Loading...
1983 10 17 I I I REGULAR CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 17, 1983 Mayor Hamilton called the meeting to order. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag. Members Present Councilwoman Watson, Councilmen Geving, Councilman Horn, and Councilwoman Swenson Staff Present Don Ashworth, Bill Monk, Scott Martin, and Bob Waibel Mike Thompson, Planning Commission APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilman Horn moved to approve the agenda with the following additions: Discussion on Businesses in Residential and Non-Business Areas, City Sign, Engineering Disclaimers, Resolution in Opposition to Landfill Site. Motion seconded by Councilman Geving. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwomen Watson and Swenson, Councilmen Geving and Horn. No negative votes. Motion carried. CONSENT AGENDA: Item l(b) Council Compensation was removed from the Consent Agenda. Councilman Horn moved to approve the following Consent Agenda items pur- suant to the recommendations of the City Manager: a. Sign Ordinance Variance Request, Near Mountain PRO. c. Proposed Ordinance Authorizing the HRA to Develop a Mortgage Revenue Bond Program, First Reading. Motion seconded by Councilwoman Watson. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwomen Watson and Swenson,Councilmen Geving and Horn. No negative votes. Motion carried. MINUTES: Councilwoman Watson moved to approve the September 19, 1983, Council minutes. Motion seconded by Councilman Horn. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwomen Watson and Swenson, Councilmen Geving and Horn. No negative votes. Motion carried. Councilwoman Watson moved to note the September 7, 1983, Joint Council, Planning Commission, and Environmental Protection Committee minutes. Motion seconded by Councilman Geving. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwomen Watson and Swenson, Councilmen Geving and Horn. No negative votes. Motion carried. Mayor Hamilton moved to note the September 14, 1983, Planning Commission minutes. Motion seconded by Councilman Horn. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwomen Watson and Swenson, Councilmen Geving and Horn. No negative votes. Motion carried. Councilman Geving moved to note the September 28, 1983, Planning Commission minutes. Motion seconded by Councilwoman Watson. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwomen Watson and Swenson, Councilmen Geving and Horn. No negative votes. Motion carried. Council Meeting October 17, 1983 -2- SIDE YARD SETBACK VARIANCE REQUEST, 222 CHAN VIEW: Ron Roeser was present. CouncT1woman Swenson - I went over an~t~another look at the situation and-Y-feë~hãr-on-ë1oser observation that Mr. Roeser will move this struc- I ture as we discussed in Councilman Geving1s motion so that the southeast corner of his garage would be behind the northwest corner of the adjacent house and Mr. Roeser has agreed to move to a three foot variance as opposed to the two which was originally requested. Taking those things into con- sideration I would like to make a motion that we reconsider this petition. foun~ilma~ Q~ving - I second the motion. Councilman Horn - This is based on the change of a two foot variance to a three foot varTance? Councilwoman Swenson - Plus the fact that in reviewing it further I was not aware really at the time when I had driven by I was definitely not aware of the slant in the back which was referred to. It wasn't visible from the street. I did get out this time and walk the property and I can see that this would be a necessary filling of land so I feel now that if he would be willing, as he said he has been. I know the people next door have said that they have no objection as long as it is not placed directly alongside the house. Mayor Hamilton "bYsaying aye. Any discussion? All those in favor of the motion signify Councilman Horn - Aye. Councilwoman Swenson - Aye. I' C 0 u n c . i 1 man Q~~!!.9.. - Aye. founcilwom~ Watson - Aye. ~ay~ Hamilton - Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Councilwoman Swenson moved to approve a seven foot side yard variance to the Planning Case #83-13 for the Ronald Roeser property, 222 Chan View, with the condition that if the structure is built it must maintain proper drainage with gutters moving the water away from the property owner to the east. That the building would be set far enough to the north so it would be placed further north than the northwest corner of the Wittenberg home. The applicant file a Certificate of Survey showing the proposed placement of the garage prior to the issuance of a building permit. Motion seconded by Mayor Hamilton. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwoman Swenson, Councilmen Geving and Horn. Councilwoman Watson voted no. Motion carried. HRA APPOINTMENT: Councilman Geving moved to table action on this item. Motion seconded by Councilwoman Watson. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwomen Watson and Swenson, Councilmen Geving and Horn. No negative votes. Motion carried. I ~hLS: Councilwoman Swenson moved to approve the bills as presented: Checks #014888 through #014958 in the amount of $944,674.94 and Checks #019363 through #019464 in the amount of $73,986.82. Motion seconded by Councilwoman Watson. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwomen Watson and Swenson, Councilmen Geving and Horn. No negative votes. Motion carried. I 1 I Council Meeting October 17, 1983 -3- TOUR OF PROJECTS: Council members will tour various projects throughout - -r-;- the Clty on October 29 at 8:30 a.m. LAKE SUSAN PARK LANDSCAPE PLAN: Mark Koegler presented a proposed landscape pran-for the area around the park shelter in Lake Susan Park. Councilwoman Swenson moved to approve the landscape plan for Lake Susan Park. Motion seconded by Councilwoman Watson. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwomen Watson and Swenson, Councilmen Geving and Horn. No negative votes. Motion carried. SUBDIVISION REQUEST, 731 WEST 96TH STREET: The applicant is seeking appro- val to split off a 38,600-square-foot parcel from a 90+ acre parcel in order to construct a home. Sanitary sewer through the-201 Program will be available within a year. Councilman Geving moved to waive the platting requirements to allow for the subdivision to be recorded by metes and bounds description, Planning Case 83-12, with the following conditions: 1. That the road easement along the westerly side of the property be 50 feet in width. 2. That a septic tank be installed should occupancy of the proposed resi- dence be sought prior to completion of the installation of the West 96th Street sewer line. 3. That a septic system including drainfield be installed in accordance with the requirements of Ordinance 10-A in the event that the West 96th Street sewer line is not installed as scheduled. Motion seconded by Councilman Horn. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwoman Swenson, Councilmen Horn and Geving. Councilwoman Watson voted no. Motion carried. SIDE YARD SETBACK VARIANCE REQUEST, 731 WEST 96TH STREET: The applicant is requesting a 25 foot side yard setba~variance-Tn order to move a home onto the property. The Board of Adjustments and Appeals recommended appro- val of the variance with the condition that the proposed driveway for the house have a culvert installed for drainage purposes. Councilman Geving moved to approve the 25 foot side yard setback variance as requested, Planning Case 83-15, with the conditions that the proposed driveway access have a culvert installed for drainage and that the place- ment of the home would be in line with homes to the east so that the garage would line up with front of their garages. Motion seconded by Mayor Hamilton. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwoman Swenson, Councilmen Horn and Geving. Councilwoman Watson voted no. Motion carried. ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK SETBACK VARIANCE REQUEST, LOT 5, BLOCK 1, RICE LAKEIMANOR: Peter Beck, John Weidt, Mike Mulligan and Gãry Hittle were present. The applicant is seeking a variance in order to construct a home. Peter Beck - We submitted a memorandum to the Board of Adjustments and Appealš-ãnd I believe a copy was sent to each Council Member. It addressed itself to three issues. One is the design of the house. Two is the con- sistency of that design with the purposes and intent of your Shore1and Management and the third is the hardship that would be imposed on the Mulligan's if the setback variance were denied. In the memorandum we talked about the unique nature of this lot and the unique placement of the Council Meeting October 17, 1983 -4- home on the lot. The lot slopes down to the water and has a natural pla- teau about 20 some feet up from the ordinary high water line and four to eight or so up from the field to the south. What John (Weidt) and Gary (Hittle) have done is designed a home that utilizes that existing natural plateau and fit the home to the natural contour of the lot. Slab on grade construction. The intent being to disturb the land on which the house will be built as little as possible. Vegetation in the area of the home will be transplanted. The lake is some 600 feet from this lot. The setback is from the marsh. The second purpose of the design was to maximize energy efficiency so the house has been sort of buried in the vegetation for pro- tection from the northerly winds and will contain over 2/3 of its windows on the south side which will collect passive solar energy when the trees drop their leaves in the fall. The intent and design on this house was, one, to preserve the natural and environmental characteristics of this site and, secondly, to maximize energy efficiency. To deny the variance, we feel, would work a hardship on the owner who would suffer the loss in energy efficiency. We think the land itself would suffer. There would be a considerable more land alteration required if this house had to be moved back. We also think the neighbors would suffer because this house would be visible whereas as proposed they would see the natural setting basically as they see now. The Board recommended three conditions. All of which are very agreeable. Mayor Hamilton moved that the ordinary high water mark setback variance be approved with the conditions as outlined by staff in a memorandum dated October 5, 1983. Motion seconded by Councilman Horn. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwomen Watson and Swenson, Councilmen Geving and Horn. No negative votes. Motion carried. SALE OF TAX FORFEITED LANDS: Carver County has submitted a list of thir- teen parZeTs in Chanhassen-rhat are proposed for tax forfeiture sale. Mayor Hamilton moved to approve the Certificate of County Board of Classification of Forfeited Lands as Provided by Chapter 386, Laws 1935 as Amended. Motion seconded by Councilman Geving. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwomen Watson and Swenson, Councilmen Geving and Horn. No negative votes. Motion carried. PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT DESIGNATING THE CITY COUNCIL AS THE BOARDlDF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS, FIRST READING:--rhe-PTanning CommissTon has-Tnltiated a proposed amendment to seCTTõn-22 of the Zoning Ordinance which designates the Council as the Board of Adjustments and Appeals. Mayor Hamilton - The question is an interesting one and I think the Planning Commission probably should have just raised the question rather than passing it on as a proposed ordinance amendment. There should be some discussion here with the staff as to what their thoughts are and perhaps with the City Attorney and perhaps review what other communities do. I I Mike Thom~ - The active member of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals cou1d~continue to attend so then the question came up, could we rotate the Planning Commission members on some basis through the Board of I Adjustments and Appeals and then I think somebody mentioned that since the final say is done with the Council anyway, it seemed like a duplication of the process. I don It think anybody is objecting to putting the time in, I am talking about the applicant and the process and the fact that the City Attorney also stated that he thought this should be done. I 1 I Council Meeting October 17, 1983 -5- Councilman Horn - Typically the types of issues that are brought up before the board are not quite the type of things that come before the Planning Commission. I think it does, in some cases, slow the review process down. It was recommended both by the City Attorney and actively discussed at some of the ordinance review procedures that we had with lack Johnson. I don't think the philosophy that is being used in this case generally holds true to the other commissions. I think that the Board of Adjustments and Appeals could be handled by the Council since we go through them all anyway. Mayor Hamilton - The purpose of having a Board of Adjustments and Appeals Ts-tO have some people sitting on that board who are willing to review it away from the Council and make a recommendation back to the Council as to what their findings are. What we are really doing is giving the requesting person the opportunity to get the viewpoints of some differing people who are not going to make the final determination. I think that's fairly important. It gives you a little different perspective and one more oppor- tunity to either have it approved or not approved and it seems to me that's part of the whole process even though it may take a little bit longer. If I were in that position I think I would certainly want to have somebody other than the Council making that determination. Councilman Geving - I have served on the board since 1976 so I have seen a number of issues involving variances. I think the system works pretty good because it sorts out a lot of the issues. On the night we met on the two issues that we had this evening, the Mulligan property and also the Swenson property, we met for li hours that evening to discuss both of those. Tonight we dispatched both of them in about 15 minutes. Had we not had that meeting with the board prior to tonights meeting I suspect we would be talking here until 10:00 on both of those because they were quite different. There are advantages of these people getting their acts together before they get to the Council. They are very well prepared. If they run into any opposition from what I consider three skilled people, we know whether or not they need a better sketch or maybe their idea isn't quite right or possibly, what we run into the most is neighborhood objec- tions. Many times when we meet here with an applicant there is a whole host of neighbors in the area that are just plain mad and they are against this proposal. We give them a chance to go back and meet with their neigh- bors and maybe find some ground work which they can make concessions. You didn't see anybody here tonight but when we first met with the Swenson's