CC 2004 04 26CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
APRIL 26, 2004
Mayor Furlong called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. The meeting was opened
with the Pledge to the Flag.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Furlong, Councilman Ayotte, Councilman
Labatt, Councilman Lundquist and Councilman Peterson
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Roger Knutson, Bob Generous, Todd Hoffman, Jill
Sinclair, Matt Saam, Paul Oehme, and Kelley Janes
PUBLIC PRESENT FOR ALL ITEMS:
Jerry & Janet Paulsen
Steven Lillehaug
7305 Laredo Drive
Planning Commission
Mayor Furlong: Good evening and welcome to everybody here this evening. We have a
full house. It's nice to see and also would like to welcome those that are watching us at
home this evening. Start out with regard to the agenda. The one item, item number 5,
based on discussion at our work session this evening, we are going to table that item for
this evening. Most likely bring it back at our next council meeting, but just as soon as
staff has the opportunity to address the items that were addressed at our work session.
Other than that, are there any other, the other thing ! would like to do under public
announcements is a proclamation for Arbor Day that was distributed in the packet prior to
the poster winners, I'd like an affirmation both from the council with regard to that
proclamation. Are there any other changes to the agenda? If there are none the agenda
will stand approved as amended.
ARBOR DAY PROCLAMATION DECLARING MAY 1 AS ARBOR DAY.
Mayor Furlong: At this point is there a motion to adopt the proclamation for Arbor Day,
May lSt?
Councilman Peterson: So moved.
Mayor Furlong: Is there a second?
Councilman Lundquist: Second.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. All those in favor, any discussion?
Resolution #2004-20A: Councilman Peterson moved, Councilman Lundquist
seconded to approve the proclamation declaring May 1st as Arbor Day. All voted in
favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
City Council Meeting - April 26, 2004
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: PRESENTATION OF CERTIFICATES OF
ACHIEVEMENTS AND MAPLE LEAF AWARDS.
Mayor Furlong: We have a number of Certificates and Maple Leaf Awards to pass out
this evening. Some other items so I'm going to go down in front, ask for a microphone
and invite some people to come up. Bruce Feik, is Bruce here this evening? Bruce
served 3 years on the Planning Commission, from April, 2001 to April, 2004. On the
commission Bruce assisted in updating the Chanhassen City Code and studying the 2005
MUSA AUAR project, which was a very extensive project and I know that he took a very
keen interest in that and his comments were well received and thoughts there. He has
always been an advocate for Southwest Metro Transit and we're going to miss his insight
and thoughts on the Planning Commission so Bruce, on behalf of the council and
Planning Commission would like to present you with this Certificate and extend our
appreciation and thank you for your time and assistance to the city. Thank you. Amy
O'Shea. Is Amy here this evening? Hello. Good to see you. Amy served on the, as a
park and recreation commissioner from April, 2002 to April, 2004. She came to the
commission with a background in recreation and desire to serve her community, which
she did very well. From relocation to Hudson, Wisconsin has forced Amy to resign from
the commission. We will miss here. It will be Hudson's gain. With her fellow
commissioners we appreciate your service and desire to make our community a better
place to live, so Amy thank you for your contributions on behalf of the council and the
staff would like to present you with a certificate. Thank you very much. Susan
Robinson. I saw her here earlier. Susan served on the Park and Recreation Commission
for one year, from April, 2003 to 2004. She was a committed contributor during that
short tenure, but nonetheless was able to make our city better, specifically with the park
and recreation area. The commission will miss her services and contributions and so
Susan, thank you for your contributions and on behalf of the City Council we'd like to
present you with this. Thank you very much. Steve Nalefski. Steve was appointed to the
Environmental Commission in August of 2001 and has served until March of this year.
He's been a dedicated member who volunteers his time on behalf of the commission at
such events as Arbor Day, and the 4th of July parade. During his tenure the commission
accomplished many tasks including, how did that come out of my mouth. Including
environmental excellence awards, environmental book purchase for the library, and a
variety of other projects, specifically the Blue Sky Guide, which I know you were very
involved in. Steve, on behalf of the City Council and City of Chanhassen I'd like to
present you with this certificate and our thanks and appreciation for your service. The
next item is a maple leaf award for Tom Faust who served on the senior commission from
1999 to 2004. Tom was not able to be here with us this evening but I'd like to take a
moment to just explain some of his service to the city. He served on the Senior
Commission for the past 5 years, from April, 1999 to April, 2004. He was instrumental
in incorporating into the Chanhassen Residents Guide, the senior services that are
available within our city. Additionally he advocated for an expansion to the senior center
into the former library space. That construction's taking place right now as we speak and
will be completed later this year. So the council will be sure to get this award to Tom,
but if you see him, please extend your thanks and appreciation to Tom as well. Is Marion
2
City Council Meeting - April 26, 2004
Olson, would you like to come forward. Good evening. Thank you for coming. Mrs.
Olson is here to accept an award for her husband, Albin Olson who passed away this last
year. For those of you that don't know when he passed away, his contributions to our
city over the many years that he served have been self evident. He served on the Senior
Commission for 10 lA years beginning in April of 1990. Worked hard to convince
business owners to put up senior citizen parking signs in their parking lots, many of those
we see when we go to our local businesses. He was actively involved in planning and
ground breaking for the Centennial Hills Senior Housing, which has been an asset to our
city, and was one of the first tenants to move into the building. It was through Al's love
of gardening that Chanhassen Community Gardens were born. He didn't just take care of
his own plot, but it was clear that he helped in other people's gardens as well by weeding
and nurturing them and teaching them how to be better gardeners. He volunteered at city
special events, including all 7 Arbor Day celebrations, where he distributed tree
seedlings, February Festival and the Septemberfest Festival. His contributions to the City
of Chanhassen were truly endless. Marion, please accept this Maple Leaf Award and our
most sincere appreciation for Al's contributions.
Marion Olson: He really, he loved the city of Chanhassen and the seniors and enjoyed all
of you. And he loved telling people how to garden.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you very much.
Marion Olson: Thank you.
Councilman Ayotte: God bless you.
ARBOR DAY: PRESENTATION OF POSTER CONTEST WINNER.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, this evening just before ! came down we passed a motion
affirming a proclamation that ! made as the Mayor of City of Chanhassen proclaiming
this coming Saturday, May 1st as Arbor Day in our city. There will be a number of
events, tree plantings, people will be gathering to clean up parks as well. Everybody's
invited. If you'd like to participate, there's still time. Please contact City Hall and you'll
be connected with somebody that can help you if you've got a small group, Boy Scouts,
Cub Scouts or others within your neighborhood that you'd like to help them to
participate, we'd encourage you to do that. I'd like at this time to talk a little bit about
the Arbor Day Poster Contest, so is Dottie Shea here? Were you going to come and join
me? On behalf of the City Council and the Environmental Commission I'd like to thank
and congratulate all the winners of this year's Arbor Day Poster Contest. The City has
been sponsoring the contest for four years in order to express our commitment to trees
and natural resources in our city. Every year our local fifth graders are invited to submit
their drawings based on the annual theme. The theme for 2004 was Trees are Terrific in
Cities and Towns. The City would like to thank all the fifth graders at St. Hubert's
School, Bluff Creek Elementary for their wonderful drawings. The City would also like
to thank Halla Nursery and the Garden Center for their generous donation to the grand
prize winner of a potted tree of their choice. Please visit the Chanhassen Library's
City Council Meeting - April 26, 2004
Wilder Room over the next week or two to see all the posters submitted. The framed
winning poster will hang in City Hall, along with the past winners. The runners-up are
receiving a potted spruce tree that they can pick up on May 1st at the Arbor Day
celebration, and we'd like to have you come forward now so that we can give you a
certificate as well. And I'll apologize for any last names that I don't get quite right.
Paige Polinsky. Is Paige here? She's not here. We'll give that to her. Kelsey Peterjohn.
Hi Kelsey.
Councilman Ayotte: Got to get your picture taken.
Mayor Furlong: Turn around. Erinn Voas. Congratulations. Kacie Foster. Kacie. Sara
Kullberg. Sara. Jessica Sorensen. Jessica. Kaylee Schmall. Aren't they here? There
she is. Congratulations. Megan Pfeifer. And now is Mallory Undestad here? Mallory is
the grand prize winner this year and I'm pleased to present you with a certificate for the
tree, as well as the plaque that will hang in City Hall, or the library. Turn around.
Congratulations. Thank you Dottie.
CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman Ayotte
seconded to approve the following Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City
Manager's recommendations:
Approval of Minutes:
-City Council Work Session Minutes dated April 12, 2004
-City Council Summary & Verbatim Minutes dated April 12, 2004
-Board of Review & Equalization Summary & Verbatim Minutes dated April 12,
2004
Receive Commission Minutes:
-Planning Commission Summary & Verbatim Minutes dated April 6, 2004
-Park and Recreation Commission Summary & Verbatim Minutes dated March
23, 2004
Resolution #2004-21: Call Assessment Hearing for 2004 MSA Street
Improvements, Project 04-02.
Resolution #2004-22: Accept Street and Storm Improvements in Ashling
Meadows, Project 01-04.
Approve Street Name Change from Halla Nursery Drive West to Bramble Drive,
Project 95-13.
Approval of No Parking Resolution #2004-23A for West 78th Street; Resolution
#2004-23B for Market Boulevard; and Resolution #2004-23C for Great Plains
Boulevard, Project 04-02.
g. Approval of Final Tax Settlement, Southwest Metro Transit Commission.
