And I would like to know what
staff foresees this as being used as in the future for City Hall in case the
seniors move somewhere else? 1
Paul Krauss: Well we've had a couple of meetings to try and get around that.
Frankly I don't think anybody's really too sure. One of the options that's been
discussed periodically is that the HRA is giving some thought to constructing a
new library down the street. And this is clearly, I guess I'd call it a phase
1 senior center because it doesn't offer congregate dining and if this thing
catches on the way we hope it does, at some point that will have to be done.
That leaves a couple options. Now this is designed to be expandable. The
ceilings, the lighting fixtures, everything will match what's in the library.
Theoretically it's going to be possible to just kind of expand that space. The
hallways are designed to just come through the library with some minor tinkering
with walls in the future. There'd have to be a commercial kitchen added at that
point in time but that's certainly an option. If the senior center ultimately
relocates out of that space, I guess nobody is real sure about what that's going
to be. One of the reasons why we went ahead with that in this space in the
first place, this is very difficult space to use in day to day city functions
because the connections of upstairs to down there are not very good. Long term,
if there's another wing built onto City Hall, a lot of things could happen. But
at the very least you've got a series of meeting rooms which you know we already
intended to use these as meeting rooms to piggy back onto when it's not being in
use for senior activities, that the City can get a couple of other things going
in there at the same time. So you've got the meeting rooms. You've got the
bathrooms where you need them. So to the extent we could, we tried to make sure
that the investment is one that's going to pay you dividends into the future. 1
Councilwoman Dimler: So you could easily put up partitions and make offices or
something down there as we need it? 1
Mayor Chmiel: Oh yeah. Okay, any other discussion?
Councilman Wing: This is quite a step for old Chan. I remember the story about 1
your lonely walk one Saturday morning. That's how this all started.
Mayor Chmiel: Yes. That's why I said a few thousand bucks I thought you know.
We'd get some people to come in and volunteer their time.
Councilman Wing: I'm a little stunned by the dollars but I'm going to turn that
to you and rely on you for that judgment because you tend to watch it pretty
close. The seniors, I think at the HRA, I think somebody might comment they
tend to get kind of possessive. What are the intents for multiple use here? Is
there an intent for multiple use? 1
Paul Krauss: Yes, to an extent. I mean the primary use of the senior space is
a senior space but to the extent we keep on telling the senior commission this
and the advisory commission, there are going to have to be By -laws established I
would assume but to the extent that we have meeting rooms that may be available,
and they've got first dibs on them when it's available, we've got a real
27 1
1
'City Council Meeting - February 24, 1992
1
shortage of meeting space in this community and there's an intent to be able to
schedule that. Yeah.
Councilman Wing: Is there a refrigerator in the kitchen area?
Paul Krauss: Yes. 1
Councilman Workman: When we talk about using this in the future and we talk
about, what was that word you used? Who used the word about, that will become
the senior center and they might get a little territorial. The library is that
way. Now what happens when we need, and we're kind of building this with the
intent that some day soon the seniors won't be in there. I dare you all to push
them out the door but assuming we have another place for them to go, they will
go just like the library. Well we may be getting ahead of ourselves if we don't
have a library, we don't have a senior center and all of a sudden Paul's
Planning and Company gets so big they need the entire lower level. And then
Krauss' is going to have to push the elderly into the park. So with that in
mind then okay we've got kind of a kitchen area and bathrooms, which you need
but now I'm trying to imagine which department would use that fancy little
dinette area and is that wise for future City Hall use.
Don Ashworth: If I might. I foresee that lower level, if anything the request
from seniors will only get stronger. I mean I do not see that that group is
going to get smaller. They'll simply get larger. The requests jor more and
more activities will grow. The earliest that owners can vacate the Pauly /Pony/
Pryzmus property is July of 1994. We're anticipating being able to knock those
buildings down in that timeframe. Start construction.of a new library during
that timeframe with the idea that the library would be able to move in the
spring or summer of 1995 from their current location. At that point in time, 1
the lower area then could be expanded for senior needs and I think that's what
Paul was attempting to say. The long range plan would have seniors in this
building. It would also then move the Park and Recreation Department into that
.lower level and provide a better marriage. The programming activity that
they're currently carrying out in the upper area would again be moved to the
lower area and be part of the senior activity and other programs that they
operate. That will provide reasonable growth space for other city functions
during the timeframe of 1995 thru year 2000 and a potential wing onto this other
side then may occur sometime after the year 2000. As Paul was pointing out,
this corridor that we're starting right here eventually will be a mirror image
II of the one out here. So you'll have a corridor running down that side leading
to a stairway very similar to this one coming up on that side and what Bert has
shown is really pretty much an identical image. So if you stood on Main Street
11 and looked back towards this building, you'll see the angular wood front over on
this left side will be very much like the angular wood front on this side.
You'll see the corridor on this side will be similar to the corridor on that
I side.
Councilman Workman: I guess I would also, we might want to keep in mind the
fact that this room that we're in right now may become inadequate. As we.get
1 more citizens and we get more lakes, it may not be enough and certainly on
property degregation night, the Board of Equalization, you know we don't have
enough room in here and if I might add, we could probably use some new chairs. '
1
28
1
City Council Meeting - February 24, 1992
But just thinking how that hi g hat would all work out sounds like Todd Hoffman will be
able to mix up some goodies there mid -day.
Mayor Chmiel: Mike.
Councilman Mason: Let's do it. 1
Councilman Wing: What are the plans for Council expansion? How does that fit
in here? What direction are they going to go?
Mayor Chmiel: Well, we may be able to, like we've done before. If you have a
lot of people you're anticipating, you move over to the school. 1 think this
probably adequately serves for this particular time and probably for the next
few more years as well. If no other discussion, can I have a motion?
Councilman Workman: I would move that the City Council approve plans and
specifications for the Chanhassen Senior Center and authorize staff to solicit
bids for construction.
Mayor Chmiel: Second. With hopefulness that we will have lower bids than we're !
anticipating.
Resolution #92 -29: Councilman Workman moved, Mayor Chmiel seconded to approve
plans and specifications for the Chanhassen Senior Center and authorize staff to
solicit bids for construction. All voted in favor and the motion carried
} , unanimously.
RECEIVE SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT TO FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR WEST 78TH STREET DETACHMENT
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 92 -3; CALL FOR A PUBLIC HEARING.
Charles Folch: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. I'm sure you're very
familiar with the evolution and transformation of this project. It's our intent
to see this project proceed with construction this year. Right now we're
basically back to the feasibility study point. Since construction did not
initiate within one year of the previous ordering of the project, State Statutes
429 governs and requires that we hold another, or least prepare an update to
that feasibility study and hold another public hearing accordingly. In addition
there was some new information that resulted from the recently completed
downtown business district traffic study which was completed by Strgar- Roscoe-
Fausch that has affected some of the design elements of the project.
Specifically the new design proposed is to incorporate medians and designate
left turn lanes to help improve capacity levels of service on the roadway. The
previous traffic study also recommended the addition of traffic signals on West
78th Street governed by retail and population growth criteria. In fact the
timing of the Market Square development potentially could add the installation
of two traffic signals on this project located at the intersections of Kerber
Blvd. and Powers Blvd.. Tonight we have Mr. Jim Dvorak and Mr. Dennis Eller of
Strgar - Roscoe - Fausch to provide you a brief presentation of this feasibility
study update and answer any questions you might have. Jim.
Jim Dvorak: Charles, those of you that don't know, my name is Jim Dvorak. I am
an associate with Strgar- Roscoe - Fausch. I basically was in charge of preparing
this feasibility update and bringing the project to you. As Charles said, with
29 1 •
1
City Council Meeting - February 24, 1992
1
me is Denny Eiler. A principal with our firm who has dealt with the traffic
II study for the central business district. After I go through this quickly,
hopefully if you have any questions we'll be able to answer them. The project I
we're talking about tonight is West 78th Street Detachment between Kerber and 1
Powers Blvd. located on the west end of the central business district. As j
II Charles stated, the central business district traffic study identified a need I
for this particular stretch of roadway to be built with medians that would
provide for left turn lanes and separation throughout the corridor. What we
have here are some typical sections. The one on top shows basically the two
lanes in each direction with a center median. One thing we would like to point
out at this point is that this wider or larger center median there is going to
II be 18 feet. In this schematic, it . only occurs for a short distance. I'll get
to that in the plan in a minute. ..we have in the area what we term as a left
turn lane situation where there are left turns to make movements to the north or
south of the roadway into the planned development. Basically what this graphic
I shows is the storm sewer and utility layout. They are remaining the same as was
previously proposed under the work done prior to us. So I wouldn't give that a
great deal. It may be of more interest and is easier to see on this graphic is
II the actual medians themselves and some of other amenities that are being
proposed with the project. There are driveways shown in approximately this
location. A block east of Kerber and another main entrance north and south at
II this location and then a solid median filling in the gaps between those. To the
east, on the east end of town we have heavily landscaped medians. They're wider
than are shown here and there are I guess quite a bit of trees And that type of
planting amenity in there. As you can see on here, maybe on the reports, there
II are only short distances where we have provided a wide enough median to provide
for plant. The rest of the area, the median area could be concrete. It could
be some type of decorative bonenite. Some type of paver. That kind of thing.
11 We're open for any suggestions... Additionally we've shown some plantings along
the boulevard interspersed with the lighting system. Also included is the
sidewalk on both sides of West 78th. Sidewalk would be outside of the plantings
where you have the curb, the boulevard with the trees and the lighting and then
11 a sidewalk. Project costs, just quickly with grading, paving, drainage...
sanitary, watermain and landscaping, we come up with an estimate of about $1.4
million total between West 78th and Powers. Tacking on an additive for legal
II with engineering contingencies, half million dollars, we're up to about $1.9
million dollars. As far as funding, as Charles outlined in his staff report,
about $500,000.00 or a quarter of the project is proposed to be assessed based
II on city standard assessment policy. The other $1.4 million would have to come
out of some type of general fund or other means. With that I guess I would be
happy to answer any questions anybody may have. If you have anything on
transportation or traffic needs, I think maybe Denny can answer them.
II Councilman Mason: A real quick question. Just a real quick one on figure 2.
The bottom diagram. You've got one thru lane at 12 foot and another thru lane
II at 14.
Denny Eiler: Right.
11 Councilman Mason: Okay.
Denny Eiler: 14 feet is from the face of the curb to the center of the lane. A
11 thru lane where there's no curb and.there's no obstruction on either side can be 1
r
1 30
II
City Council Meeting - February 24, 1992
11
12 feet but since you have that curb there, we recommend the 2 foot of reaction.
Councilman Mason: Okay.
Mayor Chmiel: Somewhere in here I thought I had read that your contemplating
having a sidewalk on the north side? 1
Jim Dvorak: Both sides.
Mayor Chmiel: On both sides. 1
Jim Dvorak: That probably raises a good point here. The existing right -of -way
that's platted out there is only 80 feet wide. The section that we're proposing
here is about 74 feet face to face. So depending on how much boulevard and how
far you want your sidewalks set back, you're either going to have to require
some more right -of -way or acquire some type of easement over the adjoining
properties to construct the sidewalks outside of the road.
Mayor Chmiel: I guess I'm trying to just in my own mind justify having walks on
both sides of that road. I guess I'm probably answering some of my own because
the business that would be to the south with the existing 78th Street, that
would probably have those needs for those people to get there because there's no
way to get back across here and that's going to be a fairly busy road. The
other questions I have, looking at the proposed landscaping and lighting, it
looks like there's just an abundance of numbers of trees up•and down that
street. What is the total distance from Kerber to Powers? Remember off hand? 1
Jim Dvorak: I guess first of all I should, this is merely a graphic. This does
not pretend to...the number of trees or plantings. That would be work done in
final design with staff, with yourselves, making sure that everybody's
comfortable with that.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. 1
Councilman Workman: I know that to Mr. Burdick, the landscaping was of a big
concern to him. I know that that would be a part of an assessment. They'd have
the roadway, storm drainage, watermain, sanitary sewer but we don't have
landscaping. Will that be broken out? Just curious.
Don Ashworth: I don't believe that the landscaping was under previous 1
assessments. Is it being proposed to be assessed? I was thinking not.
Charles Folch: I guess I concur. I was under the same understanding that the
grading and paving, although it appears that the landscaping is lumped in with
the actual line item under the project financing table but correct me Jim if I'm
wrong, the assessable amount would represent basically the grading, paving, and
lighting type work.
Don Ashworth: It's answered on page 3 and 4. 327 and then 327 under assessable
so it's not being assessed. 1
Jim Dvorak: The landscaping is included in what were showing on the proposed
assessment but it can easily be modified and broken out. I guess whatever the
31
1
City Council Meeting - February 24, 1992
Council wishes. These numbers do have the landscaping reflected in the
II assessments.
Don Ashworth: There will be time to discuss this but I would recommend that it
11 not be included because I know that it can be an area that can be controversial ■
and I don't think that we want to get into a position where we're not going to i
plant a tree simply because the owner sees then that he's paying this amount for
this tree.
II Mayor Chmiel: It shows there landscaping, miscellaneous 458. As I total up the
total amount of trees as it looked, I think I came up with about $80,750.00.
II And some of the concerns I have in putting these trees in and adjacent to those
lighting standards, making sure that the trees are not going to be an
obstruction to the light distribution. I'd like to make sure that if we put
those lights in, that we do have them lighting those intersections with either a
Type II two way or no, that'd be a Type II three way as to what we have here
presently. Each of these standards that are shown are almost across from each
other and I think that the lighting should probably be staggered a little more
II too if those considerations are going to be looked at.
Jim Dvorak: That's something we can look at in final design.
II Mayor Chmiel: Because then you're lighting a little bit more.
Jim Dvorak: ...very wide pavement so we want to make sure that we have some
II uniformity down the road. As you're driving you don't want a bright spot and
then a dead spot. So that's something that we will look at in final design.
Denny II Eller: We had a few discussions on the pole types.
Mayor Chmiel: Are we looking at the shoeboxes?
I Denny Eiler: Shoeboxes and whether they may be 30 foot...whatever. Again,
there are several computer formulas for looking at Type II where you have a long
pattern but the shallow pattern so their lights opposite of each other may be
II more. Or you go to the Type III which requires a tighter spacing but then you
have a staggered pattern so there's several options. We're not to that point.
This is just kind of a generic graphic. One other item we can bring up, we've
II shown the roadway section that had a standard median treatment and standard lane
widths that would be typical for a State Aid type standard street. Now we
understand that the issue of landscaping is open at this time, the 80 foot
II right -of -way does kind of hem us in a little bit. We could go to a slightly
wider median. We're showing a 6 foot median adjacent to the turn lanes. We
haven't investigated the turn lane length at every location. Maybe some of
those could be shorter. We could possibly go out to a 10 foot wide median. Have
II a turn lanes which would give you 4 foot wider, 22 foot range between the
intersections. So that in the tapered areas you'd have a longer distance where
you'd have a plantable, tree plantable area. But then again you're pushing out
II to work that right -of -way line. Realizing the boulevard, the sidewalk, the
landscaping on the side, you're going to be off the right -of- way... So we've
shown it basically the standard roadway... We can narrow the lanes up slightly.
Hennepin County uses a 27 foot roadway. We're showing 28... On the left side,
■
I the driver sits on the left, they're comfortable with the 1 foot gutter. Maybe ■
I/ 32
II
City Council Meeting - February 24, 1992
11
you can pick up a foot that way. There's all sorts of little details like that.
•
Mayor Chmiel: What's our streets presently right now? 1
Jim Dvorak: 16.
Denny Eller: Is that what it is curb to curb where you have a single lane.
Typically MnDot would build an 18 foot roadway in that situation...
. Don Ashworth: Mr. Mayor, to go along with that. I want to make sure. We're
talking about a 6 foot median and this is as it applies to the protected turn
lane areas. Really a majority of the distance through here. 6 feet is not a
large enough distance to have any type of planting, whether it be grass or
shrubs or trees. And again your choices might be like a concrete, asphalt, or
like a bulminite which they emulate then what a brick might look like. But I
mean you're not going to have, I think the comment has been made that in the
downtown area that it's been overly done as far as the amount of trees and
grass. Well we're going to go kind of the other way because this will be more
the standard type of islands. Just solid concrete and it will only be in those
center sections where you can have some form of vegetation. So I think that's
really the question that Denny's asking. Do you want them somehow to try to
widen that enough to allow the grass or some smaller plantings in a larger area
or are you happy with the idea that those islands throughout that whole area
will pretty much be just concrete? So you have concrete curb, concrete and then
concrete curb.
Mayor Chmiel: What's the existing center median?
Don Ashworth: 16 feet. 16 feet allows you then to do the type of things that
you have out here. I agree and I think Denny would agree that the previous one
put too many trees, and especially as you started to approach the turn areas.
Qkay? That's some of the conflict that's out there but I don't know that we
necessarily want to go to the other extreme and that is almost total concrete ,
the whole distance. Again I think that's the question Denny is posing to you.
