1h. Minutes •
1
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
OCTOBER 22, 1990
': . Mayor Chmiel called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.. The meeting was opened
with the Pledge to the Flag.
COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Chmiel, Councilwoman Dimler and Councilman
Johnson
COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: Councilman Workman
STAFF PRESENT: Don Ashworth, Roger Knutson, Paul Krauss, Gary Warren, Todd
' Gerhardt, Todd Hoffman and Scott Harr
Councilwoman-D;mler: Mr. Mayor? For the record, Tom Workman is sick this
evening and he asked that we all say a prayer for his recovery. He told me he'd
be watching on television to see if I brought it up so I want to tell him that
I did.
' Mayor Chmiel: Excuse me, Tom who?
Councilwoman Dimler: Workman.
,• Councilman Johnson: If he's got the same flu my wife has, I feel sorry for him.
There's a lot of that going around.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to
approve the agenda with the following changes: Mayor Chmiel wanted to pull item
1(f) from the Consent Agenda because it requires a four-fifths vote and withdraw
item number 6, John Klingelhutz' Preliminary Plat. All voted in favor of the
agenda as amended and the motion carried unanimously.
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT: RESOLUTION PROCLAIMING OCTOBER 22-28 AS RED RIBBON
CAMPAIGN WEEK AND DECLARING CHANHASSEN A DRUG-FREE ZONE.
Mayor Chmiel: The proposed resolution that we're adopting will read, a
Resolution establishing the City of Chanhassen as a drug free zone. In
recognizing the Red Ribbon Campaign Week of October 22-28, 1990. Whereas, the
City of Chanhassen is responsible for maintaining the public safety of our
community, and Whereas the City of Chanhassen is committed to fighting back
against the perils of illegal and harmful drug use and abuse, Now Therefore, Be
It Resolved by the City Council of the City of Chanhassen as follows:
1. That the City of Chanhassen shall continue to be drug free zone where
illegal and harmful drug use and abuse is not accepted.
2. That the Week of October 22-28, 1990 will be proclaimed as Red Ribbon
Campaign week during which the City of Chanhassen will recognize it's
national commitment to reduce and prevent the abuse of alcohol and other
idrugs.
Passed and adopted by the City Council this 22nd day of October, 1990.
1 1
City Council Meeting - October 22, 1990
Resolution 890-135: Councilman Johnson moved, Councilwoman Dialer seconded to
11 approve the Resolution Proclaiming October 22-28, 1990 as Red Ribbon Campaign
Week and Declaring Chanhassen as a Drug Free Zone. All voted in favor and the
motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Chmiel: I just wanted to mention one thing. I did take the opportunity
this week to go through the complete business area and provide these red ribbons
to all the owners of stores, business offices and so on and ask that they would
participate in wearing these red ribbons so if you see people within the
community wearing them, that's support of this particular proposal. We also had
the grade school wear their ribbons as well within town and all the children
within both school systems are wearing them and including Minnetonka School
District. So we feel that we want to keep at least by wearing these, I should
say by wearing these red ribbons and hopefully divert any child from even
thinking about using drugs. If we can just save even one child, it's more than
well worth it.
CONSENT AGENDA: Councilwoman Dialer moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to
' approve the following Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's
recommendations:
a. Site Plan Amendment for a 4,260 square foot addition to the existing
building, 7870 Park Drive, Industrial Information Controls.
' b. Preliminary Plat to replat a portion of an outlot in Chanhassen Mall
Addition and placement of Market Boulevard, Located south and west of
Chanhassen Bowl, Easy Rider Addition.
' c. Approval of 1991 Police Contract.
e. Resolution 890-136: Resolution establishing a Seven Member Senior Needs
' Commission.
g. Resolution 890-137: Accept Roadway and Drainage Improvements in Eight Acre
Woods Project 87-29.
h. Resolution *90-138: Approve Plans and Specifications for TH 5 Expansion
from 2000 feet west of CR 17 to Eastern Carver County line; authorize
Cooperative Agreement, Project 88-28B.
j. Approval of Accounts.