4
City Council Meeting - April 26, 2004
j. SCADA System:
1)
2)
3)
Resolution #2004-24: Approval of Plans and Specifications; Authorize
Bids for SCADA System Improvements, Phase I, PW307D.
Resolution #2004-25: Authorization of Plans and Specifications for
SCADA System Improvements, Phase II.
Approval of Contract with Kaeding & Associates for Design and
Construction Services for SCADA Improvements.
Resolution #2004-28: Resolution Approving Supplement No. 1 for Multi-Family
Housing Bonds, Villages on the Ponds.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
Mayor Furlong: Let's go to, we'll bring those up under new business. Each of those
items if there's no objection. I'd like to move now to Visitor Presentations.
Todd Hoffman: For l(i) we have a couple of members in the audience here for that item.
The Miracles for Mitch Foundation.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, is that okay? Without objection then we'll take up item l(i) at
this point. Mr. Hoffman, staff report. Or Mr. Ayotte, actually. Purpose of your removal.
i. APPROVAL OF SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT, KIDS TRIATHLON,
MIRACLES FOR MITCH FOUNDATION.
Councilman Ayotte: I wanted to pull that item because I think it's so important that I'd
like to give it some visibility and get a short presentation by staff on the event and the
intent of the event and how it came about.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you.
Todd Hoffman: For that we'd like to introduce Tony Schiller who is working on the
event and he'll introduce whoever he has here as well.
Tony Schiller: Good evening. I'm Tony Schiller and this is Steve Chepokas and we're
working together, co I guess producing if the event comes off, the Miracles Kids
Triathlon which is to support the Miracles of Mitch Foundation. I'll talk briefly about the
event and Steve will speak as the Chairman and Founder of the Miracles of Mitch
Foundation in a moment. I've been competing in endurance racing, this is my 32nd year
without ever having a break from racing. Getting ready for another year and this summer
look forward to being really actively involved in this race. It's something that I've
wanted to put on for years, ever since I got to witness my first kids triathlon back in the
late 80's and saw something that was just extraordinary. I really believe, as I drive here
to the building tonight and see the parks and see the kids out playing soccer and baseball,
City Council Meeting - April 26, 2004
how wonderful of course those sports are but one thing that those sports don't do is they
don't reach out to any kids at all that are wired a little differently. Wired like me. To be
an individual sport athlete and I think it's such a fantastic use of the park system so it's
exciting to know that we can reach out. We're hoping to bring in between 300 and 500
kids, depending on I guess popularity and the limits that may or may not be put on the
event, and to be able to see kids participating in this extremely unbelievable day where
they'll accomplish something really quite remarkable. To be one of the few athletes in
the world that can say they're a triathlete. It's quite a deal to see kids finish. They will
finish the swim and when they're finishing the swim, running to their bikes, you'll see
kid after kid screaming, I finished the swim. Having quite an accomplished look on their
face. They'll race off and take off on their bikes and they will be flying through the park
and out onto the roadway that we have designated and back into the park before they
complete their run, and even though this event is not a competitive event where we're
going to be recognizing the champions or the winners, we're actually recognizing all the
kids as the winners but the kids will race so hard and it will really be an unbelievable day
for the media, for the volunteers, for the parents and mostly for the kids and I think
they'll learn something about themselves, about how much fun it is to participate and to
have a goal. The whole program is set up to keep them busy and active all summer long.
Probably one of the best things we can do I think for kids, to keep them physically active
so that's the scope of the event and I'll turn it over to Steve to talk a little bit about
Miracles of Mitch, the foundation and why he thought this was such a great connection
between the race and the foundation.
Steve Chepokas: Thank you. You know I thank Tony for really taking an interest in this
and I thank you guys for hearing us out on this. Mitch was my son who died of
osteosarcoma bone cancer. We celebrated, we call it a celebration as one year heavenly
birthday was on Easter Sunday. The resurrection of Christ and the death of my son, it
was a great day. All I can do is move ahead with the Miracles ofMitch. I made a pinky
swear. I don't know those of you dad's out there who know what a pinky swear is, but
we made a pinky swear and sealed it with a kiss so I got to do it. We're carrying on the
Miracles of Mitch because we saw other families in the hospital that weren't as fortunate
as we were. They didn't have the gifts. They didn't have the support. They didn't have
the finances. They weren't able to take a year off work and travel around the world.
They didn't have a community like Chanhassen that stood behind us. You know some of
you may have been at the events, I don't really know. Chanhassen threw a pancake
breakfast for us. Raised $25,000 and also threw a spaghetti dinner and raised another
$25,000 so I'd say we live in a pretty good town guys. I want to keep the Miracles of
Mitch first in Chanhassen. He was a Chanhassen kid and I can't move beyond that.
We've been taken on by Culver's throughout the United States now. They're starting in
the entire state of Minnesota and Iowa as well as Wisconsin, calling it Miracle Monday
where they're donating 10 percent of all proceeds of every story to the Miracles of Mitch,
which is Monday, May 17th SO go there if you can. We've also been adopted by the
Minnesota Timberwolves as their charity of choice for 2004. We've also been honored
by the Minnesota Twins so we've got great things going on. It's because we've aligned
ourselves with good people like Tony. We're not doing a ton of events. We're doing a
few events and we're doing them very well, and this is an event I want to be around for a
City Council Meeting - April 26, 2004
long time. We want to follow policies, procedures. We want to do whatever we have to
do but this my friends is my passion, so I've got a brochure for everybody that I'd like
you to take home. Visit our web site if you'd like. That's all ! have. Thanks for
listening.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. You know from our standpoint we appreciate those
pamphlets and I'd like to thank you, both of you for the efforts that you're putting
forward. It's a great way to remember your son and we appreciate it very much.
Tony Schiller: Are there any questions for us?
Mayor Furlong: No, I think it's a great idea so looking forward to it. Any other issues
Councilman Ayotte?
Councilman Ayotte: No, that will be, he said it just fine. Thank you very much.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Is there a motion to approve item l(i)?
Councilman Ayotte: So moved.
Mayor Furlong: Is there a second?
Councilman Lundquist: Second.
Mayor Furlong: Any discussion?
Councilman Ayotte moved, Councilman Lundquist seconded to approve the Special
Event Permit for Kids Triathlon, Miracles of Mitch Foundation. All voted in favor
and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS.
Neal Blanchett: Mayor and members of the council, my name is Neal Blanchett. I'm
here this evening representing Paws, Claws & Hooves with regard to the kennel licensing
ordinance that you're hearing. I've presented a letter. It's on short notice that it came
into you today, and ! wanted to have a chance to present that to you. ! can do that now. !
can do it in connection with the ordinance.
Mayor Furlong: If there's no objection may we take that up with the ordinance? If you
can wait, why don't we do it then. Thank you. Is there anybody else that would like to
discuss any item this evening for visitor presentations? Yes, please.
Susan Rick: Hi, my name is Susan Rick. ! was here at a previous meeting and concerned
with Paws, Claws & Hooves. ! live in Hesse Farm neighborhood and just wanted to
show my support hoping that the City Council will vote in favor of amending these city
codes. I'm particularly interested that there is a contact person to correct the violations as
City Council Meeting - April 26, 2004
they occur. That's contact person 24 hours a day that would come back to the kennels to
fix whatever violation is occurring at the time. Probably the dog barking. ! also thought
it was important about all the animals should be inside the building when an employee is
not present. That way if the dogs are outside, there's nobody there to monitor the noise.
And thirdly, an employee, not to allow the animal noise, if there's a particular dog or
dogs barking, that that employee who would be on property, that they would bring the
dog in to try and get the dog not to make the noise. Number two, ! just had a couple
other concerns and I'm wondering how the city would plan to enforce these codes. Is it
doing, giving citations or you know when would you determine that you could revoke the
license?
Mayor Furlong: ! think what we can do there is, that will be an issue we'll raise when we
talk about that later in our agenda.
Susan Rick: Okay, because my concern is that in the past citations have been given to
Paws, Claws & Hooves and with the citations, that has not changed their behavior in
trying to abide by these codes. We have an expectation ! guess as a homeowner of
Chanhassen that if there's a violation of these codes that prompt action should be taken
by the city, and to alleviate the problems. As in the past, as ! just mentioned, issuing
citations has not changed the behavior of Paws, Claws & Hooves and ! would certainly
hope that there wouldn't be a double standard from the city in how they treat businesses
with attorneys versus private citizens in the community in enforcing those codes. Are
there any questions?
Mayor Furlong: If there are none, no. Thank you. Appreciate your comments. Is there
anybody else that would like to address the council with regard to visitor presentations?
Sir.
Wayne Decastre: I'd just like to state that I'm also a resident of Hesse Farms Estates and.
Mayor Furlong: Could you state your name and address.
Wayne Decastre: I'm sorry, Wayne Decastre, 1025 Hesse Farm Road. And Susan's
made a wonderful presentation of our concerns and we hope that you support those.
Thank you.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. We're still within visitor presentations. If there's anybody
else that would like to address an issue before the council. Sir.
Chad Junker: Chad Junker, 1250 Hesse Farm Road. ! also am one of the neighbors and
am concerned about Paws, Claws & Hooves and the noise factor down there with the
dogs. ! agree with everything that Susan has said.
Mayor Furlong: Is there anybody else who would like to address the council as a part of
visitor presentations this evening? If there are none we'll close visitor presentations and
move on with our agenda.
City Council Meeting - April 26, 2004
LAW ENFORCEMENT UPDATE.
Sgt. Jim Olson: Good evening. I'd like to introduce Deputy Eric Kittleson with the
Carver County Sheriff's Office. Deputy Kittleson was hired in 1997 with the sheriff's
office and started originally as a detection deputy. Became a full time officer in 1999 and
has worked in the city of Chanhassen for the past 3 years. Eric works the p.m. shift in the
city. Some of the things that he's involved in with the sheriff's office. He's a crime tech.