Mayor Chmiel: How do we funnel that traffic? It's easy going out towards
Powers Blvd. coming from downtown but how do we funnel that traffic if we're
going to make the road wider, maybe even 2 lanes. How do you funnel that down
back into that one lane without causing congestion and problems? 1
Denny Eller: As the traffic volumes grow in the section east of Kerber,
eventually you're going to have to add, have to widen in that area. With the
. first phase of the development, assuming that's still Market. Doing to one lane
and widening to 2 is no problem. It's dropping the lane going east...and we
presume that will be dropped as a right turn lane at Kerber. So you've got to
have some advance warning that the right lane must turn right at Kerber, or the
next intersection. Some sign to that effect. That's called a. trap lane. Not
too bad when it's a right turn lane. It gets to... That should work out as an
interim solution. And presumably with the development there, you would have
enough right turners to make that a very attractive movement in the first place.
But as Market gets extended south of TH 101 development, and starts to grow in
the whole area... The likely place would.be to extend that lane en Market so if
you're going to have a trap lane, Market looks like it doesn't have one because 1
33 1
11
City Council Meeting - February 24, 1992
you're going to have a lot of right turns heading east and wanting to turn south
I to get to TH 5 and go down.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay.
Councilman Workman: I'd move approval.
Mayor Chmiel: Accepting approval of the feasibility report.
Councilman Workman: Report and call for public hearing on Project 92 -3.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, did you want to amend it to take the landscaping out
of the assessment?
Councilman Workman: Yeah.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, is there a second?
II Councilwoman Dimler: Second.
Councilman Mason: At what point will we be making these kinds of decisions
about trees and this, that and the other thing?
Mayor Chmiel: When final design more or less. I shouldn't say final but during
design time. Any other discussion? '
I Resolution #92 -30: Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Disler seconded to
receive the update to the feasibility study for the West 78th Street Detachment
Project No. 92 -3 dated February 19, 1992, deleting the landscaping from the
,II assessment portion, and calling a public hearing for Monday, March 9, 1992. All
voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
11 COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS:
Mayor Chmiel: Dick, do you want to touch on your item (b) at this time for
II Council Presentations?
Councilman Wing: Pr. Mayor, I misread item 1(b) or I misinterpretted it but I
I did have a comment that I'd just like to make. It came out of Planning
Commission and having watched and listened to them over the last few months. It
has to do with lot size. Paul's got his, what's the name of this ordinance
you're looking at the PUD and lot sizes?
Paul Krauss: PUD standards in residential.
Councilman Wing: PUD standards. And I just want to express my concern or
interest here that PUD's are in. PUD's I think are accepted. I think we like
PUD's. PUD's give us what we want and the proposal that Paul has before the
Planning Commission is our standard 15,000 square foot lot with a minimum of
10,000 allowed on PUD's. Planning Commission's been debating this and arguing
back and forth and trying to come up with the numbers in deciding what to do for
some time now as I understand it and I thought might be appropriate for the
I I Council, whether it's a work session or whatever, to discuss this very issue and
34
11
City Council Meeting - February 24, 1992
11
talk lot size. If we're happy with 15 and 10, maybe that could be a direction
toward Planning Commission to help them make a decision. On the other hand,
I've kind of stated that I don't care to go as high as 22,000 like Minnetonka. I
don't see any point for that but I picked compromise numbers out that we raised
our minimum lot size to 18,000 and then a PUD down to 13,000 so we kind of
little less density and little larger lot sizes all around which I felt more
comfortable. Little less density. Little less people. Little less pollution
and so on and so forth. It seems that if the Council takes this from the
Commission, we maybe could save them a lot of time if the Council actually had
an opinion and wanted to give some direction on lot size and where to go. And
maybe it's smaller. Maybe it's no change but maybe in fact there is a majority
here that would like a slightly larger lot size. I'm not sure how we would
approach that or the proper protocols here Don but.
Mayor Chmiel: Well nothing can be done but be some discussion to have staff
look into it and come up with some of those conclusions.
Councilman Wing: Did the Council ever come up with a resolution? What's the
word I'm looking for? How would we come up as a group with maybe a consensus
that would assist the Planning Commission in making a decision pending on what
we might do anyway.
Al
Councilman Workman: We'd call Chairman Emmings tonight at about midnight.
Mayor Chmiel: I guess it's something that I have looked at and have voiced my
opinions against because 10,000 square foot lots to me is absolutely ludicrous.
My opinion.
Councilman Wing: I feel the same way so what do we do? 1
Mayor Chmiel: I was always under the opinion let's go to the 20,000 and offer a
PUD at 15,000 and I'm serious when I say that. '
Councilman Wing: And I'm willing to compromise at 18 and 13.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. That's something we can discuss. 1
Councilman Wing: Well I'd follow your lead.
Councilwoman Dimier: Is the Planning Commission looking for a recommendation 11
from us because I think we're reversing our roles here. They're supposed to
advise us and here we're advising them. 1
Mayor Chmiel: I'm just offering my opinion. Anybody else can offer their's.
Councilman Workman: Let's hear it from the young end. 1
Councilman Mason: I lived in a side by side home in Minneapolis for 7 years
with what I believe they call negative lot line. Or what is it? 1
Paul Krauss: Zero.
1
35 1 •
11
City Council Meeting - February 24, 1992
II
Councilman Mason: Zero. Believe me, there it was negative. And you know, in
II certain circumstances it works just fine.
Councilman Wing: Did you have a boat? Were you employed at the time? Did you
have any children?
Councilman Mason: That's none of your business. But yes, yes, no, yes, yes.
So I certainly think it's open for a fair amount of debate.
,1 Councilman Workman: I think maybe going to 20, that kind of ignores some of the
realities of home buying to a larger group of individuals wanting to enjoy the
-- amenities of our fine community. I don't believe in 10. Now you just said you
liked my neighborhood and I'm not living in decadence but I think I'm just under
• 15. But I think it's very nice and comfortable. They're building bigger houses
on littler lots and it's kind of the way it's going but that doesn't make it
right or wrong but I think we're kind of closing out a group of people if we're
getting. The bigger the lot and the bigger the house you've got to put on the
lot, the more people you're closing out. Maybe that's what we want to do but
for younger, two income, professionals who are fighting to keep ahead of
I inflation, it is very difficult.
a Councilman Wing: It will have an affect on the market.
Councilman Mason: And maybe we're not just talking about professional people
moving here too.
I Mayor Chmiel: That's true. I think the whole intent behind the...at the time,
and maybe I'm wrong but this is my viewing of it, is the fact of having a house
II that's affordable for most people. But once it gets going that price is not
there. The price is escalated yet but yet you're still having a smaller lot.
And to me it just didn't make sense. You put a larger footprint on it and that
accessibility is there. Where do you put your kids to play? What do you do
II with those kinds of things and I think that's maybe some of the things that the
Planning Commission has indicated as well. I've seen that too often and rather
than having the kids playing out in the street, you want them playing in the
I/ yards or going to the parks. But if they don't have a park accessible to them
that close, kids aren't going to do it. They're going to play in their yards.
If they have that space. And I guess all the years that I've had my kids,
I there's always been enough back yards. They want to play football, they could
play football. If they wanted to play baseball, they could play baseball. But
it's there. That accessibility is there and there again I'm looking at it from
a standpoint too that it does provide one of the things that we always look at
II is public health and safety and the safety aspect to me needs those kids in the
yards and those yards should be a little larger than what they are. At 10,000
square foot. How much larger, that can be discussed.
I Councilman Workman: I just think that we can dictate whatever we want. Do
whatever we feel comfortable with. The market will tell us if we're right or
II wrong. If we choose that we do not want to develop very fast or perhaps not at
all, then the economy or the forces that be will tell us whether or not we're
keeping something out or not.
II 36
11
City Council Meeting - February 24, 2992 1
Mayor Chmiel: I guess I look at it too from operating from an individual
developer. Sure, they're in there to make the dollar and that's why they're
doing business but to give them 1 additional lot for every 3, I really sort of
question. And that's size.
•
Councilman Wing: That density thing is the issue I settle on. Density means to
11
me more traffic, more pollution, more noise, more taxing the city services and
even by upping say to my 13, which is an arbitrary number, what are we cutting
• out of a division? 3 -4 lots at the most? All we do is widen the line. We just
cut the plan a little differently. Anyway I've said my piece and appreciate
your comments.
Councilwoman Dimier: Do you want mine? Okay. I think 10,000 is way too — -
little. So I would go for a bigger one as well. I think that we don't want to
shut anybody out and I know that Chanhassen has been known to do that with high
taxes anyway. I've heard lots of people say I can't afford to live in your
community. And I've tried to tell them, I don't know what but we're going to -
try to do something about that but anyway so I would favor something inbetween
there where we're not shutting people out but also for the safety concerns and
children playing and so forth, I definitely favor larger than 10,000. And like
you said, I don't know if it should be 13. Perhaps 14. Whatever but to do a
study and see what is safe. look at what is a safe density for us.
Mayor Chmiel: I guess you've heard some of the discussions back and forth here.
At least getting a sense, a feeling as to where we're coming from. I think that
you've really been sort of spinning your wheels back and forth on the issue and
everybody can't quite get together. At least it seems to me there's a consensus
of opinion here that 10,000 is much too small, but what that size should be is
something I think we can discuss. Maybe even at our, if there's time, at our
workshop coming up on Saturday. So with that, we will move on. Thanks for
listening.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: PLANNING COMMISSION REQUEST TO PROCEED WITH STUDY
OF HIGHWAY 5 CORRIDOR, PLANNING DIRECTOR.
Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, I guess I don't think I need to spend a whole lot of 11
time on background with this. Everybody on the Council I think has seen the
presentation from Bill Morrish and his folks at least one of the times he's been
here. And I think you're aware of the fact that even before Bill's folks became
involved the City and the Planning Commission, City Council have made a
tremendous amount of progress in how we manage development over the last years.
We had the comprehensive plan completed. We're in our storm water program.
We've gotten completely new set of ordinances to deal with and there's a lot of,
and I think what's probably most important of all is that the expectations you
have for this community, I think the expectations most of the residents have for
the community, have really risen and there's a belief that you can achieve a lot
of innovative things. Given that and given the input that we had from the
University, the Planning Commission very strongly felt that we should proceed to
the next step which is the formalized corridor study building upon what the
University folks have done which really is some conceptual ideas. They need to
be refined. They need to be made real and public hearings held to make sure
that the engineering works and everything else. So I'm bringing forward a
recommendation that we proceed along the track of undertaking that study. Now
37 1
1
City Council Meeting - February 24, 1992
1
last fall when we had discussed this at a work session I had hoped that I could
do a lot of it in house. Since that time we frankly have gotten quite busy and
committed to a lot of different projects. New development is really starting to
build up again and I'm also losing one of my planners for most of the spring and
summer. We really think that to the extent we do something, you really have to
operate quickly. Either decide to go ahead or not because there's a tremendous
amount of development design going on in that corridor today. And one of the
things I want to point out, whether or not you go ahead with a full blown
corridor study, we should be working very intensively on TH 5 right now.
Charles and I had an initial meeting with MnDot on a design of the next phase of
TH 5 and think we've got a real good working relationship established but we've
got a lot of concerns too about how the highway's designed so that would be, if
I you go ahead with the corridor study, that's something that falls well into it.
If you don't, you really ought to consider going ahead with that independently.
With that I'll turn it over to you for your discussion.
I Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thanks. I was going to say something first but I'll save
mine for last. Ursula.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. I was in favor of doing the corridor study. Of
looking and planning and having it look great. You know not have it just
haphazardly grow. I'm also in favor of, and I don't know if it's included in
1 here. I think we would really be making mistake if we don't put in frontage
roads. Are they part of the plan? I'm not sure.
Paul Krauss: Well yes. The frontage road system is outlined in the
- comprehensive plan and certainly is one of the features of Bill Morrish's crew.
Councilwoman Dimler: It is? Okay. Good. I wanted to make sure of that. But
I one of the problems I see here again is allocating monies and monies for studies
and studies and studies. And where are we going? I mean I get a little
frustrated when we keep doing this and we're not really ending up with, what are
we ending up with that we couldn't do with the information we already have from
what's been done so far? And isn't it really up to us to sit down now and start
writing the design standards and isn't that really the City's job rather than
hiring someone else to do a study? And who are you talking about here too?
That the City should work with someone, with us and MnDot. Who should that be
and at what price?
'1 Paul Krauss: Well on the later question, and maybe the City Manager wants to
add something to that. We've had an ongoing working relationship on this phase
of TH 5 with Barton - Aschman who's also working with MnDot. And all the stuff
that the HRA has worked out with the intersection improvements and pavement
design and what not to let people know they're in downtown Chanhassen, that's
been done in that manner and I guess what we saw, that sort of a relationship
continuing. As to the first part of the question. I tried to be pretty
cautious when we got into this with the University because I think that what
they did raised the consciousness of a lot of folks and that's a real valid
thing to do. And I think the effort is really praise worthy because it pointed
a lot of interesting things out. But it's a highly conceptual thing that they
I did and it's not designed to stand the test of time. It's not designed to say
okay, here's the plan for the corridor. Let's just go out and build upon this.
It was a series of ideas. Good ideas that they put together and Morrish himself
38
City Council Meeting - February 24, 1992
Mayor Chmiel: That's the other thing. Where are the dollars going to come
from? We're not going to get any money from MnOot. You almost have to do the I
funding on this in order to get what we really want and that's going to be the
city. I don't know if there's any dollar allocations out there that we could
get from the Feds or the State in which I really doubt. Don?
Don Ashworth: I think you're right. The funding will have to come through
ourself. Surely it won't come from Arnie. He's just going to send us another r
bill. I don't know where the funding will come from. I !
Councilman Workman: Let's research that and then come back.
Councilwoman Dimler: Do your magic Don like you always do.
Mayor Chmiel: I think we have to really start thinking because as Paul
mentioned, there's already people requesting services be provided to their I,
areas. I don't know if we can curtail some of this. We could probably put, I
think we've discussed different things. We can probably put a moratorium on
something so it doesn't go too far but I don't like doing that either. My main
concern is okay, maybe we should proceed but we don't know what the total
picture is going to be. We don't know what the total costs are going to be and
whether or not the city can even afford it. There's the whole thing that it
really boils down to. But I think somehow we have to continue from where we are
right now and proceed but with the total amount of dollar expenditure I would
think is rather exorbinate in my opinion right now. Do you have something
working out the back door of another place?
Councilman Workman: I guess I'd move that we direct staff to find, diligently
look and find for cold cash that we can use to do this.
Mayor Chmiel: Or where it's going to come from.
Councilman Workman: Todd Gerhardt's all of a sudden missing one day and we got
the program, then we'll knew what happen. That was a motion.
Councilman Wing: I'll second that.
Mayor Chmiel: It's been moved and seconded. Discussion.
Councilman Wing: How can we discuss it without finances?
Councilman Workman: Let's talk about it Saturday.
Councilwoman Dimler: Well if they get the finances, we'll discuss it further.
Direction for the staff to look for financing and if they get the financing
we'll discuss it further.
Mayor Chmiel: Mike, you look a little disgusted.
Councilman Mason: Well I am and I'll tell you why. When we voted to approve
our budget, there was something thrown in at the last minute to give the
taxpayers a little bit more money, which is hey. Don't get me wrong. I don't I j
want calls tomorrow morning but it was to the tune of about $30,000.00 or so
43
I ,
,City 'Council Meeting - February 24, 1992
that we cut the budget a little bit more and at the time ou know things,
Y 9 ,
unforeseen things come up and I felt at the time that maybe we didn't want to
11 shut that window. But we did.
Mayor Chmiel: Can't cry over spilled milk.
II Councilman Mason: But if we end up not being able to do what we want to on
TH 5, there's going to be a whole lot more than a little bit of milk spilled.
II Mayor Chmiel: I don't disagree. I think the whole idea and the concept is
great. But realistically the dollars, whether they're here today or they were
here last week when we allocated them back to the citizenry of the city, that's
I/ another thing. Whether that *30,000.00 would even touch it, you're talking here
*40,000.00 or *60,000.00 and Paul said he's just probably raised that a little
bit.
11 Paul Krauss: Would it be useful if I also, I mean I tried to limit this but
talk to a few folks who I think might be...to talk about a work program and tell
them, give me a better idea about what this might cost?
it Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, but I think we've got to get this .moving too in a public
direction to make sure that that's taken care of.
11 Councilwoman Dimler: Plus I think too if the bidders know we don't have much
money, they might come down in their bids. You know. •
il .Mayor Chmiel: Maybe with that motion as we have it, to work at that and then
come back. I think that's the direction that you're getting. Any other
discussion?
il Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Wing seconded to direct staff to
investigate into funding to proceed with a study for the Highway 5 Corridor and
I then bring the information back to City Council. All voted in favor and the
motion carried unanimously.
1 Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Mason seconded to adjourn the meeting. All
voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 10:10 p.m...
1 Submitted by Don Ashworth
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
1
II
1
44
il
1
f �
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
FEBRUARY 19, 1992
•
' Chairman Batzli called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m..