there were objections. There were, of course, no objections on Mulligan's because there weren't any neighbors but there was one neighbor who objected and it was read into the minutes that evening. We dispatched that problem and they took care of it with Bill Monk before it came to the Council. There is a tremendous amount of sorting out that takes place and it's worthwhile. I would in my own opinion say that it is quite different, the Board of Adjustments and Appeals is informal but it is quite different from our other commissions. I also feel that it could be absorbed by the Council if the Council is willing to look at every piece of property that is asking for a variance and there is a lot of them. Councilwoman Watson - I think the Board of Adjustments and Appeals should continue. It's not that I mind taking it on here. I did the Board of Adjustments and Appeals when I was on the Planning Commission and I enjoyed it. I think it's worthwhile. I think it should continue to exist. Council Meeting October 17, 1983 -6- Councilwoman Swenson - As a member of the City Council having to make these rlnal decisions along with the rest of you, contrary to what perhaps some of the volunteers on our other commissions may think, despite the fact that I don1t consistently agree with them~ I am exceedingly appreciative of the I input from as many people as we can get and I concur it is unfortunate it has to be delayed but it1s only a week or ten day delay. I like to have as much information as I can have and I appreciate what they do. f~ncilman Geving - The only other comment I would like to make is that if we continue with the present system I would like to have a permanent member of the Planning Commission be assigned. Councilman Geving moved to table action on this item. Councilman Horn. The following voted in favor: Mayor Councilwomen Watson and Swenson, Councilmen Geving and votes. Motion carried. Motion seconded by Hami1ton~ Horn. No negative 1984 HRA OPERATING BUDGET: RESOLUTION #83-50: Councilman Horn moved approving the 1984 HRA Operating Budget. Hamilton. The following voted in favor: Watson and Swenson, Councilmen Geving and carried. the adoption of a reso1 ution Resolution seconded by Mayor Mayor Hamilton, Councilwomen Horn. No negative votes. Motion 1984 PARK AND RECREATION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM: Mayor Hamilton moved to-ãpprove-the 1984 Capital Improvement~ge~-amended. 1. Chanhassen Pond Park pave walkway from Laredo to Viewing Stand minor landscaping improvements 2. Lake Ann Park portable fishing dock replace lifeguard towers and locker 3. Meadow Green Park tot lot miscellaneous landscaping 4. Lake Susan Park landscaping tables and benches fishing dock 5. Minnewashta Park relandscape ditches enlarge tot lot or landscape 6. Herman Field refine details of development plan 7. General tree replacement in tree farm 1,000 picnic tables 800 8. Park Shelter in Lake Ann pending LAWCON Application 8,050 Motion seconded by Councilwoman Watson. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwomen Watson and Swenson, Councilmen Geving and Horn. No negative votes. Motion carried. $ 1,250 300 1,500 2,000 I 4,000 400 8,000 800 1,500 800 1,200 1,200 BUSINESSES IN RESIDENTIAL AND NON-RESIDENTIAL AREAS: that-retterS-had been sent-to violators and fe~the ture to the Council discussing the issue. This item Council agenda. Members requested a list of persons letter. Councilman Horn noted letters were prema- will be on a future who have received a I I 1 I Council Meeting October 17, 1983 -7- COUNCIL COMPENSATION: Councilwoman Swenson moved to approve Ordinance 52-C, An Ordinance Amending Sections 1 and 2 of Ordinance 52-B, Adopted April 9, 1980, and Entitled IIAn Ordinance Establishing Compensation for Members of the Chanhassen City Council II. Motion seconded by Councilman Geving. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwomen Swenson and Watson, Councilman Geving. Councilman Horn voted no. Motion carried. CITY SIGN, HIGHWAYS 5 AND 101: Councilwoman Swenson suggested that the City directional sign bechanged to general categories, such as IIFood and Lodgingll. No action was taken. ENGINEERING DISCLAIMERS: A suggestion was made that from this point hence all engineering firms working in the City be asked to sign a disclaimer concerning their involvement on the project on which they are working. RESOLUTION IN OPPOSITION TO PROPOSED LANDFILL SITE: RESOLUTION #83-51: CouncTTman Horn moved the adoption of a resolution in opposition to the proposed landfill site on the Eden Prairie/Chanhassen border. Resolution seconded by Councilwoman Watson. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwomen Watson and Swenson, Councilmen Geving and Horn. No negative votes. Motion carried. Councilman Geving moved to adjourn. Motion seconded by Councilwoman Watson. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwomen Watson and Swenson, Councilmen Geving and Horn. No negative votes. Motion carri ed. Don Ashworth City Manager