As a matter of fact oh about a month ago or so he was, had some rave reviews by Mark
Littfin about some work that he did at a house fire here in Chanhassen with some photos
that he took, and things that he did to assist the fire department. They were very thankful
for that. He is also a use of force instructor for the sheriff' s office. A field training
officer where he trains other officers that are new to the sheriff' s office, and he's also a
member of the sheriff' s emergency response team. Eric has taken personal ownership in
the city and I see that through his reports and a daily basis, and takes it, actually takes it
as a personal affront when something happens on his shift when he's working and I'm
glad that he works in Chanhassen. He does a real good job so I'd like to just introduce
Deputy Kittleson.
Mayor Furlong: Very good. Thank you Deputy. We appreciate all your efforts. Thank
you.
Sgt. Jim Olson: With the packet this month I've included the area report for the month of
March, the sheriff's area citation list, copy of crime alerts that were put out by Beth
Hoiseth, community service officer report and also just copies of the speed studies that
have been done with the speed trailer that we have. Reference and monthly numbers, our
total calls for service for the month were up by 161 and some of that is attributed to
DWI's have been up quite a bit. Not only just for the month, but for the entire year.
We've had a couple of Safe and Sober shifts that have helped with that, and the deputies
have really been targeting, trying to target drunk drivers at night, and they've been doing
a good job with that. Our damage to property was down for the month from 39 to 28.
That's a good thing. Theft was up from 35 to 42. Approximately 18 of those were flight
thefts. Overall thefts is down for the year from 97 to 92 for the year. Reference to flight
thefts, the Carver County Sheriff' s office is looking for information regarding those. We
are offering an award for information leading to the arrest and conviction of the people
involved in those thefts. And if you do have any information, please call our tip line and
the number to that is 952-361-1224 if you have any information in reference to those and
we would greatly appreciate that. Our fire calls were down for the month from 14 to 21.
Traffic stops were up from 182 for the month of February to 316 for the month of March.
So those were up quite a bit attributing to total calls for service that were up and citations
overall were up for the month from 200, or excuse me, to 222 for the month of March and
that's compared to 183 for the same month last year. They wrote quite a few citations.
Are there any questions reference to monthly numbers at all?
Mayor Furlong: Questions with regards to the monthly numbers?
City Council Meeting - April 26, 2004
Sgt. Jim Olson: Okay. A couple of weeks ago the sheriff's office did alcohol compliance
checks for the city of Chanhassen, and did cover all of the alcohol establishments here in
the city. ! am happy to report that we did not have a single violation in the city. That's a
good thing. That's a good thing. They did a great job with that. It's that time of year for
driving. You know one thing ! receive more calls about probably than anything else is
traffic concerns in the city and a majority of these calls in the neighborhood. Please be
aware of your speed and your surroundings when you're driving through neighborhoods.
A lot of those calls concern neighbors and people that live in the neighborhood that are
speeding and driving through and just be aware of those. We are certainly doing a lot of
traffic details and writing a lot of traffic citations in the city of Chanhassen so watch your
speeds and be careful. There's a lot of kids that are out playing and we would certainly
appreciate that. ! want to touch a little bit on underage alcohol consumption. Just what
our process is that we go through. We've had a number of those in the month of March
that you'll see for next month. Excuse me, the month of April that you'll see in next
month's report when ! come in. If the person who receives the citation for underage
consumption is under the age of 18 years old, our practice is we contact parents and we
also do something called the 691 form that we need to send into the schools and that are
mailed into the schools. And then the schools take it from there. From a prosecution
standpoint, there's a fine and or court that they have to do depending on how many they
have and a few different things. If the person is 18 years or older, we normally do not
contact parents because they are an adult. However we do still send a 691 form into the
high school if they're still a student at the high school. They fall under the high school,
or the State High School League with extracurricular events and so on and there's some
ramifications and penalties involving that, with that. Unfortunately occasionally with the
ones that are over 18 years old, we have seen where the kids are not necessarily always
truthful with us whether they're in high school or not, and at that age they could be in
college or in high school. We have had a couple that have fallen through the cracks with
that where they have not told the truth to us, told us they've been in college, that we have
tried to do some follow-up on some of those and try to get the 691's in where we can.
There's a couple that have fallen through the cracks on that. Are there any questions on
how we do the underage consumption reference alcohol.
Councilman Ayotte: Just a couple points of clarification. When an individual is 18 years
old and living at home, although they cannot be found criminally, the parents cannot be
found criminally associated with the event, they can be found civilly liable, is that
correct?
Sgt. Jim Olson: They could be sued. ! mean let's say a child drives away from a party in
the house and has a traffic accident. He's been drinking at that house. He could certainly
be sued you know from a civil standpoint, yes.
Councilman Ayotte: Yeah. And ! guess, do we do much with respect to educating
parents who are the parents of 18 year olds on what are the ramifications what they can
and cannot do with regard to minor consumption?
10
City Council Meeting - April 26, 2004
Sgt. Jim Olson: You know I've talked about underage drinking in a couple of my
newspaper articles. I'd have to double check but ! think I've covered that in a couple of
my newspaper articles, at least one. There is not a lot of education that we do sir.
Councilman Ayotte: And what I'm concerned about is, there's a lot of parents may not
be aware that my Johnny wouldn't certainly drink and what they can do with regard to
finding out about what's going on. I'm just wondering if we should research that avenue,
see if we can do something to help educate parents on the pitfalls because as you well
know, an 18 year old can get away with it and the risk is with the parent until that child
moves out, is that correct?
Sgt. Jim Olson: Civilly, it would certainly be with the child also. You know how a civil
court would look at that and a jury would look at that, ! mean you can get sued for
almost anything and how the civil court would look at that, or excuse me, a jury. Civil
jury would look at that, you know that would be up to that jury and the facts and so on
surrounding the case, but it could certainly get sued. You know I've got a two track
thought on this as far as notifying parents. Track number one, the kids are adults. There
is no statutory requirement that we have to notify parents when the party has occurred at
their house. As a parent of a 19 year old, ! would certainly want to know if my child, my
19 year old was having a party in the house, and would certainly take steps to make sure
that would not happen. Ever again. So ! think it is certainly a good idea to notify parents
you know if their 18 year old was having a party, or 19 year old, 20 year old, whatever.
That there was a party at their house when they've been gone. We talked a little bit about
that at our operations meeting today from a county standpoint with the sheriff and chief
deputy and some different people, and ! think what we're going to do is, I'm going to
monitor those personally as far as what's come in and try to catch those as they come in
and notify parents.
Councilman Ayotte: What do the schools do with, is it the 6917
Sgt. Jim Olson: Yes.
Councilman Ayotte: What do they do with it?
Sgt. Jim Olson: They had a chemical assessment team that sits down and who that is
comprised of ! think depends on the school district and the school. That sits down and
make the decision or determination if the child has a, if they feel the child has a drinking
problem or not, and what steps they as a school can do to step in and try to help that
child. You know does the child need help on a school level.
Councilman Ayotte: Are the parents brought into it if the child is over 18?
Sgt. Jim Olson: I don't know. From a school standpoint, I don't know the answer to that.
Councilman Ayotte: Could we find out?
11
City Council Meeting - April 26, 2004
Sgt. Jim Olson:
couple of recent
so recent but we
and that robbery
solve that, there
that face mask.
! can, sure. ! can. Anything else on the underage drinking at all? A
cases ! just want to talk about briefly. We had an armed, this one isn't
had an armed robbery at Brown's Amoco a few years ago that occurred,
has been solved and charges are pending. And the way we were able to
was a face mask that was left behind and we were able to get DNA off
Kind of like CS! stuff. We were able to get DNA off that face mask.
Run it through the state, or the nationwide DNA repository that there is, and match it up
to a party. This person is currently in prison on other charges, or other violations that
he's had and we have charges that are pending with him from that so that was a good one.
We also have two suspects in custody from a vehicle break in that occurred at Lake Ann
Park here within the past 3 weeks or so. And we were able to recover some of the
property that was taken from that so that was a good thing. They were also caught in a
stolen vehicle so we had a couple of good ones from this. Any other questions for myself
at all?
Mayor Furlong: Any in general? Or what point are you in your report?
Sgt. Jim Olson: No, I'm done if you have any other.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Any questions at this point? The one, ! guess question,
suggestion I'd like to make with regard to the traffic information from the new speed
trailer. It looks like it's being well utilized. Some of these neighborhoods ! know have
been recurrent problems with regard to traffic, and others, one in particular, Lake Susan
Drive. There's been a lot of concern raised there with regard to future impacts from 212
or other. It would be helpful to retain this information so that if over the year people
come to us and say, speeds are increasing or the problem's increasing, we can, we will
have some base line data with which to compare that. Some objective data so, if you
weren't going to, I'd encourage you to do that, and especially in those areas that we know
we may be looking at down the road.
Sgt. Jim Olson: We will keep that every year and we haven't really sat down and talked
about how long we will keep the information but it will be at least ! think probably 5
years anyway.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Keep that in your thoughts as you're reviewing those policies
guess would be my suggestion.
Sgt. Jim Olson: Thank you.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you.
Sgt. Jim Olson: Have a good evening.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. There's no representative from the fire department here.
They did include a report in our packet. Are there any questions from council to staff that
they can follow up with the fire department on? If not, then we'll move on.