MEMBERS PRESENT: Tim Erhart, Ladd Conrad, Matt Ledvina, Brian Batzli, Jeff
Farmakes and Steve Emmings
' MEMBERS ABSENT: Joan Ahrens
STAFF PRESENT: Paul Krauss, Planning Director; Kate Aanenson, Planner II;
Sharmin Al -Jaff, Planner I; Todd Gerhardt, Asst. City Manager; and Dave
Hempel, Senior Engineering Technician
Batzli: We're going to rearrange our agenda briefly, while we're waiting
for some technical difficulties to be resolved with our overhead projector.
We're going to jump into the old business, organizational items first and
take care of those things before we hold our public hearings.
ORGANIZATIONAL ITEMS:
' ADOPTION OF PLANNING COMMISSION BY -LAWS.
Batzli: What I'd like to suggest is that we have staff take a look at them
' and make them gender neutral. Also there is a typographical error
somewhere. Someplace here and I can't find my copy now because we skipped
ahead here. Does somebody have their copy handy? In Section 4.1, first
paragraph. Third sentence reads, each member shall cast it's ballot for
the member he wishes to be chosed for chairman. And I remember.
' Emmings: What's wrong with that?
Batzli: Chosed for chairman? Well, first of all there's a he in there and
I'd like that to be gender neutral but I would like it to read, eliminate
' chosed for and have it read, elected as. Any problem with that anybody?
And also chairman throughout I think should be chairperson and then
wherever it's he, it should be added, or she and there are several places
' throughout. If we can just do that kind of by voice vote tonight.
Krauss: We can make those changes.
' Batzli: Okay. Any other changes? So we need to adopt the By -laws if
somebody would like to make a motion, as amended.
Emmings: So moved.
Batzli: Second anyone?
Conrad: Second.
Batzli: It's been moved and seconded that we adopt the Planning Commission
By -laws as amended.
Emmings moved, Conrad seconded to adopt the Planning Commission By -laws as
amended. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
•
Planning Commission Meeting 1
February 19, 1992 - Page 2
LIAISON ATTENDANCE AT CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS.
Batzli: Steve, the last year has been attending just about all of them and'
in the past we've rotated. I prefer to rotate I think. I will try to
attend as many as possible myself probably but.
Erhart: I prefer to have Steve keep doing it.
Batzli: Okay, then Steve can just go.
Conrad: Oh, you're really squirrels tonight. '
Batzli: He's not going to make it easy.
Conrad: Kind of a freshman chairman.
Batzli: That's right. He's going to nail me. I would prefer to see
rotation. Is someone against having to go to one out of 7 Council
meetings?
Conrad: That's probably a smart thing to do. It's also though, what did II
you say Brian? You were going to try and make as many as possible?
Batzli: Yeah. • '
Conrad: The continuity is also real valid, and Steve, what was your
feeling when you were there? Did they call on you quite a bit? Did they
get to know you and feel confident?
Emmings: I went to about 1 out of 7. And lots of times didn't make it to
the planning issues because they tend to come on later. Wasn't really,
when I was there and there was a planning issue, and now we're getting down
to kind of a fluke, I didn't think they were, there were only 1 or 2
occasions where they were interested in input from me. Their dynamics are II
so different than ours that I can't say that while I thought it was
important to be there and watch how they work, I don't think it really gave
me much to bring back here. 1
Batzli: But see that's why I would rather have it rotate. Because I would
like everybody to at least see the dynamics and how they're resolving some
of our issues rather than forcing m'oi or one other person to attend every
meeting for that. Because I also have attended a lot of meetings where
they don't call on you at all or else they'll note that I'm in the
audience. Well why don't we ask him and then somebody else jumps in and soil
they never end up asking anyway. So you know.
Conrad: That's because it's you. -
Batzli: That could be too. I think the upshot was that we're going to
have a rotating. So we need a schedule for rotation among all the
commissioners.
Krauss: Okay. From our standpoint we can do that. The only thing for us
is we mail out a Council packet to who's ever going to attend so when you 1
Planning Commission Meeting
February 19, 1992 - Page 3
M
get the Council packet. We'll make up a schedule.
1 Batzli: I'd like you to give everybody the schedule also.
Krauss: Just as a reminder too. Your proposal that the City undertake a
Highway 5 corridor study is going to be heard at the Council on Monday. So
if you wish to be there.
LIAISON ATTENDANCE AT HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETINGS.
Batzli: Our last bit of old business to clean up here, and I note that
we've got our overhead so we can move onto our public hearings after this,
' is the Liaison at the Housing and Redevelopment Authority Meetings. Is
anyone interested in doing that?
Ledvina: I'll volunteer.
Batzli: Okay. So in the future Paul, if you can deliver the packets.
1 Conrad: Before we move on Mr. Chairman, we had a problem with terms. I'm
reflecting back on.
' Batzli: By -laws?
Conrad: On By -laws. I'm sorry, just catching up but we did have a problem
' with staggering terms. Now with new members, actually with Matt on board,
no. With 4 new appointments, we did stagger them and how did we stagger
i be
sUfggc t ; c %.,. l y 2 years for rotation and what have you. We shouldn't end
up with what we had the last time.
Krauss: You did wind up staggering them. As I recall, Tim was absent from
that meeting and got stuck with the longer term.
Conrad: And that was perfect. So do we need to adopt something
specifically to stagger? How do you do this Paul? How are we staggering
terms?
Krauss: You're doing it by nature of the fact that you serve set time
1 periods now and those time periods are now staggered so.
Emmings: They should stay staggered.
1 Krauss: Yeah. As long as somebody leaves early, we make sure that
whoever's appointed fills that until the duration of their original
appointment and then gets reappointed. It will all work. You're all at
staggered terms now.
Conrad: We are?
Batzli: So do the 4 people who were just appointed understand the length
of their term?. I mean are they all being appointed for 3 years?
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting 1
February 19, 1992 - Page 4
Krauss: Why don't I give you at the next meeting that list. I had my
secretary make it up. I'll bring it in.
•
Conrad: Okay. But we're not going to get another time where.we have 4
appointments at the same year? That's the only thing I want to validate so
whether we do it in terms of amending our By -laws or just administratively I
doing it Paul, I don't care. And I think you've taken care of it but I
just want to make sure. We should not have 4 re- appointments in one year. I.
Sorry, Mr. Chairman.
Batzli: Okay. Is that taken care of then?
Conrad: Nobody cared.
Batzli: No, I think it's important but I think Paul's going to tell us how
we're staggered. I think in the past what happened was there was a lack of
record keeping which created part of the problem. It was unsure for
example when someone filled in a position where someone had left early,
there was a lack of communication of how the length of time that
appointment was for. So I think that was part of the problem. There,was all
turnover in the Planning department which I think created kind of a lack ofIl
records. In any event.
PUBLIC HEARING: ' II
PRELIMINARY PLAT TO SUBDIVIDE 2.107 ACRES INTO 2 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS ON
PROPERTY ZONED RSF AND LOCATED AT 915 PLEASANT VIEW ROAD. EDWARDS VOGEL
SUBDIVISION, SCOTT EDWARDS AND DAVID VOGEL.
Public Present:
Name Address 1
Scott Edwards Applicant II Daryl Fortier Representing Frank Beddor
Kate Aanenson presented the staff report on this item.
•
Batzli: Just for my own education, when we're treating something as a flag,
lot, normally on a flag lot aren't they sharing a common drive?
Aanenson: You don't have to, no. There's a private drive, you can have up!'
to 4 homes but the only addition on the flag lot would be the side yard
setback which have to be 20 and that lot significant. What you do is take
the frontage back to a depth of where it's a square lot. You wouldn't
include this piece right here. You'd take the frontage based right there
which he has over 120 feet. 125 feet and the minimum would be 100 so.
Technically you can't develop on a lot that doesn't have public frontage. II
Batzli: Right. So you're treating it as a flag lot solely for the purpose
of allowing them to subdivide it? Is that what you mean?
Aanenson: Yeah. That he does have access. He does have enough frontage
further back in even though it's not on the public street.
Planning Commission Meeting
February 19, 1992 - Page 5
Batzli: Is the applicant here and want to say anything at this time or do
you agree with the staff report?
Scott Edwards: Yes. My only question was the need for...7 feet on
Pleasant View...
Batzli: Okay. Are you actually the applicant?
Scott Edwards: Yes.
Batzli: So you're Scott Edwards? Okay. No one else wants to speak at
this time. Okay.
Daryl Fortier: I'm Daryl Fortier representing Frank Beddor who's the
adjacent property owner.
Batzli: Can you come up to the podium please.
Daryl Fortier: I'm Daryl Fortier. I'm representing Frank Beddor, Jr. who
' is the property owner of the Vineland lots immediately adjacent to the
west. We're in favor of it providing access off of Outlot B which is the
staff recommendation. My only question tonight is whb currently owns
Outlot A? Your staff report says someone is, Mr. Cunningham would like to
purchase it. The question is from whom?
Aanenson: The developer of Vineland Forest Subdivision.
Daryl Fortier: Alright, thank you.
Aanenson: And that was created just so there was an existing home on
Vineland Forest. That was just created so that person could have a drive
and they don't even need it anymore.
' Emmings: Say Daryl?
Daryl Fortier: Yes.
' Emmings: On the Vineland Forest plat, you had a similar issue over the 7
feet. Extra 7 feet along Pleasant View Road, isn't that right? Do you
remember that?
Daryl Fortier: That's correct.
Emmings: You didn't want to give that to us either but you did, didn't
you?
Daryl Fortier: Actually it was on Troendle. Vineland did not give up the
7 feet. Troendle plat did.
Emmings: Oh, okay. It was .Troendle.
Daryl Fortier: I believe it was deemed as an oversight on the Vineland
plat.
r
Planning Commission Meeting
February 19, 1992 - Page 6
Emmings: Yeah, you're right.
Aanenson: Those three lots. 1
Batzli: Anyone else want to speak to this matter at this time?
Erhart moved, Conrad seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in II
favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
Batzli: Tim, do you want to lead us off? '
Erhart: Yeah, what's Outlot B? Why does that City want that? What is it
used for now? ,
Aanenson: Utility easements is what we'd like to maintain ownership for.
Erhart: Okay, you still have those easements though if you allow this to II
be used as a driveway?
Hempel: It's currently owned by•the City, Outlot B is. We do not, with ,
the plat we do not have any drainage or utility easements over it because
we own the property.
Erhart: I know but you would maintain the right to go over that? 1
Hempel: Undoubtedly an agreement the City Attorney would prepare.
Erhart: That's your intention here? i
Hempel: That's right.
Erhart: Okay, essentially he's getting almost like a driveway easement
then?
Aanenson: Right.
Erhart: And moving the property line to the south 10 feet, you feel II that's required because the rear yard setback, because the house actually
faces east. There is no way to view it as the back yard being the west
property line?
Aanenson: Even if it's the rear, the supplementary regs as far as this.
Krauss: Yes, it's frontage is on Pleasant View regardless of which way the
house if oriented.
Aanenson: But even so, the size of that garage, because it's almost, well
it's 755 square feet and an accessory structure has to be less than 400 to 11
be get that benefit of being up closer to the. setback. If we interpret it
the other way.
Erhart: Item number 3. You say you want a landscaping and tree
preservation and home placement plan at the time the subdivision is done.
Isn't that normally done with the building permit application? ,
1
a '
Planning Comwission Meeting
February 19, 1992 - Page 7
r Aanenson: Home placement plan be submitted?
Erhart: What you're trying to do now is essentially tie down where the
home is going to be?
Aanenson: Well he's going to submit a home building plan.
Krauss: It's in the building permit.
' Erhart: Okay, does that have to be in here as a requirement then?
Krauss: Yeah. It's here as a requirement and it's tripped when they come
in for a building permit. We can't add requirements to building permits
unilaterally.
Erhart: You want to do it in here?
Aanenson: Condition of the subdivision.
Erhart: Should that state to be submitted with the building permit?
Krauss: Sure.
Erhart: And item number 5. Who pays for that sanitary sewer and water
brought to the property?
1 Hempel: That would be paid for at time of building permit application.
Erhart: By the applicant?
1 Hempel: By the applicant.
Erhart: Okay, I would read this as, the City just assume responsibility
' for it. The way the condition reads. Maybe it's not an issue. If I was
the applicant, that's the way I'd read it. And 7 additional feet,, what
total right -of -way does that give us then on that side of it?
Aanenson: It would be half of the 80 so it'd be a 40 foot half width.
Erhart: 40 foot half width?
1 - Aanenson: So we still need 7 on the other side.
Erhart: Okay, that's pretty good for Pleasant View. That's the one that's
all chopped up isn't it? That's all the questions I've got.
1 Conrad: I agree with staff report.
Ledvina: No questions.
Emmings: I agree with the staff report.
Farmakes: No further comments.
1
Planning Commission Meeting 1
February 19, 1992 - Page 8
Batzli: Have we ever granted driveway easements over outlots that we own 11
•
for access purposes before?
Aanenson: I spoke with Roger and he said that that shouldn't be a problem II
but not that I know of.
Batzli: Is this setting a precedent that the city has to do this everytime '
we get a landlocked?
Krauss: What was unusual in this case was that we thought ahead enough
when we platted the Vineland Forest to know that some kind of provision
there was required and we just took possession of it. It's somewhat of an
unusual situation in that regard. We've only allowed access to lots via II private driveway for the last year and a half so it probably is the first
time we've done it this way but that's the reason.
Batzli: Is there any problem allowing access points onto Nez Perce, either!'
because it's on the curb or because it's close to the house to the,
whichever way to the right on the map is. Is that south?
Aanenson: To the south, yeah. We looked at that. The way the driveways II
line up and the homeowner came in and spoke with me o'n that one and it
looks like it shouldn't conflict with his driveway at all.
. Batzli: Okay.
Aanenson: But there was a concern but actually the best sight distance wall
right at that corner. The other way to develop it would be, I mean if they
combine private driveways and come out on Pleasant View but we felt like it
makes more sense to put it onto Nez Perce and allow more access onto
Pleasant View. It will be a Class II and 80 foot wide.
Batzli: I guess my only comments are, I agree with the staff report. I'd '
like to see that several technical things happen when somebody makes the
motion, including that the plans are included in the motion somewhere.
That item number 1 reads so that the existing home meets the setback
standards. I think we're talking about proposed Lot 1 or the garage and 11
not necessarily the existing home. Just so that it's clear as to what
we're trying to do there. And then an additional 7 feet of right -of -way,
they're not giving us anything under this subdivision other than the 7 feet"
right? So it's not necessarily an additional 7 feet. They're just giving
us 7 feet that isn't shown on the plan?
Aanenson: Right. 1
Batzli: Okay. I'd accept a motion.
Erhart: I'll move that the Planning Commission recommend to City Council II
that we approve Subdivision #92 -2 as shown on the plans dated January 21,
1992 with the following conditions. Item number 1, delete the word home
and substitute Lot 1 as shown on the plans. Item 3 to add the phrase, at
the time of the building permit. And item 5, the phrase that states that
the expense is the responsibility of the developer.
i
Planning Commission Meeting
February 19, 1992 - Page 9
Conrad: Second.
' Erhart moved, Conrad seconded that the Planning Commission recommend
approval of Subdivision #92 -2 as shown on the plans dated January 21, 1992
with the following conditions:
1. The proposed property line for the lot split be moved a minimum of 10
feet to the south so that the existing Lot 1 meets the setback
standards of the RSF zone.
' 2. Lot 2 gain access by receiving a right to use Outlot B to Nez Perce
from the city.
3. A landscaping, tree preservation and home placement plan be submitted
at the time of the building permit for staff review and approval.
4. At the time of building permit issuance of Lot 2, Block 1, a connection
charge in the amount of $7,732.68 (1992 balance) should be collected.
' 5. The City will provide and install sanitary sewer and water to the
property, at the developer's expense, at the time,the building permit
is issued for Lot 2.
6. The applicant shall dedicate to the City by final plat an additional 7
feet of right -of -way along Pleasant View Road.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
1 PUBLIC HEARING:
AMERICANA COMMUNITY BANK LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF WEST 79TH
STREET AND MARKET BOULEVARD:
A. PRELIMINARY PLAT TO REPLAT LOT 7, BLOCK 1. CROSSROADS PLAZA INTO ONE
LOT.
' B. SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A 7.268 SQUARE FOOT (2 STORY) BUILDING FOR PHASE I
AND PHASE II CONSISTING OF 4.200 SQUARE FEET.
Sharmin Al -Jaff presented the staff report on this item.
Batzli: Engineering, do you want to comment at this time before we hear
from the applicant or about the traffic study or anything?
Hempel: As Sharmin had pointed out Mr. Chairman, kind of a last minute
traffic study by the City's traffic engineer consultants, Strgar- Roscoe-
Fausch, they had prepared the downtown traffic study so they're quite
familiar with our future land use and potential number of cars using Market
Blvd.. We also have the Eastern Carver County Transportation study that
was prepared, in the year 2010 and full development, they estimated 7,400
trips per day on the street. That had engineering somewhat concerned with
a full access onto Market Blvd.. Based on their calculations that Strgar -
Roscoe performed, if future land uses intensify in the downtown area, we
II may have to relook at this intersection. If the number of accidents become
1
Planning Commission Meeting 1
February 19, 1992 - Page 10
excessive, the City would like to reserve a condition that if there are
excessive accidents, that we have a right to limit or restrict that access
to a right -in /right -out only and reconstruct the center median area.