12
City Council Meeting - April 26, 2004
PUBLIC HEARING: VACATION OF A PUBLIC SEWER & WATER
EASEMENT WITHIN HIDDEN CREEK DEVELOPMENT, VACATION FILE
04-03.
Matt Saam: Thank you Mr. Mayor, council members. As you stated, this is public
hearing for the vacation of a sewer and water easement. The city's been requested from
the developer of the Hidden Creek plat in Chanhassen recently approved in 2002 to
vacate an existing sewer and water easement that goes through it's property. Just show
you the property now. Get you familiar with where we're at. This is the Hidden Creek
plat outlined in black. We're on the north side of Highway 7, just west of Minnewashta
Parkway. Prior to development of this plat, the city had a sewer and water line that went
through the property, and that's shown here in green. Approximate alignment of those
sewer and water lines. With the development of the plat, there were lots obviously that
were platted and streets put into place. The city got right-of-way for Pipewood Curve
with that plat, in addition to other easements. Also as part of the development of that
parcel we moved one of the sewer and water lines to put it in the right-of-way, and this is
really the easement that's been questioned right now. As you can see the pipe is moved
out of the lot but we still have an easement over where that sewer and water line used to
be, which encumbers that lot. Prevents a developer from getting a building permit on it.
That sort of thing, so we're here to rectify that. Remove that encumbrance and as ! said,
staff has no objection to this because we did get right-of-way and new easements over the
sewer and water line. So with that we are recommending approval and I'd be happy to
take any questions.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you, any questions for staff?. No? Okay, very good. Thank you.
Is the applicant here and if so, would like to address the council on any matters not
presented in the staff report? No? Okay. Thank you. This is a public hearing so at this
point ! will open the public hearing and accept public comments with regard to the
request for this vacation. Anybody would like to speak, please come forward. State your
name and address at the podium. Absent any comments ! will close the public hearing.
It is so closed, and bring it back to council for other questions for staff or further
discussion.
Councilman Peterson: I'd move to approve.
Councilman Labatt: Second.
Mayor Furlong: Made and seconded. Is there any discussion on the motion?
Resolution #2004-26: Councilman Peterson moved, Councilman Labatt seconded
that the City Council approves a resolution vacating the existing public sanitary
sewer and water easement as defined on the attached vacation description. All
voted in favor, except Councilman Ayotte who was not present during the vote, and
the motion carried unanimously 4 to 0.
13
City Council Meeting - April 26, 2004
CONSIDER AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 5 OF CITY CODE CONCERNING
KENNEL LICENSING.
Bob Generous: ...introducing them and then if there's any questions I can pick up on
that. Staff was directed to revise the kennel license ordinance. There were some issues
with review of one of the kennel licensing. As part of this ordinance amendment we are
providing specific criteria for the application of kennel license as well as the issuance of
the licenses. One of the, previously someone talked about some criteria for issuing
kennel licensing. We did submit this to the attorney for the kennel license. The
commercial kennel and also to private kennel license holders in the community. One of
the feedback we got is they wanted us to be clearer what parts of the criteria for issuing
the licenses related to private kennel owners and what relates to commercial and so we
divided those sections into rules that apply to all kennel licenses. Rules that apply just to
the commercial licenses. In drafting this the one item that we added that applies to both
is that the kennel be available for city inspection during normal business hours. That
applies both to commercial and private kennels. For the commercial kennels we added
that the licensed facilities must provide a designated contact person available to be
contacted to correct any and mitigate any violations of the licensing or city ordinance.
Also that they provide this information to the sheriff' s office. Otherwise we continue the
criteria that we have in the existing kennel license procedures. Staff is recommending
approval of the revised ordinance and with that I'd be happy to answer any additional
questions.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Any questions for staff at this time? I guess one question
that came up in visitor presentations was the question of enforcement. Maybe this is a
question for staff at this time or for our attorney, or Mr. Gerhardt. Mr. Knutson.
Comments.
Todd Gerhardt: Well as we receive complaints in this area we will go down and enforce
the ordinance. Typically as a part of that violation, a citation will be issued. Annually
we will look at how the kennel is being maintained and operated, and also the violations
against that. If it seems as if there is going to be continued violations, we will look at
potentially removing their license or taking it away.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Thank you. Any other questions for staff at this time? If not,
Mr. Blanchett, you requested time to speak.
Neal Blanchett: Yes Mayor and council members. Thank you. Neal Blanchett, Larkin
Hoffman Law Firm representing Paws, Claws & Hooves. As ! understand it, Paws,
Claws is the only commercial kennel in the city and in that respect we have a particular
concern with these new restrictions. I've submitted a letter today. The reason for the
lateness of the letter was because we were continuing to do some research to see what
was out there in terms of both acoustical data and different ways of enforcing ordinances.
While there's a lot of general information out there, there was not anything that was
specific enough for us to bring it forward and try to recommend it to you, but ! did want
to walk you through the letter and particularly as it relates to our earlier letter on the
14
City Council Meeting - April 26, 2004
nuisance ordinance. Recently enacted changes to the nuisance ordinance. Those changes
are linked to the kennel licensing ordinance because, as the city manager noted, if a
nuisance becomes persistent, then a kennel license can be revoked so the two are linked
and that's important. They're important because the nuisance ordinance, which we
commented on, continues to be vague and some senses over broad, and it doesn't provide
any objective standards and that's what we're concerned about. There's a history
between, really between the neighbors and Paws, Claws & Hooves. We think that if the
parties came together and talked about that history, there would be an opportunity to
solve some problems. We've offered to do that repeatedly and we haven't, that hasn't
been reciprocated so we can certainly air our concerns in an open meeting and in front of
the City Council tonight, but we would prefer to be involved in more of a working group
format. Talking about whether or not there are problems. Talking about the way we
operate and whether there's a way to solve those problems and moving forward in a
cooperative way rather than, as it seems to be moving forward, in an adversarial way. So
we would certainly welcome you to direct staff to work with us more cooperatively and
we would like to do that. As ! stated, in regards to our kennel license. We're willing to
look at all kinds of different ideas. Turning now to the letter of April 26th, we've got
some specific concerns. We've got some general concerns. First that, contrary to some
of what we've heard tonight, from what we have learned, there's no substantiated
evidence that Paws, Claws & Hooves is the source of nuisance noise. Now that may
surprise you because the neighbors over the years have said, we've continued to make
complaints. We continue to make complaints. But the fact is that there are no reports out
there of law enforcement visiting and noting that nuisance noise was coming from the
property. There's nothing written that we can point to to document that. So while that
doesn't prove that there has never been noise coming from the facility, it does say that the
complaints have been investigated and to this date there's no documentation of it. So
there's really a failure to meet there because ! think the neighbors are saying that they've
made their concerns known and that their concerns, they're taking them as true. When
we look at the site where it is, how it relates with the neighborhood, it is reasonable to us
that in fact it's well buffered and that the noise, whatever noise is produced, is not a
problem. As we pointed out in our earlier letter on the nuisance, it's more than 1,000 feet
from Paws, Claws & Hooves' building to the Hesse Farm neighborhood. It's about 150
feet difference vertically, so it's, so the neighborhood is way up the bluff. Way up the
bluff. It's up a wooded bluff. It's across Highway 101. It's across a creek ravine, so
there is as much buffering there as you could ask for on a kennel site. So given that,
Paws, Claws & Hooves' position which is that the noise, whatever noise there is, has not
constituted a nuisance, is reasonable. We don't have any evidence that it's not
reasonable, so what we'd like to do is examine what is actually happening out there first
before we tighten up the restriction. We ought to determine whether or not there's
reasonable need to tighten up those restrictions. So that's really our first objection.
Secondly we think that the new restrictions duplicate what's out there right now. And
thirdly, again we'd like this to be a more cooperative process. We'd like to talk more
about the facts of the restriction and to see if we can come together and arrive at a way to
solve those. We've got some specific objections to the new restrictions. First of all,
adverse actions to deny or suspend a permit based merely on a showing. We don't know
what a showing means. There are no objective standards about what a showing is. It
15
City Council Meeting - April 26, 2004
seems to us that at a minimum a showing ought to be some objective standard and that if
it's nuisance noise, that that noise be a greater degree of noise than the background noise.
We know that Highway 212, adjacent to Paws, Claws & Hooves is a noisy highway. We
know it's a busy site, and so we think we ought not to be held to a higher standard than
that highway, which is next to us. The second restriction that we're concerned with is 5-
18(8)(5). That's the nuisance and that ties directly to the nuisance. Again, if the
nuisance standards are subjective, we really don't know how we can conform to those.
Section 5-18(2)(b) requires a designated contact person at all times. You've heard
comments that the neighborhood supports this. A little bit about the way Paws, Claws &
Hooves operates. When a person comes in in the morning, when the employee first
arrives in the morning they have a number of duties that they do in terms of cleaning,
feeding the animals, keeping the facility up. During that time, the gates are closed
because those are non-business hours, so those are things that need to be done and they
need to be done without disturbance from business folks. So the restriction that the city
currently has is that an employee be on site while the dogs are in their exterior runs. That
has always been complied with. There's no evidence that it hasn't been. That's Paws,
Claws & Hooves business practice and that is in fact what occurs. So the fact that the
gates may be locked means simply that that employee might be maintaining the facility.
They may not be next to the phone, but that's why Paws, Claws & Hooves has an
answering machine so they can address any complaints if they are made. Now over the
last 5 years or so complaints have been at best few and far between. When ! spoke with
Paws, Claws & Hooves owners, they couldn't say beyond a shadow of a doubt that they
had never had a noise complaint ever on their answering machine, but they are extremely
rare. They couldn't point to any recently, so the requirement that they have someone on
call seems to duplicate what's there now. There's now a 24 hour phone line. That phone
line is not being used to our knowledge to report complaints. It's a duplication of
something that, from our standpoint is currently adequate. From the neighbors standpoint
it isn't adequate. In any case it's still a duplication. Section 5-18(2)(k) imposes a
requirement that Paws, Claws & Hooves reduce animal noise based solely on citizen
complaint. Again there's a wide gulf between what the citizens are thinking and what
Paws, Claws & Hooves sees as a position. We don't believe that without substantiation
Paws, Claws & Hooves ought to be required to change their business practices. We think
that's the wrong way to go and we ought to get the facts first and then move forward with
restrictions, if restrictions are needed. The last specific restriction that we've got a
problem with is the new buffering requirement. We think we're complying now. We've
got a heavily wooded area buffering us from any neighbors, and we think that's shown by
the fact that in fact the neighbors have a leaflet and asked the entire Lakota Lane
neighborhood whether or not they would object to the renewal of the kennel license. We
generally don't see those folks complaining and when Paws, Claws & Hooves contacted
many of those folks, they said no, we don't have a problem. So we see some neighbors
that do have a problem. We see a group, a large group of neighbors that don't have a
problem. Again it just points to different levels of sensitivity. Rather than tightening up
the restrictions based on that, we think we ought to talk about what needs to be tightened
and what are ways that we can productively do it. I've laid out some legal arguments for
you. You can talk to counsel and I'm happy to dialogue about those. We think the prior
approval creates an estoppel. There's a basic problem in that the city has specifically
16
City Council Meeting - April 26, 2004
approved Paws, Claws & Hooves building plan. The way the site is laid out. The fact
that over 100 dogs are, is equipped for over 100 dogs in population, so this is in fact not a
surprise. It was known by city staff. The city knew what was going to be there. There's
no surprise. That's why the site is as well buffered as it is. That's why it's 1,000 feet
from the neighborhood. That's why it's surrounded by woods and the Minnesota River
valley. Finally we think the restrictions, as they're written, are just unreasonable because
they don't address the problem. We don't know right now, we can certainly talk about it,
but we don't know right now what are the restrictions.., all times throughout the day.
Some neighbors say maybe it's only when the dogs are in the exterior portion of the run.
Staff seems to think maybe it's only when they're in the exterior portion of the runs.
We've heard a lot of different things. When the police have stopped out there, they've
confirmed that it hasn't been a problem, even though they've just gotten a recent
complaint, so there's a lot of difference in the facts here and we'd like a chance to
balance those and we'd like a chance to work with you. ! have also copied the map that
were the basis of our calculations. ! told you we're 1,000 feet from Hesse Farms
neighborhood. We are and ! can distribute those maps and ! can talk about those. I've
got copies for each of you. I've also included for you the state noise standards which
apply to Highway 212. Those are attached to the letter, and generally dictate that noise
can be up to 66 decibel levels on Highway 212. What we've seen, if you go on the
internet for an hour you can find some standards that talk about what would be the
projected noise level from a kennel. We see that they wouldn't go as high as those 66,
even measured much closer to the kennel than the approximately 1,000 feet that we've
got between us and the residential neighborhood. So what we'd ask you to do tonight is
to table this ordinance. To direct staff to work with us and we're happy to sit down with
the neighbors. There has been an atmosphere of mistrust and some of that is based on the
city's prosecution, which occurred 4 years ago now. The neighbors have stated that
citations have been issued and it hasn't changed behavior. Well, that's not quite correct
because one citation was issued. It was a citation for two violations. Paws, Claws &
Hooves didn't believe they were in violation and in fact a judge agreed with them and
dismissed both those charges and dismissed completely that citation, so it hasn't been that
we have been uncooperative, but it has been, there has been some bad blood in the past.
We'd like that to end and that's why I'm here this evening. So ! thank you for your time.
! certainly stand for questions and ! would provide the maps if you would like to have
them. Thank you.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, any questions at this time?
Councilman Ayotte: ! have some of staff but not.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, any questions right now? Councilman Lundquist.
Councilman Lundquist: ! have one question Mr. Blanchett. You talked about the 24
hour answering machine. At 2:00 in the morning, who checks the answering machine?
Neal Blanchett: Well, like any other business, we are not staffed 24 hours. So the
answering machine likely would not be checked until morning.
17
City Council Meeting - April 26, 2004
Councilman Lundquist: And what are the approximate hours of non-employee coverage
at Paws, Claws & Hooves?
Neal Blanchett: Well the animals are all brought in at 6:00 in the evening typically.
After that there are, the employees have to finish up their duties. ! don't know as ! stand
here whether they go home immediately after that. ! mean ! know that there is some
overnight time that they are not there. ! don't know exactly how long that is. ! will tell
you that typically during the time that seems like it might be the most conflict arising, the
7:00 in the morning time. There is an employee there. That employee is doing their
duties to get the kennel ready for the day.
Councilman Lundquist: So generally, ! mean care to take a guess? Maybe 10:00 p to
5:00 a or something like that?
Neal Blanchett: Maybe that's a good guess but ! really would be speculating. ! don't
know if it's based on when they get their duties done. They can go home for the evening.
! will ask my client that.
Councilman Lundquist: Good, thank you.
Mayor Furlong: With regard to your statement about getting together and talking, if the
citation was issued 4 years ago I'm curious, have you issued an invitation to some of the
neighbors and the people that have expressed concern about the noise to sit down and talk
to them? And try to work out the problems.
Neal Blanchett: ! don't believe that we've issued any specific invitation. When we've
appeared, every time I've appeared I've always said we're willing to talk about things.
So short answer is no but ! think we've always extended an olive branch.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. ! know ! expressed that when this came before the council ! think
last month is when we dealt with it, and encouraged a meeting to take place and to take
the lead in that so ! don't know if you have since we met the last time.
Neal Blanchett: When we appeared for the licensing?
Mayor Furlong: ! believe that was correct. That was in March if I'm not mistaken. One
of our two March meetings. Because at that time it was discussed clearly, and ! know
that Councilman Labatt brought up the issue about whether we want forward with that
licensing, if we made the modifications to the ordinance that were being contemplated, if
that would apply to the license, so ! think it was just this last month. That we talked
about that so.
Neal Blanchett: ! looked over those minutes and maybe ! missed the reference to that. !
mean given the fact that the city was amending it's ordinance at that point, ! think
everyone should have been involved and it should have been a city, neighbors, Paws,
18
City Council Meeting - April 26, 2004
Claws & Hooves process in order to make some progress towards the ordinance. But I'm
sorry if! missed that in the minutes, but ! did review the minutes of those meetings.
Mayor Furlong: Alright. But regardless over the last 4 years there hasn't been any
meetings organized by Paws, Claws or your client to try to address some of the neighbors
concerns?
Neal Blanchett: Well, no. After the prosecution,
called a meeting. The neighbors have not and Paws,
together.
! mean in fairness the city has not
Claws has not, so nobody has gotten
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you.
Neal Blanchett: Thank you.
Mayor Furlong: Councilman Ayotte, you said you had some follow-up questions for
staff.
Councilman Ayotte: If ! may, thank you Mayor. How long has the current ordinance
been in effect?
Councilman Peterson: Probably about a year...
Councilman Ayotte: And with respect to this, and ! don't know how we got two
engineers here so, decibel's a function of pitch. Right? So high pitch to low pitch would
have an effect on. Could somebody explain that to me. So just amplitude then? Just the
volume?
Roger Knutson: Yes.
Councilman Ayotte: Okay. Is there any measurement for pitch? In any ordinance.
Roger Knutson: No. None that I'm aware of.
Councilman Ayotte: Remember you're dealing with somebody who's hearing impaired
here.
Bob Generous: No, nothing in the ordinance. Reference to the adoption of this is from
1976.
Councilman Ayotte: Is there any reason why the previous ordinance to the one that we're
contemplating would have an effect on whether or not another kennel can move into
Chanhassen?
Roger Knutson: No. If they meet the requirements, more could move in. Certainly.
19
City Council Meeting - April 26, 2004
Councilman Ayotte: Okay, I'll wait for my comments until after... Thank you Mayor.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Any other questions? For the staff. Mr. Knutson, I guess
my question would be with the points raised just now by Mr. Blanchett. Curious if you
have any comments, discussions. Not that ! want to get lawyer going against lawyer but !
would appreciate your thoughts.
Roger Knutson: I don't have a prepared presentation obviously but just jumping in at any
location. First looking at the state noise standards. They really don't work, really not
applicable to the kind of noise we're talking about. The state noise standards are based
on L10, which means duration of 6 minutes in an hour, or an L50, 30 minutes in an hour.
And they do fairly well with long, sustained noises. They have nothing to do with short
duration, very annoying noises. You could have, as an example, start up a jet engine in a
neighborhood and have all sorts of people going nuts if you will, and be a tremendous
nuisance. Start it up and turn it off and you would not have violated the state noise
standards. Because it was not a duration. You look at the average decibel rating over a 6
minute period and you would not violate the state noise standards. So just relying on the
state noise standard really does, in this kind of, for dog barking ! don't, no one that !
know of would rely upon that as providing the kind of neighborhood you'd want to live
in. It just wouldn't be workable. As far as the other general comments, they're not
rationally related. ! certainly believe they are. ! mean we're attempting to address an
issue of providing, eliminating nuisances and making sure that these type of businesses
don't create nuisances or problems to people in the neighborhoods so they can all co-exist
peacefully. And there's every attempt made to do that, and if you look at ordinances in
other communities, and we've looked at a lot of them, these are the kind of claims. We
didn't invent any new wheels here. We're using, borrowing from others and trying to
learn from our own experiences in putting together the best ordinances we can. Council
suggested that there's no problem out here. Well other people think certainly that there
is. That's not the issue tonight. If there is no problem, then this ordinance will be no
problem for anyone. For the client because they don't create a nuisance. They don't
create any, live with these issues, then everything is well and good and they won't, this
can go forward and you've done an ordinance and maybe it will have had some good
effects and everyone behaves and in good shape. As far as the word smithing on words
like showing, ! mean you can use a thesaurus but ! think this is, this would be not in, in
reference to revoking potentially the license, which we consider to be a very serious thing
to do. You wouldn't do that just because there's been one or two issues. You're taking,
you're closing down a business. Showing means to me you prove. Demonstrate.