Batzli: Would you like to give a presentation now?
Randy Schultz: Good evening. My name is Randy Schultz. I'm President of 1
the Americana Community Bank. We're here tonight to show you a design for
a site plan of a building project that we'd like to put down on West 79th
and Market Blvd.. We have an artist drawing here of what we think the 11 building will look like. Would be pretty close to. We also have a board
on the floor here that would show you some of the materials that we'd
expect the building to be made out of. Just like to say that we think it'd
be a very attractive building. We think it'd be the kind of building the ,
City of Chanhassen would be proud of to have right there on that main
intersection coming into the community and we look forward to constructing
the building and doing business in Chanhassen. As far as any questions,
I'll turn it over to our architect Kim Jacobsen to tell you more about the II
building. Thank you Kim.
Kim Jacobsen: As you remember we came in before you last time with a gray II
building I think when we were here. It was redone. 'it came back to being
a building that was technically Phase I. It was on a different site.
Opportunity came about and we said we'd like to add Phase II. It was
always planned but this was what developed in Phase II. We're still trying
to keep some of the downtown character. I think that was one of the goals
we tried to feel and wanted to have a building we'd feel comfortable in
town. So we kept a roof...we have the Timberline shingles, we're feeling II
comfortable with it. We've got an exterior material that is a masonary
_material. It's stucco type of material. It has a color to it. We've got
a rock faced block that goes down...to tie the building down. Overall we
received fairly favorable comments. Put awnings on it to kind of keep the
sum shade out and give it some color and feel. That in a nutshell is our
building. We did a plaza out in front. Put flagpole there. There is a
big fountain across the street and our earlier proposal had a fountain in
•
it but we felt it would not really fit with the large spray across the
street to have something that was fairly small. And we developed our
parking and everything predicated on the parking movements and movements on
the site. If there's questions, I'll sure... There's some tiles for
color. There's some inserts of tiles that are going to...building to just
kind of break it up a little bit. We do have some signage that...over the
entranceway.
Erhart: When will you see completion? 1
Kim Jacobsen: We would like to get started, you know if everything goes
well, middle of April through the end of April at the latest.' I figure 4 II
or 5 months until completion so August. July or August...
Batzli: Does anyone else have any questions right now? Some might come up"
I guess. I guess no one else is here for the public hearing. If someone
would like to.
1
•
Planning Commission Meeting
February 19, 1992 - Page 11
Erhart moved, Conrad seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in
favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
Batzli: Jeff, what do you think?
Farmakes: The building I guess it's an improvement over the original
' building. I guess I appreciate the fact that they made an effort to not be
the same as some of the other development buildings in the interpretation
I think I talked about that before. Basically being a carry on an
I identical building because I think the city loses out with that.
Particularly with an opportunity to have an upper end building in an
important location in the city. I always have been uncomfortable with
' reading that it should be compatible with retail development that's going
on. It seems to me we're limited ourselves. I see the definition of
compatible as being, doesn't clash with. Not the same as. And it's a far
friendlier building than the original that I've seen. I guess I would have
liked to have seen maybe a bit more of the detailing of the plaza. It
seems like it can be again a nice feature and a key corner. I have not had
the opportunity to look at some of your drawings a little closer. But it
looks like a major improvement. The signage area, I think for the size of
the building, that the signage is appropriate. I do have a question in
regards to the, who is the other tenant in the building? Does the tenant
want that too?
Kim Jacobsen: There is leaseable space right now. 1, 2 or 3 tenants. The
bank will have about 2/3 of the main floor. The upper floor and the last
1/3 of the south side facing 79th Street would be leaseable space.
Farmakes: Right now it shows that the Americana Community Bank on the
' monument sign is very, very small. Is tenant 1 you and then tenant 2
another leasee or would it be two other tenants?
Kim Jacobsen: It would be Joe Smoe's whatever and somebody else's
whatever.
Farmakes: Okay. So the monument sign would primarily then be for your
tenant?
Kim Jacobsen: For tenant only...
' Batzli: Does that fit in with what the sign task force is looking at?
Farmakes: Well, that's still pretty fluid. Real fluid as a matter of
fact. We've just begun that but I don't want to hedge on that because I'm
one member out of many that my preference would be that the monument sign
reflect the major tenant of the building. But I don't believe our present
ordinance is that.
Batzli: What do you think about the turn in, turn out? Did you take a
look at that? Do you have a feeling about that?
Farmakes: I would leave that up to the engineers. I can see that that may
be a problem when the area's entirely developed. That's a difficult read
for me considering that basically right now a large extent of that area is
r
Planning Commission Meeting 1
February 19, 1992 - Page 12
empty. And I don't think that that street is very heavily used right now. I
But I think once that development is in place, it will see far more
traffic. That will be main street. I have no further comments. '
Emmings: All and all, we've seen most of this before and we're just moving
it to a different site and it looks fine to me. I wondered if the parking
information that's in here, they're required to have 30 and they're
providing 36. It says in this report. Now is that based on just Phase I
or is that both?
Al -Jaffa With Phase II, they would need 47 spaces. They will be providing"
52. So they're fine.
Emmings: Okay. So that's fine. Alright. I think that's all I've got. II
It is. Oh, and the hard surface coverage also, it says 62% and there's a
65% requirement. The 62% is both phases?
Al -Jaff: I think it's Phase I only. They will be very close to 65 %. Dave
tried to calculate the hard surface coverage and he was very close to 65 %.
Emmings: So it looks like it's alright?
A1 -Jaff: Yes. They're still fine. We did a very quick check -up with
Phaes II before we came down here. Not all the information is in the
report that we gave you but they are fine.
Emmings: Okay. That's it. 1
Ledvina: I had a question regarding the engineering staff and their _
recommendation regarding two traffic accidents. It doesn't state the time '
period. Eventually two traffic accidents are going to occur. So is this a
year or?
Hempel: That's correct. That was an oversight on our part. We're looking"
at a 12 month period.
Ledvina: Okay. I'm a little bit confused about the number of tenants that
would be in this building. Would there just be Americana and then one
other tenant or Americana and potentially a group of other businesses?
Randy Schultz: ...we're not sure at this point. We have lease space and II
of course we're going to obviously try to find good, suitable tenants and
we'd like to have as few tenants as possible._ The building will be
designed, it will be able to accommodate a large tenant or another smaller '
tenant. How that will shake out I don't know.
Ledvina: No other comments. 1
Conrad: It looks good. The impervious surface or the hard surface, as
I look at the map it doesn't look. It looks like there's a lot of hard
surface on the diagram so I just want to make sure. We did the calculation'
today or when did we do the calcuiation for everything including Phase II?
Hempel: Approximately 2 weeks ago. 1
Planning Commission Meeting
February 19, 1992 - Page 13
11 Conrad: But you're pretty confident we're close?
Hempel: Very close.
•
Conrad: Okay. The question on future parking. The site north of the
drive thru. Is that a bermed area? That's grassy and we'll convert it to
' parking?
Kim Jacobsen: Right now in order to Phase II in, that already will be
' bermed.
Conrad: Is there grass there at all or is that just parking? Is that just
hard surface parking then?
Batzli: Are you looking at the new set of plans?
Conrad: I'm looking at whatever Tim has here. That is grass, okay.
Kim Jacobsen: In the plaza design, the amount of hard surface in the plaza
has been cut down. There is a design...landscaped and it comes back in and
it's full of plantings. has a seating area to it. That was done as
representation of the plaza... We've actually cut down on the hard surface
area or soften it a lot. I've got it along if you'd like to.
Conrad: Well yeah. Is it easy to? As they're doing that, our left in off
of Market Blvd., if we were to, what do we do? Do we create a left turn
lane then or is that just a left turn from, as we're going south, is that
just a left turn from one of the two lanes that are there or how do we
handle that traffic?
' Hempel: Prior to this bank proposal there was another one, Crossroads
Bank. They had looked at originally a full access also I believe. The
original Market Blvd. construction plans showed a median going all the way
up to the railroad tracks and a standard width of the road. Since that
bank proposal they looked at cutting back the center median and also
putting a tapered end on the west side of Market Blvd. to expand the lane .
width. This taper here was expanded to allow for left turns into here.
Into the bank site and also to swing traffic around the median. Actually
there are two lanes capable up here. A 12 foot lane... What happens with
' the expanded driveway, if we allow the wider cut. We are cutting back the
median and it's kind of a short taper zone then. When you're driving south
on Market. It's actually below design standards right now. Staff looked
at, originally sat down and looked at this and on a quick note, we thought
well if we're going to have a left turn lane or allow a left turn onto
southbound Market, it might be a good idea to provide an extra lane width
in the access. So we have a right out, a left turn and one lane in. After
I rethinking that, we believe the site will function properly with just a two
lane entrance. One lane in, one lane out. If stacking becomes a problem
on left turn lane, they can loop back through the site and exit out to 79th
Street which is the desired out anyway.
11 Conrad: 5o we don't end up with a left turn lane coming in?
1
Planning Commission Meeting 1
February 19, 1992 - Page 14
Hempel: Yes we would. That can be striped. Right now it is a painted 11
median out there. That would have to be revised.
Conrad: Did you find the? 1
Batzli: Yeah. It's still at this end. It's coming around.
Farmakes: I have just a quick question. Is this relatable in size to the
site plan that we have on page 1?
Kim Jacobsen: Pardon me?
Farmakes: How does this relate in size? I notice a difference in what I'm1
seeing here.
Kim Jacobsen: It's a 1 to 30 and the other one is 1 to 40 so you're at
different scales there. That's a working drawing.
Batzli: Do you want to take about a 2 minute recess while you get a chance
to look at this and look at what we're doing here? I think there's been a II
lot of changes and I wouldn't mind taking a short break just to try and
figure out what changes this is.
(The Planning Commission took a short recess at this point in the meeting"
Batzli: Ladd, we were right in the middle of you and your discussion. II Conrad: I'm done. I think I feel comfortable with what I see. I do. No
more questions.
Erhart: Where's, the bank customer, where's the predominant parking when 1
you want to go and make a large withdrawal? Who parks in the north
parking lot? Where the 16 stalls are. That's employees?
Kim Jacobsen: Employees and some leased major tenant that would come in.
Same thing with the far easterly stalls...most of those are again for
employees or tenants of the building parking. 1
Randy Schultz: Employees will be asked to park as far from the building as
possible. 1
Erhart: Right, okay.
Batzli: Is there a rear entrance to the building? 1
Kim Jacobsen: It's not a public rear entrance. It would be a person would
walk into the lockable entrance. 1
Randy Schultz: You can enter off of the plaza. That would be an entrance.
Erhart: But that's the only entrance so if you're parking on the east end,`
you have to walk around the front?
Randy Schultz: No, no. That's the main entrance to the building. 1
1
Planning Commission Meeting
February 19, 1992 - Page 15
Erhart: Oh, it's not from ar 0 r the plaza?
•
Krauss: It's got two entrances.
Kim Jacobsen: The main entrance to the building would be right off this
parking lot into that entrance there.
Erhart: Into the bank?
Kim Jacobsen: Into the bank or actually into a leased space.
Erhart: What about into the bank?
' Kim Jacobsen: Into the bank, this direction also.
Erhart: So you can get into the bank from both directions?
Kim Jacobsen: You can get into the bank from both directions. You can get
into the leased space from...
11 Batzli: 5o are people from the parking lot then cutting through the drive
thru traffic if they're parking in the north stalls? '
' Kim Jacobsen: They shouldn't be. It's two way traffic on that northern
route.
Krauss: No, but I see what you're saying and yes, that's a possibility but
what we're talking about doing is probably an oversight on our part but we
have typically labeled more inappropriate stalls as employee parking only
' forcing those folks to park in places that might be a little more
hazardous. Like the ones just to the outside of the drive up should
definitely be employee parking only. You want to free up the best spaces
in front of the door.
Kim Jacobsen: That parking up there has actually been created. They have
•
11 a room which may operate as a community room or as a service room for the
bank and that appears off the plaza and that would be open late hours.. In
other words it might be open until 9:00 or 10:00. The drive thru would
traditionally close at 5:00 or 6:00. 7:00, whatever. It's really to
' serve late night if someone comes into that room and uses it.
Conrad: Sidewalk on both those streets?
Kim Jacobsen: There's an existing sidewalk on Market and yeah, we're being
asked and we will put in a sidewalk on 79th.
11 Erhart: On the parking lot adjacent to the bank but on the east side, is
that for people who are going to be coming and going frequently?
Kim Jacobsen: Yes. It would be customers that either bank or the lease...
Erhart: That's a lot of turning in there isn't it? Dave do you see that
as well designed? Or acceptable.
1
Planning Commission Meeting -
February 19, 1992 - Page 16
Hempel: It appears acceptable. Any kind of banking facility like that 11
you're going to have a lot of vehicles moving. Pedestrian traffic is
always a concern.
Erhart: I understand the movement. It just seems you've got to turn in and
all of a sudden you've almost got to turn like it's almost another entrance
onto. another street to turn into that parking lot. I see a lot of
potential for conflict there. Almost create a lot.
Kim Jacobsen: It's not a major street. It's a parking lot. Traffic's
moving at 5 to 10 mph. I don't see internal problems... A lot cleaner
than the last one we brought to you.
Erhart: Well yeah. A lot of turns but I'll leave that up to Dave. What
are the awnings, that's awnings I think on there. I'm getting old. I can't
see so good. Is it awnings right?
Kim Jacobsen: Yes. 1
Erhart: What's the material? What's the life of the material? Color or
durability? 1
Kim Jacobsen: 3 to 5 years on an awning.
Erhart: Really? 1
Kim Jacobsen: A commercial awning. It should be 10 years but I would 11 never tell anybody that. They'll tell you 10 years.
Erhart: When it fades and starts looking ratty, who's responsible to get
it changed?
Kim Jacobsen: The bank. It's got an image. You're not going to stick
dollars into a bank without an awning. I mean I think that's the biggest 1
thing you've got. You've got tenants...
Erhart: You're not a savings and loan right?
Randy Schultz: No, it's not a savings and loan. We're a bank. A year or
two from now you may not think...
Erhart: Is staff satisfied with the awnings issue? Non - issue?
Krauss: It really is a self controlling problem. If it got notoriously
bad and we had to interact, I mean the property owner has an obligation to II
maintain the property in the condition you approved it. So theoretically
we could go after somebody if it became a problem.
I/
Emmings: Are we approving it with awnings? I mean we've got a drawing
out here. An artist rendering.
Krauss: Yeah. It's part of the architectural elevations. 1
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting
February 19, 1992 - Page 17
Emmings: Okay. Does it appear in the plans too? The plans that we're
approving?
Kim Jacobsen: Yes, definitely. The elevations...face south and leave
those windows exposed, we're going to have a real heat problem.
Farmakes: There are no graphics on those?
Krauss: I think one important thing that you need to recognize on this
site is that it's a corner site. It's a little more difficult to develop
but I think there's a real advantage with this site plan over the
Crossroads. I don't know if the Crossroads appeared in your packet but
Crossroads had all the drive thru was on the corner and the building was
further back. It had less conflict in terms of the parking lot but your
main view of the place was a drive up window which really was not all that
appealing and I think this with the plaza and the building and everything
behind it is a lot more attractive.
Emmings: It also made you feel a little insecure to have a bank with
wheels underneath it.
Erhart: Okay, I've just one last question. Maybe sdinebody asked this.
11 The plaza, the material itself, is that a non -slip?
Kim Jacobsen: Yeah, we're going to use a crushed concrete and exposed
aggregate mix.
Erhart: Oh, so it's not tile?
II _ Kim Jacobsen: No tile...so we're keeping it so it will be non -slip.
Erhart: Okay. Looks good to me.
r Conrad: 90% of your business wouid be drive thru traffic probably?
Randy Schultz: Usually 60% to 80 %.
r Conrad: 60% to 80 %, okay. The only thing that really bothers me about the
plan is that little bit of a cross street. You know most of the folks will
be going through your 3 drive thru stalls and our engineer has looked at it
and he's comfortable with the taffic alignment on the north side of the
property. Just, and you've probably thought about it. You've got cars
backing up into the inbound lanes and I know why you've got those parking
stalls with the berm on the south. However, would it make any sense to put
the berm on the north of those parking stalls so you don't.have folks
backing up into the inbound?
I/ Krauss: But then you would have them trying to back out into what may be
standing traffic in front of.
Conrad: The drive thru. Maybe. There looks to be space there.
Batzli: Isn't that the truck lane?
Planning Comn,�ssion Meeting 1
February 19, 1992 Page 18
Kim Jacobsen: ...I think that northern road really is for employee
parking. If I went into the bank I would probably come back out of that
parking lot and exit back onto 79th Street...
Conrad: Most of the traffic is drive thru and most of the traffic will be
coming from Market Blvd., that's why you want to be on that left end I
assume. i
Kim Jacobsen: I think that most your traffic's going to come from going
home. It's going to be a normal drive thru i.s 3:00 to 6:00 peak time.