Whatever other words smithing you want to use. ! think showing's a pretty good word
and that's in context as it appears. Let me see if there's anything else. ! mean ! think it's,
in answering the...trying to have a party in your back yard and you get an answering
machine, I'm sure there's a certain amount of frustration with that. Leaving a message
on an answering machine does not solve your issue, and the next morning when it's cured
if you will because the dogs have stopped barking. It's no solace to know that someone
got your voice mail or your recorded message to them. You want prompt action to stop it
and that's what this ordinance attempts to do. As far as leaving, ! mean certainly that's
up t the council but ! would suggest that whether you adopt this ordinance tonight or not,
20
City Council Meeting - April 26, 2004
you can certainly probably make some sense. Either way you don't have, if you want to
adopt the ordinance or if you don't. If you do adopt the ordinance, then we can still can
make sense because these folks live in the same area and they think they're being
disturbed by this business and ! think it's everyone's desire to sit down and figure out
what they can do. And ! think this ordinance is a start and maybe won't be the final
product, as most ordinances are. As we learn from experience, it may be amended again.
If there's anything other specifically that you'd like me to address.
Mayor Furlong: No, ! think that's fine for me. Thank you. Unless there's any other
questions. Councilman Labatt.
Councilman Labatt: Roger, so on this one sheet we were handed here. On the new
section 13.51(c). Under animal noise. I'm just reading all this and ! wonder if, obviously
this is a new section to what we're being proposed to here.
Roger Knutson: This is the already adopted...
Todd Gerhardt: ...That's the nuisance portion.
Councilman Labatt: Okay. That's the nuisance portion. Okay. Well maybe I'm reading
two, but he kind of brought up, I'll take it where ! think he kind of left off or dropped it.
He wants to talk about the noise levels from motor vehicles or the 212, 66 decibel. Is that
right Mr. Blanchett?
Neal Blanchett: That's right. That's according to the chart. Line A on the chart.
Councilman Labatt: So I'm wondering if it's in our ordinance what we approved, and
maybe we have to go back and redefine this, but noise from one or more animals occurs
between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.. Where the noise can be heard at 500 feet from the
location of the building where the animal. ! think that if we use what is being used on the
lake for noisy boats. The 82 decibels at 150 feet for all boats manufactured from 1982.
On the A scale. So do we need to quantify what we're saying here. If ! live 1,000 feet
away and ! can hear a dog, at what point does that dog become annoying? In a faint bark.
A loud bark. Similar to a noisy boat. If it's so many feet, there should be quantifiable
decibel level of which point.
Roger Knutson: You could do that, but I'll just take from 10 to 7 you have to hear it for
more than 3 minutes from outside the building. Now the problem with decibel meters,
you can go to Radio Shack and buy one for $100 or something. I've never done that but
they are, ! would not want to go into court with that $100 decibel reading, excuse me. !
shouldn't, Radio Shack's a fine company I'm sure. But I'll just say, take that back. An
inexpensive decibel meter, a meter that has not been recently calibrated is not going to
stand up in court. So the only way you could use decibels is if you had a calibrated
decibel meter and someone who's trained in that and that would not be the neighbors !
assume, and it would not be most of your CSO's. It would be a very difficult
enforcement task to put those for example in every squad car. It'd be quite expensive.
21
City Council Meeting - April 26, 2004
And with this standard is, if it's between 10:00 and 7:00. 10:00 at night and 7:00 in the
morning, and if the dogs bark for more than 3 minutes and you can hear it outside the
property, that's considered a nuisance because you can hear it. You could use decibels
but it would make enforcement difficult. Very difficult.
Councilman Labatt: From prior experience, we were able to enforce the noisy boat
ordinance on Lake Minnetonka all the time. We had personnel that were trained in the
operation of it and I'm willing to bet that the sheriff' s office employees have some of the
same training and maybe the same decibel meters and the same class from the Pollution
Control Agency that we went to. Some of those same deputies that work water patrol
now maybe work the road, ! don't know, but I'm just.
Roger Knutson: You could attempt to do that but again, my experience is that, I don't
know about the sheriff's office here. I'm not familiar with knowing if any police
departments who have decibel meters that are calibrated regularly, nor are trained in it.
That's the calibrating. You can't just take it and put it in your desk drawer and take it out
once a year. You could do that.
Councilman Ayotte: If! could chime in. No pun intended with respect to decibels and so
forth. The reason why ! brought up the decibel issue is because it's an issue of pitch
that's annoying. And ! don't want to belittle the discussion but if you heard my Westie
versus my lab, my Westie would get on your nerves twice as fast as the lab. And ! think
that's the issue at hand. Number two. Mr. Blanchett is completely 100 percent correct in
that they have not been substantiating problems under current ordinance. That's because
it's not enforceable. So at least what we're talking towards right now is something that
can be enforced. Point number three. When ! ask my lab who was barking, the lab
blamed the Westie. And under the existing ordinance that's what you have to do. You
have to have the lab state that it was the Westie that was barking. You cannot do it under
the current situation, and to suggest, ! don't like the idea of incurring yet another expense
and more resources without first attempting to employee something like this as a tool to
see if it would be catalyst to get resident and kennel to talk. So that's, ! don't want to
create a Cadillac when a Chevy may do because you also have to have the resources
available to employ what we're talking about.
Roger Knutson: You know an ideal situation, someone might think well why don't we
have a permanent decibel meter out there with a recorder on it. But frankly that doesn't
work at all because of possible background noise. The decibel can't pick out the
background noise from the dog barking. It takes an ear, so it'd have to be monitored and
someone has to be there, and if you want to change this and go to a decibel readings, that
may be possible but ! think enforcement would be difficult. And just to point out the two
citations that were dismissed, and as the mayor pointed out earlier, that was one judge on
one set of facts. That day. ! wouldn't read very much into it other than that.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Any other questions for staff at this point? Any other
questions for staff?. If not then I'll bring it back to council for discussion. Thoughts,
comments, gentlemen.
22
City Council Meeting - April 26, 2004
Councilman Ayotte: ! made my comments already.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, very good. Thank you Councilman Ayotte. Your thoughts
Councilman Labatt? Others?
Councilman Peterson: Yeah, ! guess I'm torn between, I'm comfortable with the revised
ordinance. I'm somewhat torn whether we approve it or whether we table it for another
couple weeks to let the parties see if we can make it better. ! don't like change
ordinances every 2 weeks. And ! don't know whether or not we'll get a better ordinance
but part of me says yeah, I'm kind of willing to try but ! think I'm willing to try on the
basis that staff and all the parties know that I'm comfortable with this. Okay. And if you
can make it better, so be it. But if you can't make it better, I'm ready to approve this.
Councilman Ayotte: Mayor, could ! re-nig on my former comment, not to make
comment?
Mayor Furlong: Sure.
Councilman Ayotte: Thank you. If it weren't for the history of the lack of dialogue, then
! would agree with Craig because typically his words of wisdom are words of wisdom.
But ! see the passing of this ordinance would be a catalyst for dialogue, and history to me
does not suggest that the residents and the kennel would in 2 weeks or 2 months quickly
turn to make this better. ! think it was put in place. There may be some period of time
where it would be functioning as a catalyst to get them together, but without us passing it,
! don't think that will occur. Thank you.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Councilman Lundquist.
Councilman Lundquist: My comments, I guess I'm disappointed that it has gotten to this
point. Even to start with over the course of the 4 years, 8 years, whatever the time flame
has been that I think given a good faith effort on both parties, the homeowners and the
business and maybe there has been that I just don't know about, but it doesn't appear to
be that way. That some sort of compromise could have been worked out and similar to
Mr. Knutson's comments that if there isn't a nuisance, then we're not going to have a
problem. And if it's clearly buffered by the Minnesota River valley and heavy woods
and 1,000 feet and all of the other things, you know that's a long ways for a lab or a
Westie's bark to carry, so I think that unfortunately it appears that we have to get
involved ordinance wise to tighten this down because it doesn't seem to be resolving
itself any other way. I don't see anything in here that's particularly restrictive or that is
going to cause undue harm. I think it is reasonable in the things that are in here. That
given the time and the parties don't seem to be able to work it out themselves, that we've
got to get involved and try to put something, a tool in place to make sure that we don't
have any issues going forward, and hopefully that this does spur some dialogue. The
only thing that's ever going to happen is if this is simply a tool for the sheriff's office, the
city, whoever it may be to enforce. If the neighbors aren't disturbed, there isn't going to
23
City Council Meeting - April 26, 2004
be a problem. We hopefully won't ever hear about anything. So I guess I'm comfortable
with the ordinance as it is and if we can come to something else that seems better through
the course of time, then we'll address that if need be.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. My thoughts would echo Councilman Lundquist. ! think
there has been sufficient time for everybody to understand that this is not working to
everybody's satisfaction, or at least the residents with regard to the noise. And ! think
there's been opportunities for people to get together and work together. That is something
that ! would always prefer and if there's still that opportunity to do that, ! would
encourage Mr. Gerhardt and his staff to try to organize such a meeting. ! don't see
waiting 2 weeks or a couple months would make sense given the problem and the length
of time that this has gone on. So again, if there's not a problem and if there are
redundancies and we're not violating the existing ordinance, then we're not going to
violate the redundancies within the ordinance so I'm not one to favor an ordinance to tell
people how to work together but sometimes that's what it takes and so ! would support
the proposed ordinance as it's been presented to go forward this evening as well. Any
other discussion?