They're going to be coming off of TH 5. They're going to be right turning"
in. My guess is once you do it once, you're going to turn in on 79th and
drive thru. It's going to take one time and you're going to find people go
to the easiest way.
Conrad: Yeah. So your premise is, most will be coming from TH 5 and then
you're right. They will go to 79th. If they come in from downtown,
they're going to be coming in, they're going to take your northerly access
off of Market Blvd..
Kim Jacobsen: And I really think that if you think about your normal 1
traffic pattern when you go to your bank, it is normally on your way home.
At least for me it always is.
Batzli: You get a lot of traffic Saturday mornings though and that will II
probably be the other way.
Conrad: Well you've thought it through.
Batzli: Tim, did you have anything else?
Erhart: No.
Batzli: Okay. We were given a look at the new plaza but it's nowhere on '
our plans. How do we make sure that that gets into what we approve
tonight, if that's what the applicants are going to do and we all like that
new concept?
Krauss: I don't know if that sheet was dated or anything but you can
reference it in your recommendation to make sure it gets approved. Maybe I
should explain why, I mean we don't usually like to bring these things that
are, have loose ends dangling but we've worked with this group for quite a
while to get them into the city. We've got a good working relationship
with them. Because only due to some unfortunate delays with Market Square '
they would be open already and we've really been trying to work with them
on their schedule as much as we can to facilitate this thing moving
through. So we apologize for some of the loose ends but that's the reason
for it.
Batzli: Okay. On a technical matter here, we simultaneously I assume are
withdrawing approval of the site plan for the Crossroads Bank? ,
Al -Jaff: True.
•
1
Planning Commission Meeting
February 19, 1992 - Page 19
11 Batzli: And since we've given them approval, we're taking something away
from them. Does the City have it in writing that they are not planning on
proceeding or something so we're not?
Krauss: Todd Gerhardt is here and can explain the status of it but the HRA
controls the property. Crossroads has no interest in it any longer. Their
option agreement lapsed and the sole control is vested in the HRA.
Batzli: Okay. So'we don't have a problem with withdrawing their approval?
Okay. I guess I'd like to see the 16 stalls.to the north labeled employee
parking only, just so that we don't have people traffic through the drive
thru.
Krauss: Would it be acceptable to label it employee and tenant parking?
Batzli: Yeah. Just so we don't have people going into the building
through that traffic there I think makes sense. People are filling out
their check stubs or what have you in their car waiting in line and
sometimes they're not paying a lot of attention to people darting between
the cars if they're trying to get that front door. I didn't have any other
comments that haven't already been discussed. I'd entertain a motion. And
I assume when, whoever does make the motion, that we'll be going off the
- February 19th revised application?
Emmings: That's what they've given us. We're talking here about the,
we're not doing anything on the subdivision? I'd move that the Planning
Commission recommend approval of Site Plan #92 -1 as shown on the site plan
dated February 19, 1992 and subject to the conditions in the updated staff
report that is also dated February 19, 1992 with the addition that
additional condition that Brian mentioned. That the north 16 parking
stalls be labeled for employee or tenant parking only.
Batzli: Did you want to include anything about the modified plaza?
Emmings: I don't know how to reference it I guess. It doesn't have a
date. I guess let's do this. As an additional condition I will say that .
11 the plans for the plaza ought to be submitted to the staff for approval.
I don't know what else to do.
Batzli: Sounds good to me. Is there a second?
Erhart: Before that I've got a question here. Item 9. Applicant receive
a Watershed District permit. Why is that required?
Krauss: That's a normal requirement for any development that disturbs more
than one acre of ground. In this case the Watershed District may well tell
11 them a permit is not required because it fits into our overall downtown
drainage system.
Erhart: Okay, with that I'll second it.
Emmings moved, Erhart seconded that the Planning Commission recommend
approval of Site Plan Review #92 - as shown on the site plan dated February
11 19, 1992, subject to the following conditions:
1
Planning Commission Meecing 1
February 19, 1992 Page 20
1. The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to erecting any signage 1
on site. Stop signs shall be installed at both exit points located on
Market Boulevard and West 79th Street.
II
2. Landscaping along the north edge of the site must be modified to meet
all requirements of the railroad. The applicant shall provide staff
with a detailed cost estimate of landscaping to be used in calculating II
the required financial guarantees. These guarantees must be posted
prior to building permit issuance. Provide a plant schedule indicating
the size and type of all plant materials for staff approval.
II
3. The applicant shall enter into a Site Development Contract with the
city and provide the necessary financial securities to guarantee
installation of the required public improvements and costs associated
with the traffic study.
4. Revise architectural plans as follows: 1
a. Incorporate the use of Timberline or similar quality shingles that
provide an image of a cedar shake roof. '
b. Provide details of building exterior treatment.
5. A grading and drainage plan including storm sewer calculations for 'a 1011
year storm event prepared by a professional engineer shall be submitted
to the City Engineer for review and approval.
6. The applicant shall indicate on the site plan utilities proposed for 11
the building and additional fire hydrants in the vicinity.
7. The applicant shall include construction of the driveway aprons, median,
improvements, sidewalk and boulevard restoration in the site plan
improvements. All boulevard restoration, sidewalks, driveway aprons
and median improvement shall be constructed in accordance with the
latest edition of the City's Standard Specifications. Detailed, plans II
and specifications shall be prepared by a Professional Engineer and
submitted for approval by the City Engineer.
8. The applicant shall be responsible for any damage to the City's
existing sidewalk along Market Boulevard.
9. The applicant shall receive a Watershed District permit and comply with"
all conditions of the permit.
10. The northerly 16 parking stalls shall be labeled 'Employee and Tenant II
Parking Only'.
11. Plans for the plaza shall be submitted to city staff for approval. 1
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Batzli: I think we need a motion on the withdrawal of the Crossroads. 11
11
II Planning Commission Meeting
g
February 19, 1992 - Page 21
Emmings: I will move the Planning Commission recommend the withdrawal of
II approval of Site Plan #89 -6 for the Crossroads National Bank building. The
applicant should file the notice of withdrawal against the property at
Carver County. I'm not sure I understand that.
II Batzli: Which applicant needs to file that?
Emmings: Yeah.
t 1-3aff: The Americana Bank would.
Batzli: Should we put that in our other motion? That probably should have
II gone in our earlier motion that they need to file that notice but.
Emmings: Well we've got it here.
1 Batzli: Okay. Is there a second?
Conrad: I second.
Emmings moved, Conrad seconded that the Planning Commission recommend the
withdrawal of approval of Site Plan #89 -6 for the Crossroads National Bank
I building. The applicant, Americana Community Bank, should file the notice
of withdrawal against the property at Carver County. All voted in favor
and the motion carried.
II Krauss: Could I propose another agenda change? We have Todd Gerhardt
waiting for an item. I think it's an item you may find a little bit
interesting anyway. It will get Todd home at a reasonable time.
Erhart: Can we vote on 'that?
II Batzli: Okay, we can vote. All in favor of moving up to new business to
previous to the PUD stuff signify by saying aye.
II Ledvina voted in favor, the rest opposed.
Batzli: Why don't we do that first. So Todd, why don't you go ahead with
your modified tax increment financing district.
II ADOPT RESOLUTION STATING THAT MODIFICATION PROGRAM FOR DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
NO. 2, MODIFICATION OF PLAN FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 2 -1;
II AND ADOPTION OF PLAN FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 2 -2, IS
CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
II Gerhardt: The first item I have in front of you is a modification to
development district No. 2 and modification to tax increment plan No. 2 -1
and creating a new district called 2 -2. And you're saying, what is all
this? In the past the City Council who is acting as the Economic
11 Development agency for the city of Chanhassen, created a district is what
we call the McGlynn District which is 2 -1, highlighted in the blue.
Approximately 2 -3 months ago the Planning Commission approved an expansion
l to the industrial park called Chanhassen Bu Center, which is
highlighted in the red called 2 -2. To get businesses like McGlynn,
Planning Commission Meeting 1
February 19, 1992 - Page 22
Rosemount and those, cities have to be competitive with the Shakopee's and II
the Chaska's in creating economic development districts to assist
businesses in writing down public improvements. Roads, sanitary sewer,
water and special assessments. As a part of that, staff is recommending toll
the City Council that you create a new district called 2 -2 and expanding
the boundary, the development boundary which is the heavy black line so
that increment dollars from district 2 -1 can be used to buy a middle school"
site. In your guide plan you highlighted a piece of property located north
of the Timberwood as a future school site for the City of Chanhassen,
District 112. Paul's got some maps that lay out and we're going to
probably have come back a modification to your land use plan. That site n
longer can support a middle school for some of the facility needs that
Chaska or District 112 is looking at. Do you want to highlight? 1
Krauss: Yeah, maybe I should touch on this. First let me say that by your
approving the tax increment plan tonight in no way are you authorizing
changes to the Comp Plan. We just want you to know what is current and
what's happening out there. Some of you may be aware of the fact that the
City Manager and I and Tom Workman sit on a committee that the School
District established to get a handle on the future growth needs. We did
that to keep in mind you do have a middle school site located here which is
part of our comprehensive plan. And fit into what we' were looking for in
terms of breaking up the TH 5 corridor area in terms of making sure we had
a residential feel. Initially the school district's architect told us that
a 40 acre site would be sufficient. We went out and visited a few of them,
that one included. They felt that that would meet their needs. We're now ,
getting down to more of the nifty gritty and we find a couple things.
First we find that the State has apparently established different
guidelines or more strenuous guidelines for school sites and they're really
. looking like, if the State allows you to build a new school, they want the II
school site to be able to accommodate growth until the next milieniun and
you basically have to provide an extensive amount of athletic fields. And
the site required to accommodate the school itself has to be pretty, 40 or
50 acres for the school still but it's got to be 40 or 50 acres. What we
found, in fact we found when Ryan Development had prepared a preliminary
program to develop an office /industrial park up there, we looked at the
land that was left for the school site. Gave that information to the
school district's architect and he came back to us and said the school
won't fit there anymore. Now what I've done here is kind of just sketched
up two alternative scenarios. The first one "is kind of, it's what's in thell
comprehensive plan right now. Showing the school over to the northeast
corner of Timberwood. McGlynn sits right here. What you've already
improved is land up to the east bank or the east channel of Bluff Creek as
office industrial. The land beyond that was residential. I'm sure you...
extensive discussions with Timberwood and all that. Where is the road
going to go and all that. Well, the Council, I know I mentioned this to
you several times, when the Council adopted the Comp Plan they kept your II
residential designation in front of Timberwood entact but provided an
alternate scenario that a very high quality office, industrial park
developer could achieve. They met I think it's 5 particularly strenuous 11
criteria. Well Ryan Development's been working with us to do that so
essentially this infill portion over here between the two branches of the
creek, up to the former school site, could and possibly would be developed
into a park and office park.... We had been working with Ryan to do this...
1
Planning Commission Meeting
February 19, 1992 - Page 23
school site but we found a couple things. First of all we found that the
road goes back even further but we originally had shown, by me meaning Mark
11 Koegler and myself, originally had shown the road down near Timberwood. I
believe we had one resident in Timberwood who objected to it and the road
was kicked up north. The road really wants to be further south. We're
looking at the stacking distances that you have over here but if the school
went here, you couldn't put the road up there because there's no place to
stack school buses come out and realistically the road wants to hang south.
Except for right in here where there's a wetland but there's a way to bring
the road through. We now have better information. So this is basically
the status quo. This is what the comprehensive plan says now. This is
what Ryan has been working with us on to date. Again the problem is the
school district is telling us that it won't fit. And we've even looked at
massaging this around. Todd met with Zak Johnson, the school district's
architect who's working with us on expanding the school site out to this
area and wrapping it around Timberwood and the terrain just gets very
tough. You've got creek channels. You've got a wetland. It becomes too
discontiguous for the school site to work effectively. 5o what we're doing
right now is looking to work for alternative scenarios to achieve a similar
goal but still allow for sufficient school to be developed. And I'm
showing this to you for informational purposes only. We're not requesting
that you change anything now. We're not even positive it works but what
this does is locate the school on the land, the 35 acres that McGlynn's has
open right now plus other land between the McGlynn site and the creek.
This map is a little bit out of scale over here. There's actually more
land here than it would appear but it's quite flat land. It's also very
prominent land as you're traveling down the corridor. Wrapping single
family residential around the Timberwood project which is consistent with
what we've been trying to do all along because the road coming in is a way
I to bring this road through. In fact we've been working with a developer on
this property down here and if the plans go ahead, they'll include
provisions for this road connection to come around the corner so we can
service residential development there. Preserving a creek corridor which
.
is consistent with what we've always wanted to do. ..so we can generate
enough revenue to secure the school site because it's certainly not cheap.
And also be a sufficient amount of office /industrial development remaining.
We wind up shifting that component over to the former school site. Now the
premise here that this is better than normal quality stuff. That's what
the comprehensive plan says. It basically said that it'd have to walk like
an office, talk like an office...qualify for tax increment but it's going
to be brick and glass construction most of it. It's going to be very, very
attractive stuff. Well in fact we've been working with Bill Morrish who
you met last time on some alternate designs. He hasn't seen this one yet
but the philosophy that we're trying to have here with the good setbacks,
which is really one of the reasons as well for pushing the road back down
here. One of the things that 8i11 has hit on a lot, which we agree with
him a lot is you do not want a scenario where you have 4 lanes of TH 5 and
then 2 lanes of collector on either side of it all paralleling each other
across the entire expanse of that property between Galpin and Audubon. In
11 fact we've had some preliminary meetings with MnDot and looking at a rural
road section now which is something...change their minds on but it means
it's going to be a very wide corridor. 5o what you're really looking to do
is to kick that road down here where it's going to be masked by all those
trees and the wetland that separates it from Timberwood and focus that
1 •
Planning Commission Meeting I/
February 19, 1992 - Page 24
development a little bit back onto it away from TH 5. And we think it's
kind of a workable concept. We're going to be working with the school
district's architect and make sure the school can fit on there before we go ,
any further. But before we did that, you know I wanted to use this
opportunity with the TIF district to kind of bounce this off you and let
you know which way we're going because it is a change in direction. So if I
you have any comments.
Batzli: Let's say we don't like this configuration. Does it make sense to
go ahead with the TIF district to buy a school that's not large enough?
Gerhardt: What the plan lays out right now is one that says that you can
use tax increment to buy a school site somewhere within the district. It I
doesn't say a site specific spot.
Batzli: Correct.
Gerhardt: And then if were to pick out a site specific spot, I'd have to
come back through with another modification and we would not acquire the
site until we had agreements where somebody wants this school site. But I II
wouldn't enter into a purchase agreement until I came back to the Planning
Commission and City Council for their approval of this modification.
Batzli: But my question is, if the school site doesn't fit on the area
where it was initially proposed by us in the comprehensive plan, if it
won't fit there and if what we're looking at right now doesn't really turn 11
us on, why do we want to do this tax increment financing district?
Gerhardt: The tax increment financing number, well we've got a couple of
things on tonight. We're making the modification to 2 -1 saying that
increments could be used to do a school site. If for some reason we decide
that there isn't any money or there isn't a site anywhere within that
boundary for a school site, we just don't do it. If you can't find a spot
anywhere within that area that's fit for a school, then you just don't do
it. You don't follow through with the plan. I mean I can't go buy a
school site and then come back to you and say we have a site. I've asked
the Attorney that it almost seems illegal...now but we wanted to get it out"
there and we talked about buying a middle school somewhere along...and
within the plan but that does not mean we have to follow through with it.
So in your land use plan laid out for that...middle school site somewhere
within this area so we are following through with what we've got so if you II
do pass a resolution, you are...But right now in front of you that doesn't
work...so basically what we're doing is looking at alternatives. Finding ,
how alternative sites does work within that area and that would be
acceptable to Timberwood. That would be acceptable to the present
landowner and everybody. We wanted to stay along the TH 5 corridor... One
of the other things that the plan does is lay out, this increment dollars II
could be used for the TH 5 corridor... So that's one part of it. The
other part is that you're creating a new economic development district
called 2 -2 which would approve special assessment reductions for any
building development that takes place on the business center. Ryan
• Business Center that you approved °about 2 or 3 months ago. So you're not
locked in on buying the school site by approving the resolution tonight.
You're not approving where the school's going to be located. However you II
1
Planning Commission Meeting
February 19, 1992 - Page 25
are approving the t that the school would be located somewhere within
PP g concept
the boundary but if you decide that you can't find a school within that •
11 boundary...
Krauss: A couple things and I didn't touch on something real critical.
Expanding the district allows us to do other stuff in there. We've talked
about bridges. We've talked about working with MnDot to improve the
highway. Those kinds of things are something we can do with the expanded
district. The second thing is.
Batzli: Let me stop you right there. In the public facilities to be
constructed in the modification we list school district land, purchase land
for future park and construction of a sanitary sewer lift station. Where
does the bridge come in and those types of things?
Krauss: We have to add that.
Gerhardt: Well, we don't know where the bridge is going to be again and
we're probably going to have to come in and condemn some additional land
for...easements and as a part of that you'd have to do another
modification. Once the TH 5 corridor has been approved by City Council and
you have a plan or feasibility study for what you're going to do, then we
can come in and incorporate that plan within the economic development
district plan and then send out based on TH 5 corridor plan... I would get
future modification.
Krauss: The other thing I wanted to touch on too is as this idea of the
school is being talked about some. One of the reasons the school tends not
to fit there and something we need to talk to the school district a little
more extensively, is they've got some incredibly huge recreational
requirements that we understand are from the state but we'd like
clarification of that. You were looking at 4 softball fields, 2 baseball
fields, 2 football fields, 2 soccer fields.
Batzli: For middle schools?
Gerhardt: ...all purpose areas. 2 soccer fields and just the green area
for those recreational fields comes up to be 23 acres.
Krauss: We're not certain if this is a state requirement or because it
fits into something the school district wants to do. We'll clarify that
some more and the site isn't totally out of the running if we can figure
out a way around it. One of the things we've been looking to do and we've
had some conversations with the Mayor and City Manager on this is, there's
a consensus being developed that when and if the school is built here that
we want to do everything we can to make it more than a school. It's going
to be a recreational and community oriented major element of our community
and we want to get these recreational facilities and a pool built with the
school and all that and probably would be using some of the tax increment
to help with that kind of construction as well. So a lot of it's still up
in the air but a lot's happening very quickly and we'd like to be in a
position to be able to move forward and bring it back to you on some
concrete term.
•
Planning Commission Meeting II
February 19, 1992 - Page 26
II Gerhardt: The owner here is really been questioning us too. He wants to
know what's going to happen you know. They're saying they've got a million
dollar...they've got to make in the next couple years and they want to
II
start marketing the property and is it going to be marketed as single
family or multi- family or is it going to be marketed as industrial...school
going to be here or is it going to be over there, that makes them real
nervous. You how long is this going to be drug out. We get those...I
think there's still some time in there that we can pacify them...they're
going to benefit from a school...SO tonight what I'm looking for is
approval of modification to 2 -1 for a public improvement to what would be II
Audubon Road. Some public improvements that would...that weren't in the
modification last year and that the dollars be also used to be spent on a
middle school. But again, that's more of a...want to buy a school site
somewhere within that area... Second alternative would be to recommend toll
the City a special assessment reduction program for District No. 2 -2 where
Economic Development...would provide 2 years worth of increment to write
down special...for any developments to occur on the Chanhassen Business
Center site. And also your increment dollars for the acquisition of a lift
station that would be on the southerly part of, or the northern part of
Lyman Blvd. and the location to be determined by the future feasibility
study... And second, for the Park and Rec, as the need for parklands in
this location here. The wetland but there's a...compfehensive plan shows a
trail system coming in and then connect with future trails through this
residential neighborhood and out to TH 5 so we're going to use tax il
increment to buy parkland generated from that area. And that's it.
Everything that we're proposing is consistent and basically that's what
you'll find. We're not doing anything that inconsistent with what you
planned to date for the City's long range plan in the future. II
Batzli: Okay, thanks Todd. Anybody have any questions, comments? We'll li
just kind of throw it open if anybody would like to comment or have any
other discussion.
Farmakes: I have a comment of curiousity. If it doesn't fit where, do yowl
have alternative sites that you're looking at if that doesn't fit ?,
Krauss: You mean like the McGlynn site doesn't work out either? 1
Farmakes: It seems a gray area what you think the requirements are.
Krauss: Well, we're trying to get them to better define it a little bit II
too. I mean it sounds like there's enough sports facilities here for
Minnetonka and Eden Prairie as well. So we're not exactly sure where the
school district is coming from. We suspect a lot of it has to do with the
fact that there's completely inadequate recreational facilities down at th
existing High School and sort of defacto they'll be leaving the High
School, well this is one scenario. Leaving the High School there and
building a lot of recreational...school district up here. To the extent II
that that makes sense for our community as well, it's probably a dandy idea
that we get the facilities and we get share them and make more efficient
use out of it. If none of this washes, there are other possible sites in II
the corridor. I personally have never been a strong proponent of any of
them for the simple reason that it didn't fit. None of the other ones fit
real well with the idea of a residential crossing of TH 5. The idea that II
1
Planning ommission Meeting
9
February 19, 1992 - Page 27
Bill Morrish has been pushing is one that you developed 2 years ago with
wanting to bridge TH 5 and Bill built on that. I think it's a valid one.
11
The school site, it's a real handy element because it's so much open space
and so much green area but basically is a residential appearing component.
...by the school district. We're fortunate in being able to piggyback this
• I onto a tax increment project but elsewhere in the corridor there's no
increment, there's no project and I'm not sure where that would put us at
that point.
Gerhardt: You can look at the map and see certain areas that work. I mean
architects like to work with a fiat piece of ground with no trees, no
hills, no wetlands and it's got perfect clay soils and all you need is to
put a little black on top so they don't have to truck any black dirt in.
That's a perfect scenario and you know when he started explaining that to
me, if you look at the McGlynn piece, you can't find a better fiat piece of
ground that has nice clay soils to work off of. He got excited when he saw
33 acres of this flat ground and no wetlands on it. He's starting to say
he can set everything on the 33 acres and you had 60, yeah I think it was
60 acres that we were working with the other site and he couldn't fit
anything on it. So the topography plays a big factor in this. To answer
your questions, I always push for 2 -2 as being a future school site because
the land's a little cheaper than what McGlynn's wants for theirs but again
we want to try and keep that corridor along TH 5 with the school and the
access. It just works a lot better in those areas. But to answer your
questions, a third scenario could be 2- 2...Business Center site and that'd
be a school site.
Batzli: What we're doing tonight doesn't enlarge in anyway the area 2 does
it? District No. 2? Those boundaries were already previously drawn?
Gerhardt: District No. °2 is the dark black line.
Batzli: Right.
Gerhardt: The previous, that is being expanded. Where it used to fall,
11 it went like this. So this would be an expansion and the reason why we did
this is, what you can do is take the increment created off of the McGlynn
piece and spend those dollars anywhere within the dark black line. So it
gives enough play in those areas to use those increment dollars in finding
a piece of land. And it also, if Galpin ever needs to be upgraded, you can
use the increment from this district to assist in writing down costs of
upgrading Galpin and part of Lyman if you need to.
Batzli: Is there any impact on Timberwood by including them in the
district?
Gerhardt: No. The only place where tax dollars would be affected is in
those dashed areas so you did not create any increment outside the red and
blue area. So this, it's within the district boundary but the taxes
generated off these parcels would not go into the district. It's only in
those areas in the dashed areas.
11 Krauss: The reason for not excluding it is.
1
Planning Commission Meeting 1/
February 19, 1992 - Page 28
Batzli: If ou got the roadway back.
Y Y
Krauss: Well, you've got the roadway and you've also got your lift station"
that's going to be here or here and you've got a forcemain that's going to
come up this way and another one that's being split up that way and you've
really got to wrap that area to build those lines. 1
Batzli: Jeff, I cut you off earlier. Did you have another question?
Farmakes: No. It didn't pertain exactly to this. 1 guess a lot of what
if questions.
Batzli: Does anybody else have any comments? Questions? Motions? 1
Conrad: I make a motion the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 92 -2,
finding that modification of the program for Development District No. 2,
Modification of Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 2 -1 and the
creation of a new plan for the Tax Increment Financing District No. 2 -2.
Emmings: Second. 1
Resolution #92 -2: Conrad moved, Emmings seconded to adopt Resolution No.
92 -2 finding that Modification of the program for Development District No. II
2, Modification of Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 2 -1; and
the creation of a new plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 2 -2.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
ADOPT RESOLUTION STATING THAT MODIFICATION NO. 11 TO REDEVELOPMENT AND TAX
INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
Gerhardt: The second item in front of you tonight is what we call the
Redevelopment Tax Increment District. On the back of your report you'll
notice that some of the newer members...but the district boundaries for the
redevelopment district follow the dark line, go up TH 101, follow TH 5, go II
around the Taco Shoppe, come back down West 78th Street, go down along St.
Hubert's, goes around the new Heritage Square Apartments and then follows •
along the parking lot behind the Riv and behind the Town Square Center and I
then follows back up and go, divides the school property and the fire
station and then takes into account the West Village Apartments over here.
And then follows due west and then the boundary is being modified in this II
location here. With the TH 5 upgrade, the City is going to have to build all
new service road to get to Lake Ann Park. We're proposing to use tax
increment dollars to build that service road because they're going to close
off our entrance off of TH 5. There will be a new service road that will
go along there.
Krauss: It's part of the collector, frontage road system that you have on II
your Comp Plan.
Batzli: So this isn't just an access road. This is actually the road that
will be the.
Krauss: The first leg of that road.
Planning Commission Meeting
February 19, 1992 - Page 29
Batzli: Yeah, okay.
Farmakes: How does that fit into the corridor plan?
Krauss: I think the corridor plan is going to have some role to play in
where we put that road and how we build it. Do you displace it? I mean we
know where it's got to pick up on 78th Street.
Gerhardt: Well the big thing you've got here is that you don't have much
11 of a choice for this corridor. You've got some huge wetlands over on this
site and there's really one path.
Krauss: Around the south end. We don't control all the land yet do we?
Gerhardt: No. We'd have to condemn to get the right -of -way but that's a
future problem. So does everybody feel pretty good of where the boundaries
I/ are?
Batzli: Does this then include City Hall?
Gerhardt: Yes.
Batzli: Did it previously?
Gerhardt: Yes. So the only modification to the boundary and this again,
we can only capture the increment within this area but we've expanded the
boundary so that means we can spend the increment from within the district
outside into the project area. Again this is Modification No. 11. This
plan was adopted back in 1978 by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority.
1And there's been 10 modifications up to this one since that time. There's
a list of 9 items in front of you that the HRA is going to undertake here
in the next couple of years in the downtown area and along TH 5. The first
of that is the construction of a center park out in front of City Hall.
There's been 3 to 4 public hearings on the concept of building a park in
front of City Hall. This is one schematic design for it. It's not going
to look like this. This is the best rendering we have to date but they're
really doing some interesting things in this area here and taking into
account sort of a bandshell type of effect, the two sided bandshell. Wanted
to take advantage of the hillside for what I'll say is the smaller event
and then for some of the larger events, the 4th of July that you would use
the opposite side where the larger gathering would take place and your
concerts in the park and things of that sort. There's been some discussion
that there may be too many trees in the plan so it sounds like every other
tree will be coming out of here. This road alignment through this area,
you'll notice that we're taking out the West 79th or Coulter. The road
that goes to the south of City Hall. That will be vacated. The City would
have to come in and acquire the 3 lots in this location. Demolish the bank
building and relocate those tenants and then take the road out and then
realign that road that would come through this location here. We've done
other drawings of how that would work. Right now it looks like it goes
right through a parking lot and that's not how it's going to lay out. It
will be a road through that area.' There will probably be future dollars
spent by. the Park and Rec to buy additional lands up here because you're
11 going to relocate a softball field in this area. That's one of the
Planning Commit ion Meeting
February 19, 1992 - Page 30
projects that the HRA is undertaking. A second is the construction of a I
senior housing project. There's been talk and Paul's done a couple of
studies on a need for senior housing in the community. When we built II Heritage Square Apartment buiiding, that took 3 to 4 years for the HRA to
approve that project and I want to say 3 years of discussions it was always
going to be a senior facility and it never came. To get financing they
couldn't designate the building as just for seniors. They had to designate
it as seniors to low to moderate income people. But the HRA still wants toll
try to get a senior housing project built and they're going to look at
building their own facility. One other spot that they've been looking at
is over by old St. Hubert's Church to the Jerry Schlenk property. The
little house with the pink roof sits. They would go in there and acquire
that land and put in anywhere from 24 to 40 units in that location. Staff
has felt that that's a good location. St. Hubert's was trying to build
their own senior facility and attaching it to their sanctuary facility and II
they just decided that they didn't have the money and the need wasn't there
for them to do that. So that's been a goal of the HRA to build a senior II
complex. And it'd be an interesting one that they want to get away from
some of the FHA guidelines and criteria that go with that. They want to go
with a straight rents would be 25% of whatever your incomes are. Right now
if you follow FHA guidelines you look at 25% of what you income is plus
whatever you have in the bank. So you get a lot of older people in this
area that sell their house and they potentially have $100,000.00 or
$200,000.00 in the bank, well that just puts them right out of the rent
bracket for some of these facilities. What the HRA is looking at doing is II
building their own facility and giving that back to the City Council or to
the City and then city money, hiring a management company to come in and
run it under their guidelines. So you're not dictated by FHA or any of
those agencies under their guidelines. So that's an interesting approach
and it would be a revenue producer for the city too. Because the building
would be given to the city so it would be debt free so the rents generated II
off of that goes to management company and upkeep but anything in excess of
that would be revenue back to the City. And that's one of the HRA's goals
is to try to look at producing revenue once the district does go away for II
the city and that's one approach that they've come up with. The second
area was construction of a library. The HRA right now is in ownership of
the Pony /Pauly /Pryzmus area and that is the old Pony Express and John
Pryzmus' own building between what was the Pony Express and Pauly's. The
HRA owns all three of those buildings. The lease with Pauly and Pryzmus
ends in 1994 and at that time the HRA would not renew their leases and
would ask them to leave. They've got compensated for those buildings and II
the HRA would tear the buildings down and construct a new library in that
location. Expanding the park inbetween what would be St. Hubert's, old St.
Hubert's church and Village Hall. 1
Krauss: One of the reasons for building a new library is not just to move
it but the fact that this library is inadequate. I forget what the formula
is but I think it's a 1,000 square feet for every 1,000 people.
Gerhardt: It's 100 square feet for every 1,000 people you have in
Chanhassen. Maybe it is 1,000. 1
M1
Krauss: Yeah. We were looking at the possibility of putting a facility
there that would accommodate a city of 23,000- 24,000 people which we'll be 11
Planning Commission Meeting
February 19, 1992 - Page 31
1 in the not to awful distant future.
11 Gerhardt: But that's the library criteria. We like to use the 500 feet
criteria and cut them in half and we feel that that's more appropriate.
Right now that means they would take the Council Chambers and the new wing
over there to meet that criteria right now and that financially we just
can't support that. But in that location it would be I think 11,000 square
foot library. 11,000 to 12,000 square foot library and down around that
area. Heritage Square Park, that is between St. Hubert's and City Hall.
Acquisition of the Hanus Building. Hanus building is where Gary Brown's
service station. It's the building directly east of the Rapid Oil
facility. We have an option right now to acquire that building. The
reason why the HRA'would want to acquire that building is to go in there
and follow through with whatever City Council approves with the TH 5
corridor study. To look to either landscape that area to what the needs
are and in the future if the building should happen, if they say the
building should be taken down, that could be an option. If the building
stays, they would want it as a private user to be used for City. Public
works needs. Park needs. Whatever it may need. We have several options
open but the real reason why everybody wants to acquire it is to landscape
that area. Right now it just sticks right out as you're driving down TH 5.
And it was just a big mistake on when TH 5 was rerouted that they left that
'-gap of land between the railroad tracks and TH 5 there. And if you look at
the map, I mean that little block there, it's just crazy. You just can't
tell that a building in there. You know we're going to acquire the Taco
place and the Red -E -Mix. To go back in there and put something else in,
how could you put a building any bigger than the Taco place in there? I
mean if you put anything bigger than that, it's going to stick out like a
sore thumb because the width of the lots in that area are not, they're very
11 small. It's a real narrow piece and that was just a big mistake for the
State to allow that to occur. They should have acquired that entire area
and it should have been right -of -way and that was a real mistake because
11 it's just not wide enough for any development to occur. By the time you
put parking lots, have a little green space and your building, you have
nothing. I mean Taco has absolutely no green spaces. It's just one gravel
parking lot. Construction a senior center. I think that's on for City .
Council approval of plans and specs this next Monday night. We had a
bottom portion of the public safety wing over here would be rennovated for
a senior center. They would have small kitchen facilities, meeting room
space, bathrooms and just a place to gather and to do some of their things.
Park and Rec is taking an active role in doing some programming for them
• and meeting some of their needs. Play cards, meet and have congregate. Not
congregate dining but they could bring some food in and...since and the
refrigerator.
Conrad: Todd, what's the percentage of seniors in Chanhassen?
Krauss: It's a lot higher than you would think. At the present time, if
you use the over 55 criteria, there's somewheres upward of 900 to 1,000
people in town that qualify and it's a very rapidly growing segment. What
we found is that we have a couple of different classes of people that are
becoming seniors. We have the original Chanhassen group. The folks that
have been here for 30 years who have aged in place, and they don't tend to,
11 you know they tend to stay. A lot of them are still here and stay. We've
1
Planning Commission Meeting 1
February 19, 1992 Page 32
got the people who have moved in in the 70's who are aging in place and
have now, you know the kids are out and they're still here. Steve keeps
thinking and talking about it...and we also have a bunch of people that are"
starting to, who have parents who are becoming dependent on their kids
again and the nature of this country now is that a lot of people don't live
anywhere near their parents and they've had to relocate their parents from is
other communities. I've got a woman on my Senior Commission who's son
lives in Chanhassen who moved her out from Chicago when the neighborhood
started going bad and when she needed more help and that's becoming more
common. So the senior population is growing nationally dramatically and
locally as well. Right now we have, we don't have any facilities for
seniors in the community. We support South Shore Senior Center which
caters to some of the demand. We do have a card club that meets once a
week which we'll provide space for but there's a pretty hefty demand and well
have a senior services coordinator that we've retained. So it's really
starting to snowball.