Councilman Labatt: ! don't disagree with the position you or Brian have taken. ! agree
with the ordinance. I'm leaning towards Mr. Peterson's request for an additional couple
weeks to try to get everybody together to see if we can make the ordinance a little bit
better. You know ! like to look at trimming noise. ! like to figure out, ! mean a truck
coming down 212 and jake braking creates a lot more noise than a dog barking, and we
have an ordinance that prohibits jake braking so ! think you know, I'm okay with the
ordinance. A couple more weeks just to get everybody on board here may not be bad.
Just to kind of, I'll call it the iceberg period. A little cooling off period. Take a couple
more weeks here. Get Paws, Claws & Hooves, rather than sending their mouthpiece or
their attorney up here, let's have them come up here and talk. The owners down there.
The people that are there. And get a meeting. ! guess this is twice here that he's been
here but ! haven't seen the Blood's, so I'd like a couple more weeks and then we'll
approve it.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Other comments? Discussion?
Councilman Ayotte: Just a counter Councilman Labatt's point. The fact that we have not
seen the owners come to city hall and taken the initiative to step forward if there was
concern, reinforces my view that the ordinance must be adopted this evening.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Other comments? If there is none, is there a motion?
Councilman Ayotte: ! so move to adopt the attached ordinance for Chapter 5 of the
Chanhassen City Code, Kennel Licenses.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Is there a second?
Councilman Lundquist: Second.
24
City Council Meeting - April 26, 2004
Mayor Furlong: Is there any discussion on the motion?
Councilman Ayotte moved, Councilman Lundquist seconded that the City Council
adopt the attached ordinance for Chapter 5 of the Chanhassen City Code, Kennel
Licenses. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to
0.
Councilman Labatt: That was a yes. I'm here. I supported the ordinance. Just wanted 2
more weeks but.
Mayor Furlong: No, understand. Thank you, and appreciate your comments. We
completed our items of new business and item number 5 has been tabled. So we'll back
to consent agenda items that were pulled for separate discussion. We'll take them in
order without objection.
CONSENT AGENDA:
F. APPROVAL OF 2004 JULY 4TM FIREWORKS CONTRACT.
Councilman Lundquist: Just a brief question and Mr. Gerhardt, I apologize for not
getting this to you sooner. Any thoughts or opinions on having the fireworks display in
the City Center Park or the elementary park versus Lake Ann?
Todd Gerhardt: The Park and Rec Commission looked at alternative sites for the 4th of
July in the past.
Todd Hoffman: Formerly, Councilman Lundquist, formerly the celebration display did
occur at City Center Park. The safety boundaries that you need, the distances between
your launch site and your first audience really mandates that it take place at Lake Ann.
We cannot identify another public location in town where we could shoot those
fireworks.
Councilman Lundquist: Fair enough, thank you.
Mayor Furlong: Any other questions on this issue? If not, is there a motion to approve
the item.
Councilman Lundquist: ! would move approval.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Is there a second?
Councilman Ayotte: Second.
Mayor Furlong: Any discussion?
25
City Council Meeting - April 26, 2004
Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman Ayotte seconded to approve the 2004
July 4th Fireworks Contract. All voted in favor, except Councilman Peterson who
was not present for the vote, and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to
0.
H. APPROVAL OF PLANS & SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZE
ADVERTISING FOR BIDS, LAKE ANN PARK PLAYGROUND.
Councilman Ayotte: I would ask staff to... so that residents have the sense as to what's
going to happen when.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Mr. Hoffman.
Todd Hoffman: Councilman Ayotte, members of the council. In January of 2004 we
completed a safety assessment of our 10 wood playgrounds in town. Those are redwood
playgrounds. The wood is completely safe. However the assessment did confirm that
those playground structures need to be replaced. We identified 15 hazard categories in
those areas. In total 207 areas of concern were identified. That averaged 21 areas of
concern per playground. These violations had to do with consumer product safety
commission guidelines and the ASTM standards and then accessibility standards. The
schedule is 2 of the 10 structures are scheduled for replacement this year. Those being
Lake Ann and Meadow Green Park. A third at Bandimere Heights neighborhood park
will be removed, but no replacement at the neighborhood park because we have the 2
new playgrounds at the community park just a block up the street. The 2004 to 2008 CIP
identified the other 8 replacements taking place over 4 years. Because of our findings we
are recommending that that be accelerated to a 2 year schedule. So we would look for 3
playgrounds, 3 additional playgrounds to be replaced next year and then 4 the following
year for the completed 10 playground replacements.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. And Mr. Hoffman, just some points of clarification to
let residents know. None of these items, or playground sites that are being replaced were
purchased as part of the 1997 park and trail referendum, correct?
Todd Hoffman: Correct.
Mayor Furlong: These are relatively old sites and, or old.
Todd Hoffman: They're 15 to 18 years old. Installed in the mid 1980's. Mid to late
1980's.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Very good, thank you. Any other questions Councilman Ayotte?
Councilman Ayotte: That's it, thank you.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Is there a motion to approve the item as
recommended?
26
City Council Meeting - April 26, 2004
Councilman Ayotte: So moved.
Mayor Furlong: And is there a second?
Councilman Lundquist: Second.
Mayor Furlong: Is there any discussion on that item? Or on that motion?
Resolution #2004-27: Councilman Ayotte moved, Councilman Lundquist seconded
to approve the plans and specifications and authorize advertising for bids for Lake
Ann Park playground. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with
a vote of 5 to 0.
K. HIGHLANDS OF BLUFF CREEK; LOCATED AT 2930 WEST 78T}I
STREET (NE CORNER OF WEST 78T}I STREET & HIGHWAY 41)
PLOWSHARES DEVELOPMENT.
Councilman Labatt: ! just want to give everybody an update here. What day did we meet
out there Bob and, ! met with Bob and Matt out at the site here. Week and a half ago?
Two weeks ago?
Bob Generous: Yeah, a couple weeks ago.
Councilman Labatt: And very good meeting. We walked on the property out there. My
concern, most of my concern out there that day and the follow-up work done by our two
employees, answered a vast majority of my questions and settled my concerns on some of
those. But my concern is, and Matt called me back on Thursday or Wednesday this past
week and my concern was the height of the new proposed road throughout portions of the
development are raised between 5 and 8 feet. Is that right? Correct me if I'm saying
these numbers, if I'm wrong please correct me. Raised between 5 and 8 feet of elevation
change upward from the current grade out there right now. And as we sat out there and
looked to the east at the first property, the homeowners there, they raised objection to the
road going through and coming back down to Century Trail. But my concern is still that
they don't realize that the height of the road, and where it's going to terminate there at the
hammer head is about 8 feet or 9 feet above the current grade.
Matt Saam: One correction that I'll add Councilman Labatt, and that's what ! called you
back on is that after talking with the engineers, looking at it one more time. This is the
developer's engineer, they are able to lower the road at the east end where it was
previously 8 feet to about 6 feet. So there's still fill going in there but it's just not at the 8
foot level.
Councilman Labatt: Okay. In any event we did have that conversation ! think on
Wednesday and my reason, ! want to make sure that's noted in here on the conditions.
That the grade changes have to be such. ! don't want to have another Chapel Hill
27
City Council Meeting - April 26, 2004
experience that we talked about out there with the pine trees. So I want to make sure that,
and ! don't know Bob if when they raised the objections of the road, that homeowner
there, if they know that that's the true height of the road terminus there on the hammer
head. That being said, Bob and Matt and ! had the conversation but with a possible
solution to that is, extensive landscaping of trees not ordinarily planted but developers,
such as 12 to 14 foot evergreens along that berm there. On the east property. To include
a near, what are we? Near total block so the concern is if you raise the road 6 to, 6 feet
above where it's currently out there, plus you take the height of a vehicle headlights, at
that terminus for the last people, everybody's going to be turning around in that hammer
head or going down into those last 3 units. Their headlights are shining right into the
windows of that last unit, and ! don't know if they realize that. So the solution that Bob
and Matt came up with is well we could make the developer put in massive amounts of
trees or landscaping there is how we control that. We also discussed such things as
access and entry off of West 78th. Those questions were answered by a traffic study that
MnDot had currently undertaking or was undertaking for the continuation of West 78th
west of 41. So those issues have been satisfied, but then we also looked at the possibility
of relocating the pond down behind the existing barn but ! think we've read the letter
from staff that that would eliminate up to 3 units and be a deal breaker so, but ! just
wanted to, so my point is ! wanted noted in the staff report that the new elevations for the
pond and the road, the 2 foot changes to the 5 foot separation with what they had
proposed, it's going to be a 2 foot, is that right? Or 3 foot.
Matt Saam: The back of those houses will be at 1003 approximately and that is about 3
lA feet higher than the pond high water. And that's coming down 2 feet Councilman
Labatt.
Councilman Labatt: Okay. And so Matt, do we need to put those in a condition here and
make that?
Matt Saam: Sure. The applicant has agreed to do that. He's submitted revised sketches
and he said they would be incorporated on the final plat. ! would make sure of that, but if
you want to include it as a condition, that might be a good idea.