Conrad: Thanks Todd.
Gerhardt: Paul's been real active with the Seniors. I mean that's the
thing. If Paul's numbers are right, it's about 1O% of the population that II
are seniors but the interesting thing about that 10% Is that they're very
active here. They want to be with other seniors. They want to play cards.
They want to be active. They don't want to sit at home and watch TV. They
don't want to just go out and buy groceries or do whatever. They want to
be active. They want to be a part of the community and it's interesting
that they pushed for this very hard. 1
Conrad: Well 10% of the population is a big number. It used to be about
3% that's why I was interested because it used to be real small.
Krauss: Well if you look at the resources we devote to kids recreation and
you realize that we've done nothing for the other end of the spectrum to
date, it's a good fit and having them downtown where there may be housing, II
where they're supposed to be shopping, where we have a park, where we have
those kind of facilities is really a very nice fit.
Gerhardt: Now they're taking my storage area and so I'm a little mad about"
it but I think it's going to be a real asset. I mean they're right next to
the library. When we get the grocery store in, this is just going to be a
real asset to City Hall I think. Having those people that close. The next"
item is the West 78th Street Detachment. In previous modifications we've
always added project numbers that would qualify for a special assessment
reduction. It looks like this project is going to be built this year.
They did some grading. You can see some of the alignment where West 78th II
Street would be detached as it would connect over here onto CR 17. One of
the reasons why that's been delayed is that TH 5's going to be raised by a
foot and when you do the West 78th Street detachment you're going to have
to reconstruct that intersection and that portion of CR 17 and if you've
got TH 5 a foot up and we built the road say 2 years ago, you've got CR 17
a foot below it. It doesn't work. You've got to do them in conjunction 11
with each other so that's why that project's been delayed. We've been
taking a...we're just doing this -for a the fun of it but we've been delayed
by what's delayed TH 5. TH 5 improvement, entry features. When Market
11
Planning Commission Meeting .
February 19, 1992 - Page 33
11 Blvd. was built, the HRA acquired right -of -way for that and with that they
acquired some additional land as a part of the TH 5 corridor upgrade
11 which, as I was talking to Dick, hopefully this goes along with it. We are
going to build some entry monuments as you enter TH 5 and Market Blvd. and
Great Plains Blvd. and TH 5. So that would be, we're going to hide the
bank and be over next to the Holiday gas station. What they're looking at
is a wall monument that would look like this with landscaping and trees.
This would be the Market Blvd. area. How it is laid out. And then they
were also going to, in this location they were going to introduce a
vertical element similar to the clock tower but substantially taller. It
would be 45 feet and then again the wall underneath it would look like
this.
Conrad: Where's that Todd? Where's the wall?
Gerhardt: The wall would be the dark purple line. •
Conrad: What's in your right hand goes where your left hand?
Gerhardt: Right. That is just another concept. You like that one
better? Everybody's looking for a home for my railroad depot.
•
Erhart: You've abandoned the railroad depot again?
Gerhardt: We own the depot.
Erhart: I know you do.
Conrad: Where's the depot?
Krauss: It's the shack that's been sitting out by Natural Green.
Batzli: Oh really? We own that? I didn't know that. So we're going to
put it there?
Gerhardt: No.
Farmakes: I have a question. The type that's on the Chanhassen logo, this
sign that you just showed.
Gerhardt: The maple leaves?
Farmakes: Yeah. Apparently when Bloomberg built this place there was like
a western theme. You see it smattered about and I'm just curious to know
the history behind that.
Gerhardt: I think we're getting away from the country theme and now we're,
what they're calling is a country modern type style. With the lap siding,
cracked off cinder block. This cedar shake.
II Farmakes: Textured...
Gerhardt: ...and the peaked roof.
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting 1
February 19, 1992 - Page 34
Krauss: But if you go back, I think it started in the late 70's there wail
actually a concerted effort to get a prairie theme.
Farmakes: Which is, it's TV cowboy is what it is. This horseshoe type 1
type is.
Krauss: In retrospect it's very chintsy, yeah. 1
Gerhardt: Have you been over on France Avenue? Next to Fudruckers there's
a big old office building and did you notice the wall element there, I
think it says the Minnesota Center. That's where this came from. It's
made out of limestone. This would be a 6 foot 6 wall. That's a
substantially smaller one but that's the concept for this. The same
architect that designed that is designing this.
Erhart: That's 6 feet tall?
Gerhardt: Yeah.
Krauss: The key idea here is to let people know who are traveling down
TH 5 that they've entered into our community. That these are the entry
ways into our downtown and in some cases where you have like the Holiday
store, to kind of cover up the back of the Holiday store which wasn't
really built with an eye towards the highway or beautification. This is II
also, I mean it points the way to some of the stuff that we'd like to be
doing on the rest of TH 5 with that tax increment district and working with
MnDot and working on the corridor later on. Similar efforts also have to
be done on the previously finished portion of TH 5 east of downtown.
.Farmakes: ...why the city is married to that type. Is it a consensus on 11
the HRA?
Gerhardt: Are you saying the lettering or the?
Farmakes: The lettering. Not the maple leaf. The lettering itself.. That
just seems to be a hold over from that previous development. I was
wondering how relevant that is. 1
Gerhardt: Well where they got that, the City's letterhead.
Farmakes: I understand that. It seems to did that theme come from
because the City chose that particular letterhead or did that reflect that?
Gerhardt: I've been here 6 years and that's what the letterhead's always
looked like while I was here and I don't know where the lettering style
came from. It looks western to me, yeah.
Farmakes: I just don't know how relevant that is to us here. I don't know
if that's, it didn't seem relevant to our community. The type style. Not
the sign.
Batzli: Do you think it looks too heavy? I mean is that, or just too
cowboyish?
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting
February 19, 1992 - Page 35
11 Farmakes: I just don't see us as that. It almost looks like we're wearing
Stetsons and, it looks like TV western type to me. I realize that a lot of
people say so what about that sort of thing but it is a style. If you go
out and you look at different communities, particularly water towers,
you'll see Excelsior is an old gothic. You'll see Edina in helmetica.
Very contemporary, modern type. It does seem to say something, just as
much as it -does about a business or corporation. That you look at a
letterhead and I don't know how reflective that is of our community.
Batzli: I think a hand written script would look kind of trendy. What do
you think?
11 Farmakes: Well you get 100 different opinions but I'm just saying, I'm not
sure. It just seems to me that I suspect that's a carry over from that
original development theme and I don't know how relevant it is.
Gerhardt: These are lights so in the evening you're going to see this area
at night. I think this is also back lit. But that's something that can be
changed. I'll bring it up to the HRA when they do final plans and
specifications for construction of it because that's one of the things that
they're going to approve is the letter style.
Emmings: I've just gotten so used to it, I've stopped thinking about it
but I think Jeff's comments are very good ones. I think it is a hold over
and we just don't see it anymore because we're so used to seeing it but I
think maybe changing it to something else a little, well plainer.
11 Farmakes: Is the green on there or is that a copper type thing or what is
that? What is the material on that?
Gerhardt: It's a painted metal letter and a pre -case letter. The green is
matching, the decorative light standards in the downtown so that's where
the green comes in. And you will have decorative lighting introduced in
this area over here and over here but again the color hasn't been approved.
But I'm sure they're doing that trying to stay consistent with those
country colors. They've been using the grays, the bluish greens and
greens.
Farmakes: Is that supposed to be like a kasota stone or did you mention
what type of stone that is?
Gerhardt: It's a limestone veneer with a rough face. Not the smooth.
Batzli: Would this come back before us for any reason? No. Okay.
Emmings: HRA stuff.
Gerhardt: I mean if you wanted to see it, we can put it on the agenda.
Farmakes: This is an important thing because this what people are...
Gerhardt: Yeah, as Dick and I were talking over there he said did Morrish
look at any of this and I said, I don't think so. One of the things that
we're going to work on is we're going to try and get this with the
1
Planning Commission Meeting 1
February 19, 1992 - Page 36
University of Minnesota and say is this what we had been planning for this
area. I know there's some talk at one of the public meetings that...and
green areas at some of the intersections.
Krauss: Morrish has seen this. Yeah, in fact we had meetings to put them
together as kind of a team for a while so yeah, he and Barry Warner did
take a crack at that. 1
Gerhardt: Okay. Once we put a set of plans and specs together, I don't
have any problems coming back to Planning Commission and showing you what 11
we're doing and if you want to make suggestions. The HRA is really
interested in getting public input. I mean we held 4 or 5 public hearings
on the park. I've gone to Rotary. We've gone to the Chamber with it to 11
get input. We don't get anybody to come to our meetings.
Farmakes: Other things that you've mentioned it's nice about the sign is
the color scheme. I think it's a nice environmental, friendly color scheme"
but the materials also I think are important. You use the rough stone, you
should be careful about the letters and the materials that those are made
out of, even the look of letting-copper go green. With the look on the
'CCO building downtown, it's quite reflective of that color scheme there.
But that gives it a far different look of natural look versus green metal
-letters. For instance of fake metal plastic type thing. It gives it a
little look. It says something different of our community.
Gerhardt: The metal letters would probably be made out of some type of
aluminum that would not bleed into the rocks and there again they would be
painted with whatever color they decide to paint it or whatever. But that II
is a good point. -
Farmakes: Copper does go green. 1
Gerhardt: Right. Well we see that with the other type of light poles that
we have in the downtown. You go over in the parking lot over there and youll
notice that the exposed metal lights, they corregated steel...get wet they
bleed down onto the top of the concrete. So it does look a little weird.
We've got that bleeding down over there. 1
Batzli: How many new lawnmowers are we going to have to get to keep up all
of these new park type areas throughout the city?
Gerhardt: Let me see, we bought one cast year. What we do is there's one II
full time employee who maintains the downtown and now we've hired a
seasonal person so he does help out during the summertime in mowing the
area. SO you basically have 2 people during the summer who maintain the II
downtown picking up the garbage, mowing, fertilizing, and this would be an
extension to that.
Batzli: I mean are these types of areas, they've got these things heavily
landscaped and flowered. Are you going•to be installing sprinkler systems
and having like the Garden Club take care of it hopefully so it actually
looks nice rather than, if the City tries to do it it will probably not get
as much attention as it deserves.
1
Planning Commission Meeting
1 1 g M g
February 19, 1992 - Page 37
11
Gerhardt: Well you're looking at the head of the garden club. I run the
garden club. And if the garden club's getting more areas than what they
want, so I'm out there planting flowers. I think I was out here and you
guys were walking in and tripping over me and.
Batzli: No, we appreciate that but I just think if it's left up to the
city from time to time, things get a little bit unruly before they get back
to us.
Gerhardt: Then you call me and then we get �n Charlie and Charlie's out
there. You know it's amazing, Charlie has 12,000 bosses. Everytime
somebody drives by, they roll down the window. You should be trimming
these trees in this location and so everybody keeps a pretty good eye on it
and I think he does a real good job.
Batzli: Oh, I agree. I mean he can't be everyplace at once. I'm just
curious to know whether we're going to have city staff out there tending,
you know clipping out the dead flowers or is this going to be kind of a
community get, maybe some of the seniors like the Excelsior seniors.
Gerhardt: The garden club's growing every year and they take on more and
I'm sure the seniors, you know with their center, I think they're going to
get more active. I've been working with Ben Gowen and he wants to flower
hostas and some other flowers off of TH 41. He's going to assist in the
garden club in trying to get them more active. The garden club's more,
they want to be more than just planting flowers. They want to go to
seminars. They want speakers to come in. They don't want to be a laborer
for the city or the HRA in trying to beautify. They want to learn and
we've got a lot of novice gardners in this club. And we can take a flower
and stick it in the ground and water it but...
Batzli: For example I think the, you know what they do in Excelsior on
Al that little piece of triangle. I mean they give high visibility to the
fact that these are the people taking care of it and you drive by it and
you're just impressed as heck. And if we can give an opportunity like that
so people even know (a) that there's , a garden club, and (b) give them a
show piece. Then it would be worth their time out there planting things
rather than you're right, just having to be slave labor.
Gerhardt: We bought little signs that say garden club. We've taken out a
good relationship with the newspaper in trying to get members. The next
• newsletter, well not the next one but the following one will have join the
garden club. We've done a lot of things. We have right now about 10
members in the garden club so that should be an area and similarly this
would be a mirror image of the sign over on the piece by the Holiday
station.
Batzli: Chanhassen would be spelt backwards? -
Gerhardt: Right. Backwards. Upsidedown. Not Home of the Dinner
Theatre. That's not going to be in there. We showed this to the bank and
with what the bank's doing with their entry piece and what this is doing in
that area, the HRA wants to put an active bell in this thing too so it will
play chimes and stuff. So they're into it.. I think it's going to be a
11
Planning Commission Meeting 1
February 19, 1992 Page 38
real nice area. Walkway going alone there. We've changed that from a 11
bituminous walkway to a concrete walkway and staying with the TH 5 in
concrete, we thought we should be consistent with what the road structure
is. And one of the other things that the HRA would be spending money is
that you're going to have a lot of detailed brick work that they're
spending money on. Pedestrian crossways would be done in brick. It would
be brick...with special paving...that will look like brick and it will be II
colored like brick that will follow along in the median section in this
area of Great Plains and Dakota. As you come down Chanhassen you see these
entry monuments and you see this brick fading with the concrete roadway, II
people are going to realize, hey this is downtown Chanhassen. This is
different and special. Just coming across brick and it's going to be...
Farmakes: I have a question. Is there anything written as to, I'm just II
wondering how people friendly this, it will look nice. I'm just wondering
how useable it is or what purpose is intended for it. Is there any study
in regards to, for instance there's a bench overlooking TH 5 and I'm
wondering how relevant that is.
Krauss: TH 5 has a bike trail, pedestrian trail. 1
Farmakes: Well I didn't mean that. I was wondering •1f somebody's going to
plant themselves down next to full of traffic.
Gerhardt: Well if somebody's going to ride a bike, I mean from what we've II
been told, this is going to go out to Carver Park. This trail. Ultimately
if TH 5 is upgraded so you can get a lot of people biking out to the
Arboretum, out to Carver Park from Eden Prairie and along the way they want
to stop and rest, they can sit on the bench.. $100.00 bench you know is
there if they want it. i
Farmakes: What I was saying though or the comment I was making, I was just
wondering if there's anything. There have been occasions where communities
have spent a lot of money for park areas where they thought they would be II
useable and have not been, including like New York City for instance.
Gerhardt: ...active park area. We're not trying to encourage people to
come down in this area. The bench is there again, this is going to be
constructed with TH 5 as it gets through Eden Prairie. We didn't put any
parking lots in to accommodate people to come down here and use this. It's
more of a visual, as you're driving by type pleasure and it's not an active
area. We're not trying to encourage people...want to go down and sit and
watch cars go by on TH 5 with the exception of...
Farmakes: Has there been communication between the other elements that
were on the corridor study? The urban design center.
Krauss: Well yeah, Morrish has seen this stuff. 1
Gerhardt: And Barton - Aschmann is the engineers that are working on the
TH 5 plan. The HRA has hired them to make sure that TH 5 is being built, II
that these elements can be introduced. The special brick paving is TH 5
being upgraded that we can get those special brick pavings done with that.
Who better to do that than the architects and engineers that are working 01
1
Planning Commission Meeting
February 19, 1992 - Page 39
TH 5. With the contract, Barry Warner from Barton- Aschmann has been
working with Bill Morrish and Paul and also is very good friends with Peter
Olin from the Landscape Arboretum so he bounced all of this off of Peter
! and what Peter thinks of this and the HRA and their thoughts of what this
area should be looking like. But we're open to any change on it but a big
factor in this was to try to get this done with the TH 5 improvement and
that segment is going to be built this spring.
Batzli: Where's the fountain in, right there?
Gerhardt: Right here.
Batzli: And you're not going to put the depot there like in the other
concept drawing?
Gerhardt: No. We want to put the depot in a spot where the best thing we
can do is to get it reused. To have people use it instead of it just being
an empty building sitting somewhere. Similar to Old Village Hall. You
wouldn't believe how much the Old Village Hall gets used. That book
upstairs is booked. Wedding parties use it to dress in. There's school
classes, the Cub Scouts, there's tap dancers, and the floor's got little
pits in it from the tap dancers. But the building gets used, it's
unbelieveable. And I'd like to do the same thing, rennovate the old depot
and put that back to a similar use. Be it whether I rent it out for some
realtor or somebody to go in there or something and has money generated but
I think the best way to use these older buildings is to put them back to
use and that's the only way they usually keep upgraded.
Batzli: So you're still looking at doing something like that within this
TIF district then?
Gerhardt: We'd like to get it down next to St. Hubert's Church. By Old
Village Hall, what we looked at, what we've got there is basically a little
historical area and I always figured a nice spot would be on a Klingelhutz
piece between those two big oak trees next to the railroad tracks. If not
in that location, a little bit farther east of where Jerry Schlenk's house'
is next to the railroad tracks. And those are my thoughts. Sometimes they
go to the wayside but we haven't designated a site but it more than likely
will be down in that area somewhere... That's all the modifications as a
part of what's going on. Again when your passing a resolution saying that
the modifications that we're making are consistent with the overall
development of the community and I stand ready to answer any questions that
you may have...
Batzli: Thanks again Todd. Tim, do you have anything? Ladd? Matt?
Jeff? Okay. Any motions?
Ledvina: Okay, I'd like to offer a motion that the Planning Commission
adopt Resolution No. 92 -1, finding Modification No. 11 of the Redevelopment
Plan and TIF Plan consistent with the city's plan for development of the
City of Chanhassen.
Conrad: I'll second.
•
Planning Commission Meeting I
February 19, 1992 - Page 42
f
complaining. We have a 50 foot lot that has 14 boats on it, that's pretty I
high intensive useage. So to answer your questions, I don't know. I think
that the lake people seem to be lobbying for 1982 and the...certainly for '
1982 and you supported it. The problem is, you support this thing and have' j
reasons for justification but then you don't show up at the City Council
meeting and stand your ground and share your thoughts...so there's a loss
of transition in there and I think...that you should be there to stand...
and giving the Council your input.
Batzli: Well it comes up for second reading next Monday?
Councilman Wing: On the consent agenda.
l' Batzli: Okay, and that's the same meeting that is going to have the
corridor study?
Krauss: Yes.
Batzli: Okay. So there may be more of us there at least. So if it does J
get yanked off of consent.
Conrad: It's on the consent agenda. Is that right ?'
Krauss: Well given the comments that Dick's been receiving, I think the 1
other Council people have probably been receiving them as well, I wouldn't
be surprised if it got pulled off.
Batzli: It will get pulled off of consent agenda. 1
Conrad: And who's made aware? It's not a public hearing at this time. Do i
People have the opportunity to talk?
Krauss: The Mayor's always, if it's pulled off the consent agenda, the
Mayor's always had a very open stance toward people wanting to comment on
things and they're always given an opportunity.
Conrad: And who is going to show up for this? There's been one reading.
Did people go away feeling that it's a done deal after the one reading?
Councilman Wing: I think that it's been my limited experience on the I
Council, the first reading is a good time to sit quiet and say nothing but
then the second reading is the time to pull it off the consent agenda and
hit it head on. I'm assuming that the majority of the discussion...real
decision will be made on the second reading. That's my opinion based on
previous ones. I think of the landscape ordinance. Nobody said anything i
...and they had a million reasons why and no chance to discuss or counter
or even be rational on the issues...so I can see that happening.Monday
although the lake people who were here, that are calling me'are certainly 1
planning on coming in with a lot of background and professional people with
them...so there's a lot of, they're not interested in...
Conrad: I'm just curious. I've talked to a councilmember or two and I
don't know that there's support for the 1982. I don't know that the 1982
is going to be what is agreed upon. But there is opportunity for people toel
I
I Planning Commission Meeting
February 19, 1992 - Page 43
kw
speak but oh well, thank you Dick.
Batzli: Anything else Paul?
•
Krauss: A couple other things that didn't happen at the Council meeting
11 but are happening at the storm water meetings. One of the goals that was
established and one of the early directives on this thing was to attack the .
problems in our wetlands ordinance and develop a new ordinance and official
map. What we've done is break out a subcommittee of the, what the swamp
group, we'll go by that acronym, that's working at a more rapid pace on
geting a new wetlands ordinance in place and adoption of the official map.
So I'm hopeful that you'll be seeing the fruits .of that effort before we
get too deep into the summer season. The other element that you're
probably going to be seeing in short order is, there's a set of manuals for
maintaining a site during construction and I'm sure Matt's familiar with
it. It's called Best Management Practices but there's different manuals by
different organizations. Basically it's guidelines that establish in great
detail how you best control erosion during various construction stages.
Re- establishment of cover and what not. Our ordinances are extremely bad
on this thing. We've been kind of making do by sticking people with
erosion control plans and what not as a part of approvals but we really
don't have a comprehensive document that tells us what to do and where to
I do it. So we're probably going to be looking to an ordinance, in fact it's
one of the topics that's probably going to come up next week at the swamp
meeting. Ordinance amendments to deal with that head on and get that into
place before we get too deep into the construction season as well.
Batzli: Does that make Tim Chairman of the Swamp?
IF Krauss: Yeah. •
Batzli: Well is that an ordinance that we can merely adopt a certain
manual as our guiding light?
Krauss: We've got a couple of approaches to that. I've been working with
Bonestroo. I think my preference is to do what you're saying. Is that not,
to go into great technical detail in the ordinance because it's confusing
and it's to adopt either that manual or a manual that we develop for
ourselves by reference in the ordinance and then we can update the manual,
11 whenever we need to without changing the ordinance.
• Batzli: Okay. Moving onto ongoing items. Jeff, has the sign group been
meeting?
Farmakes: Yes. We met for the second time this morning. And it's going
along pretty good actually. We're making some headway. We're dealing with
the intent statement now and then starting to deal with some of the
special, with how we approach districting for signage.
Batzli: Okay. Any administrative approvals?
Krauss: Yeah there was one but I can't remember what it is right now.
I'll try and think of it.
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting 11
February 19, 1992 - Page 44
DISCUSSION OF GROUP HOMES.
11
Batzli: What do we need to discuss?
Krauss: Well okay. I don't know if you, again because of the lateness of
the hour whether you want to get this in time. Even though the agenda says"
the sexually oriented materials on there too, Roger was not able to get
that into the packet in time so that's something that will swing onto the
next one. I asked Roger to give us a memo on outlining with group homes
what we do now. What recent court actions are saying that you may be able
to do. What you can't do and then to look at some alternatives. This is
one of our work items. Ongoing items. What I'd like to do is, in view of
the hour if you don't really want to really discuss this in detail at this
point. I didn't work on it but it came from Minnetonka. Minnetonka I
thought took a real progressive stance on group homes in that the City
worked diligently to allow these things into the community in a reasonable
and responsible manner but right now we have an ordinance that says some
classes are protected by the State. They can move in, you say nothing but
the larger ones have a conditional use permit but there's no guideline.
And what Minnetonka did is develop some very good guidelines and I have
copies I can give you tonight or in the next packet,, however you wish, thatli
outline where a group home, a licensed group home is a reasonable use and
where it's not. I think you're way ahead of the game to examine this issue"
somewhat dispassionately when you're not being confronted by some raucous
crowd of folks telling you to shoot something down. And I'm not asking you
to jump into anything quickly. We can always have Chuck Gabrielson, I'm
sure he'd be willing to comment on some of this stuff. He operates the
home out on TH 5. I'd like to involve him just to get some expertise. But
Minnetonka had some horrific experiences. One was a home for teenage kids
that had problems. It was in an old school. Another one which was really 11
an awful situation was a'home for battered women that was moving out of
Hopkins and into Minnetonka and the ordinance that they developed I think
showed a lot of foresight and they had a lot of input. They served on a II
State committee on regulating group homes and what not. So I'd like to
bounce some of those things off you to show what I think could possibly be
done and what we maybe ought to look at. And if you agree we'll come
through with an ordinance amendment to do it.
Batzli: Currently what do we do? Do we regulate it at all?
Krauss: Well we do but it's like so many of our CUP's and we've tried to 1
fix them as we've tackled them. It says it's a conditional use permit.
There's only four specific standards, and this is for the ones that are
between, 7 to 16 adults or children. What we require that they have a
State license. Now that's sometimes problematic because the State doesn't
license everything. So you need to look at that. Compliance with building
and fire codes as a condition. Well, that's nice. chat's reasonable.
Annual review. Well all CUP's have annual review and it's got to have a II
septic system in compliance with the ordinance. Well, this doesn't tell me
a whole lot or give me a whole lot of guidance. The stuff that Minnetonka II
developed was things like, if you're going to have a group residential
facility in a single family neighborhood, you've got to recognize it's not
a single family use. I mean not exactly and that the intensity of the use
is somewhat greater. So what they did in Minnetonka is I think they
•
1
Planning Commission Meeting
February 19, 1992 - Page 45
established a requirement that for each residential above a certain number
you have to have 3,000 feet of lot area. Off street parking has to be
provided. That these things'should not be located at the end, dead
end of a cul -de -sac but on a more prominent street, possibly where it's not
as intrusive. And a lot of what regards is somewhat like a church. A
church is allowed in a residential district but you don't want it at the
end of a cul -de -sac because it has inordinate amounts of traffic and noise
and whatever else associated with it. I think that there's a way to
reasonably approach these things without being punitive and I think we
ought to look at it when nobody's asking us the question.
Farmakes: Is it a practical matter with some of this stuff though that
because a lot of these organizations are starved for cash that they take
11 over existing buildings that have been either abandoned or looking to
unload them. Say for instance I know in some communities there's been
problems with churches who get a single family exemption and they're in a
single family community and in some cases they're quite close to these
places. And they come in. There's usually a regulation that states that
they can only be used for religious purposes. It has to be an active
11 survey and they try to do, get the zoning changed just for that one corner.
That one lot in a single family zone. Do you envision that sort of thing?
Krauss: Well churches are a little tough. A little different but I know
I've dealt, I didn't have to deal with it fortunately but there was an
instance in Minnetonka where a family, a religiously oriented family moved
into a home and turned their house into a church where they had meetings
11 and streets up and down on both sides were filled with cars and it became a
real significant problem. I think you do need to look at that and churches
are not very well regulated by our ordinances.
11 Farmakes: Don't confuse me. What I'm talking about in this particular
case that I know, it was actually a convent. A small convent. Residential
convent area. Because it had a chapel in it, it was classified as for
religious use. But it had an exemption and it was in a single family area.
Krauss: No, we don't exempt anything for religious purposes.
Farmakes: No, no. I meant that the building had an exemption being placed
in a single family zone.
11 Krauss: We don't have that in.
Farmakes: Not in this community but what I'm saying is that what happened
is that they tried to find someone to take the building. Basically they
couldn't find another religious organization to take it so they, there was
a group, a home that had a contract with the County who wanted to take over
the facility. Wanted to rezone it. Pressure because the contract was with
a municipal government that to change that within the single family zone.
Krauss: Well that can certainly happen. I worked on one in Minnetonka on
Excelsior Blvd. which was a convent and there are no more nuns living in it
and it was a home for Alheizmer's. A residential home for Alheizmer's
patients that had an operation in Minneapolis that wanted to move out
1 there. I never thought it was going to be controversial but, I mean it was
Planning Commission Meeting ,
February 19, 1992 - Page 46
a building that was designed for multiple occupancy. It had a lot of 11
little cells for the nuns. But those kinds of things, that particular kind
of thing you can deal with with the ordinance that I'm thinking of. Of at II
least laying out for you to take a look at.
Batzli: Why don't you bring it back next meeting with what you'd like to a
see. Obviously with a conditional use permit we already have flexibility
as to what we need. The only thing we're going to gain by putting criteria
in there is you're going to have it in writing to put under somebody's nose
and say this is what we want.
Krauss: With our CUP standards the way they area, we have some specific
standards for some CUP's and then we have the mom and apple pie CUP
standards that apply to everything. You'd be very hard pressed to develop 1,
detailed guidelines on an impromptu basis when somebody's already in with
an application request that would be upheld by a court.
Batzli: Then we should get rid of all the detailed CUP stuff shouldn't well
Krauss: No, I think the reverse is true. You should be more specific on II
the CUP standards. And again, keep in mind, my own professional opinion
about group homes is they're something that I think we have an obligation
as a community to do our share. I don't.think we can ship all these
problems off to Chicago Avenue in Minneapolis and shouldn't attempt to do
that.
Batzli: So this is an...problem? 11
Krauss: Yeah, very much so. One other aspect of this that Roger touched
on that we had a problem with recently is I had a woman who runs a senior
residence. They wanted to buy a home in Chanhassen and we have a
definition of what constitutes a family. Our definition says that you can
have up to 5 unrelated people. She wanted to take in, it was a 4 bedroom
house and it was she and her husband and she wanted to take in 3 senior
citizens that needed a modest level of care and wanted to live in a
residential setting. Sounded real innocuous to me. I couldn't see any
problem at all with it. In fact there was no problem at all with it under II
our current ordinance. But then she said, well what if I have a baby? My
husband and I are thinking of having a baby. Well, then you no longer have
5 unrelated people. You have 3 related and 3 unrelated, 6 total and
technically it's a violation of our ordinance. I mean ordinances were
never designed to look at the multiplicity of living situations that people
have and the courts have had some recent rulings which is why I asked Roger
to get involved. But I think it's a fairly interesting topic and I think II
the only time you can really look at it is when you're free to do it
without pressure.
Batzli: Okay, sounds good. Why don't we take a look at it next week with I
your thoughts on what you're trying to get us to look at.
Krauss: We also have for the next meeting another work item, and I know II
from talking to Commissioner Erhart about it, it's one that we've been
meaning to tackle for quite a while. We got approval from Metro Council to
lower our lot sizes in the rural area. We're scheduling an ordinance 1
t
Planning Commission Meeting -
February 19, 1992 - Page 47
amendment to follow up on that for the next meeting.
Batzli: I'm sorry, to do what?
Krauss: If you recall with the Lake Ann agreement, we got that contract
change which authorizes us to lower the lot area below 2 1/2 acres but
that's what our ordinance says right now. In the rural area. So we need
to amend our ordinances accordingly.
Batzli: I thought you could only be 2 1/2 acres if you were prior, if you
subdivided it prior to the?
11 Krauss: No. What you can have is, you're subject to the 1 per 10 acre
density cap now but you also have to have 2 1/2 acre lots. The premise we
were looking at is if you have 40 acres, instead of having 10 acres of it
in 4 lots, you may be able to have four 1 acre lots as long as you can meet
the drainfield requirements and leave the rest of your land open. So we're
not messing with the density.
Batzli: Okay. Remind me to ask you about a conversation we had months ago
about leaving open space like that and who's going to for it. Let's
talk about it then. Let's move on.
1 j DISCUSSION OF AMENDMENT REGARDING SALES OF SEXUALLY ORIENTED MATERIAL.
11 Batzli: I understand this came from the Council.
Krauss: Yes. And that Roger didn't have a chance to finish that one
before the packet date so we'll get that on your next meeting. In the past
I don't think too much has changed. You can regulate the sales of sexually
oriented materials. It's very difficult to do and you want to get away
from that community standard and all that. But in essence to regulate it,
to ban it from some part of your town you have to allow it someplace else.
You can't totally prohibit it so basically you wind up having to consign a
portion of your town over to the possibility of having this stuff and what
area do you want to write off. Roger was quite specific. You can't hang
it on a bluff in the middle of nowhere or in an industrial park. It's got
to be in a consistent retail area.
Batzli: Well the issue for us right at this point is, in the past we've
looked around at each other and said do we want to do anything with this?
Everybody said no and we've just dropped the ball. I understand now that
the Council is requesting that we do something with it?
Krauss: Well the Mayor asked that we bring this up. When I showed him
your list of work assignments for the next year, he specifically asked
about this one. Frankly I mean, I don't know what Rcger's going to tell us
exactly but if he tells us what he's told us before, you may draw the same
conclusion but we can carry that forward to the City Council.
Ail Farmakes: I have a question on the one thing. It said business and it
didn't say material and this one says materia'.. Does that refer to two
bars or that type of thing where they have entertainment or are we talking
in here about?
Planning Commission Meeting
February 19, 1992 - Page 48
11
Krauss: It was an inopportune choice of words. It's supposed to apply to
all of it as I understood what the Mayor was looking at. So you've got the
bars. You've got the videos. You've got whatever else is being sold.
Ledvina: Would that apply to like a Video Update that would sell X rated
films? 1
Krauss: Well theoretically it could.
Farmakes: What is the application to the entertainment though of that sort'
of thing? We don't have bars here that provide that.
Krauss: Roger's told us that we have, or the Council has a tremendous
amount of latitude over bars because we can do virtually anything we want
with a liquor license and courts won't overrule you.
Farmakes: Minneapolis is wrestling with that right now aren't they? 11
Krauss: Yeah they are and I'm not sure why the premise seems to be so much
different in Minneapolis but here you can attach, we've been told you can II
attach conditions to a liquor license that would prohj.bit that.
8atzli: So what we're going to do now is we'll wait for Roger and discuss
it next week and all of us need to try and decide whether we want to
consign this type of businesses to a certain part of Chanhassen before the
fact or wait for one to come in. That's the bottom line decision.
Conrad moved, Erhart seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor
and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 10:30 p.m..
Submitted by Paul Krauss
Planning Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim 1
1
1
11