Councilman Labatt: Well ! don't want to have no Chapel Hill experience so.
Matt Saam: Understood. It might be better to get it on paper.
Councilman Labatt: On paper and a condition. So if you can word up number 39 then, I
think is where it would fall. Yeah, number 39. And then on the landscaping plan which
would, do you happen to know which page is the landscaping plan on?
Matt Saam: 5.
Councilman Labatt: Can you just show me, what are they proposing to plant along that
berm and what height trees are they proposing there?
28
City Council Meeting - April 26, 2004
Bob Generous: Councilmember Labatt, they're proposing to put 5 evergreens at the end
of that and another 4 deciduous trees. What they don't show on this is there's another
row of evergreens that are on the outlet currently on top of that berm.
Councilman Labatt: Correct.
Bob Generous: And what condition number 7 of the subdivision says is we recommend
that they pull the evergreens closer to the end of the cul-de-sac. To more directly block
the headlights there. They are proposing as part of this using 8 foot evergreens in other
locations on the site. I said well we could make that a condition there. 12 to 14 foot
evergreens on other locations. We could have them put larger trees in that location.
Councilman Labatt: Can we fashion a, or somehow change a landscaping plan or amend
it to show that these trees down here will be the 12 to 14 footers also?
Bob Generous: Yes. You would amend condition number 6 on page 2. The motion.
Evergreens shall be located at the end of the cul-de-sac or you could use 12 to 14 foot tall
evergreens.
Mayor Furlong: I'm sorry, where are you?
Councilman Lundquist: It already says you're going to do it to alleviate headlight glare
into the neighboring home. Does that take care of what you're looking for?
Councilman Labatt: Well my point is, we told Chapel Hill the same thing. They had to
put 12 to 18 foot, or 12 to 14 foot evergreens in there and they planted 4 footers and they
put them on the wrong wall. So this time I'm not going to have another experience like
that where I get people pissed off at me. So I'm going to be very specific in this case
here where I'd like to tell the developer and the applicant exactly how big they shall be
and where they shall plant them. So I'd like, you know 12, if we can substitute or add in
there on condition number 6, the last sentence would be 12 to 14 foot evergreens shall be
located at the end of the cul-de-sac and positioned to alleviate headlight glare to the
neighboring homeowners. That's fine. I'd like to tell them exactly how big they should
be so when we go out there in the final thing, Bob or either or Jill does, they're 12
footers. Or 14. And that's it. I just thank Matt and Bob and Ms. McAllister for allowing
us out there for the hour or so to walk on the property and get the questions I had
answered.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Mr. Saam, do you have anything recommended for
39?
Matt Saam: I could offer up the condition for number 39. The walkout elevations of the
units adjacent to the proposed pond shall be lowered to an elevation of 1003.
Councilman Labatt: Okay.
29
City Council Meeting - April 26, 2004
Matt Saam: Satisfactory?
Councilman Labatt: And I'd like still put in the impact of that carries over to the road.
Or how do we.
Matt Saam: This will lower the filling required for the proposed road by 2 feet.
Councilman Labatt: Can we put an elevation on the road? Are you comfortable
suggesting that right now?
Matt Saam: Sure. The road would go down to 1008 at the east end so. This will give a
maximum height of 1008 on the east end of the private street. So we're tying them on
elevations with both the walkouts of the units and then the road elevation.
Councilman Labatt: And so then if you look at this color map, do you have this one
Matt?
Matt Saam: The landscaping plan?
Councilman Labatt: No, the little Highlands, the new one for April 2. Take a look at
this one real quick. If not I'll get Mr. Mayors. Just so we're looking at the same number
here then. So on the end of this map where it says 1010 running vertically, that will
become 10087
Matt Saam: Yes.
Councilman Labatt: Okay. Follow that road to the west then where you see the 1012 on
the south on the shoulder. On the curve there. And that will also become 1010 there,
correct? By lowering those walkout units, all of a sudden those units.
Councilman Lundquist: Can ! just interrupt and ask, if we're going plant 14 foot trees at
the end, what difference does it make what height the road is?
Councilman Labatt: I'm going for everything ! can get here Brian. Okay?
Councilman Lundquist: Okay.
Matt Saam: Councilman Labatt, ! would have to look at it in a little more detail on the
west end. We looked at it specifically on the east end. Of lowering that road. Basically
from the high point in the road going to the east. We thought that was the issue spot. So
it may be able to be lowered on the west end but ! just need to look at it in a little more
detail.
Councilman Labatt: Okay.
Mayor Furlong: Okay? Anything else?
30
City Council Meeting - April 26, 2004
Councilman Labatt: No.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Are there any other questions for staff at this point or
other items to be raised? If not is there a motion? For what purpose?
Steve Lillehaug: Being heard as Planning Commissioner and...
Mayor Furlong: Okay. ! guess what I'd like to say is, since this is coming back a second
time, we'll hold off because there might be other people too, so thank you for your
understanding there. So at this point if there isn't any other discussion is there a motion?
Councilman Ayotte: Make Labatt do it.
Councilman Labatt: No. You guys make it. ! had to do it on Pulte and it ate me up, so
someone else can do it. ! got what ! wanted and.
Councilman Lundquist: ! would move that we, the City Council approves land use
amendment from residential low density to residential medium density continued upon
final development approval of planned unit development and Met Council review and
approval of the land use amendment.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Is there any discussion, or is there a second on that motion?
Councilman Lundquist: Do you want to do these as a whole or?
Mayor Furlong: Are we okay taking them as a whole? And just. Take them as a whole
with the amendments and changes.
Councilman Lundquist: Okay. Let me restate then to say, the City Council adopt the five
motions for planning project 04-01 Highlands of Bluff Creek and adoption of the findings
in fact in the staff report with the addition of condition 39 on number C, and the
amendment of condition 6 on item C to include the 12 to 14 foot evergreens.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Is there a second? On the motion.
Councilman Peterson: Second.
Mayor Furlong: Is there any discussion?
Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman Peterson seconded that the City
Council adopt the following motions for Planning Project #04-01, Highlands of Bluff
Creek, and adoption of the Findings of Fact:
Resolution #2004-29: Approval of Land Use Plan Amendment from
Residential Low Density to Residential Medium Density.
31
City Council Meeting - April 26, 2004
o
Approval of Conditional Use Permit for Development within the Bluff Creek
Ovelay District.
o
Approval of Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD) Review for a 16
Unit Townhouse Project.
o
Preliminary Plat Approval for 16 Townhouse Lots and Outlots with the
following amendments to conditions:
Applicant shall be responsible for all development plantings located on
public property. The applicant shall submit to the City a maintenance
agreement signed by the homeowners association to assume responsibility
of the plantings once the development is completed. 12 to 14 foot
evergreens shall be located at the end of the cul-de-sac and positioned so
as to alleviate headlight glare into the neighboring home.
39.
The walkout elevations of the units adjacent to the proposed pond shall be
lowered to an elevation of 1003 and an elevation of 1008 on the east end
of the private road.
Approval of a Variance from the Bluff Creek Overlay District Setback
Requirements.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS:
Councilman Lundquist: Mr. Mayor, a brief presentation, which I'll provide the details
later to Mr. Gerhardt. Had a meeting at the Carver County Government Center
approximately 2 weeks ago regarding the new Highway 41 river crossing. It's a project
that's kind of been ongoing with MnDot. MnDot is looking to do a preliminary draft ElS
for 3 locations. One in Chanhassen, one in Chaska, one in Carver area. And that will be
going out for public comment ! think today, is when that went out so based on the
location of that being, effecting the Hesse Farms and Seminary Fen and several other
things, ! would encourage that we take an opportunity during that public comment period
to make some comments on that. We know that the fen is a pretty unique area to our city.
It's not a, it will be an interesting project going forward because each of the locations has
a particular kind of hold up for each of them. Historic districts, the fen and other
development things going on out west near Carver, but that said, the project's still not on
the 20 year MnDot plan but that doesn't necessarily mean that it won't be accelerated
either so would just encourage us again I'll get the details to Mr. Gerhardt and Mr.
Oehme regarding that if they don't have them already, but just to encourage staff that we
put some effort into that and take advantage, if we have 30 days to make that public
comment.
32
City Council Meeting - April 26, 2004
Mayor Furlong: Is that all we have is 30 days?
Councilman Lundquist: ! believe so.
Mayor Furlong: Okay.
Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, City Council members. ! made a note of that and ! see this as a
work session item. That we should make the entire council aware of the different options
that are being proposed and open it up for discussion at that point and try to do that in the
next 30 days. ! was working on my calendar here. ! know we've got a few other issues
coming up. We do have an extra week in May so we may try to take advantage of that
off Monday. Other than before council meetings so we can stay on schedule.
Mayor Furlong: We'll work together because ! think this is important. ! would agree
with Mr. Gerhardt. Bringing it to the council so that we're well informed and still doing it
timely so that we can, as a city provide comment there. And thank you. Thank you for
following up on that. Any other council presentations?
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS:
Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, City Council members. The only item ! have, just to expand on
the 41 river crossing is also talk a little bit about Highway 5 expansion west of 41.
Carver County is looking for some direction from us to share with MnDot as they look at
updating some of their comprehensive plans and planning for expansions, and so staff is
working on something. You may be sending out some preliminary documentation to the
county but also including that as a part of that presentation. That's all ! have.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Questions for Mr. Gerhardt.
CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION. None.
Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman Ayotte seconded to adjourn the
meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 5 to 0. The City
Council meeting was adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
Submitted by Todd Gerhardt
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
33