11 k. City Council Minutes dated October 8, 1990
Park and Recreation Commission Minutes dated September 25, 1990
Board of Adjustments and Appeals Minutes dated October 8, 1990
1. Approve Landscaping Contract for Country Hospitality Suites.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
1
2
11
City Council Meeting - October 22, 1990
D. CITY CODE AMENDMENT REGARDING EXPANDING THE RECYCLING PROGRAM TO INCLUDE
COLLECTION OF PLASTICS, FINAL READING.
Councilwoman Dimler: Item (d) has to do with the amendment regarding the
expanding of our Recycling program to include collection of plastics and I agree
with this 100%. The only question I had and I wonder if someone is here that
could answer it for me. It says here that it costs the hauler $90.00 per hour
to operate that truck and I wondered if any of them have given us an idea of how
they plan to pass those costs onto the households and how much that will cost
per household.
Victor Hallberg: I'm Victor Hallberg from the Recycling Commission. I don't 11
know if Jo Ann has given you some background on that.
Councilwoman Dimler: Just a little bit. ,
Victor Hallberg: Okay. We certainly analyzed that and we had the haulers
invited to a number of meetings. Forgive my appearance. I'm on my way to play
basketball at the gym next door. We certainly asked that question of the
haulers, if they felt there was going to be an expected increase in the rates
and of course that's a private question in the sense that pricing is always very
competitive in the hauling industry and they were unwilling to give us any fix
on that. What they could tell us is that they were either in the process or
would soon be in the process of gearing up to handle plastics and the 3 haulers
who attended our hearings were figuring out ways to most efficiently use their
trucks and modify them for the use of taking in of plastics. So to answer you
question a simple way, no we can't predict that but yes, they are already
working with plastics in many cases. Some of the haulers didn't show up. We
don't know what their reaction's going to be but they're modifying their trucks
and they're already doing this in test programs in a variety of different
cities.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. And they don't know what their increased costs are
yet to the individual?
Victor Hallberg: They're working on efficiency factors and a lot of stuff about
how to handle the plastics part of their business. They probably don't know
right now. I
Councilwoman Dimler: I just want to make sure it doesn't get too expensive for
our citizens.
Victor Hallberg: We were concerned about that as well because we knew if there
was a large rate increase, we're going to see a lot of flack coming up from
there and they did request that the beginning of the ordinance, and I believe
this is in the wording as it will be in the change in the ordinance would not
kick into until April 1. They asked for more time to get their own productivity
and all that kind of stuff in place. That's about it. Jay, do you remember
anything more from that discussion that would be relevant here? You were there.
Councilman Johnson: We also discussed it a couple nights later at the Carver
County solid waste group and it's looking like the plastics are going to be
going pretty much statewide pretty quick. There's a couple companies. They're
3
I
City Council Meeting - October 22, 1990
11
going to be accepted more. So the market's starting to come around.
11 Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, so it's going to bring the cost down eventually?
•
Councilman Johnson: Yeah.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. Thank you very much.
Victor Hallberg: Yeah. Uli Sacchet is here also. Uli, did you want to add
anything to that discussion? Okay.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, with that information I move approval of item 1(d).
Councilman Johnson: Second.
' Councilwoman Dialer moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to approve the final
reading of a City Code Amendment regarding expanding the Recycling Program to
include Collection of Plastics. All voted in favor and the motion carried
unanimously.
VISITORS PRESENTATION: None.
1 PUBLIC HEARING: PROPOSED CITY CODE AMENDMENT AMENDING SECTION 14-61 CONCERNING
THE DEFINITION OF MALT LIQUOR.
Mayor Chmiel: Todd, would you like to address this?
Todd Hoffman: Basically what this modification does is correct the defintion of
' malt liquor as it pertains in our city code. Malt liquor is spoke of in there
and then it's called non-intoxicating as well. Basically what the State Statute
says is malt liquor is non-intoxicating, 3.2 or strong beer. A sign which is
1 posted or was posted at Lake Ann Park stated you could have only 3.2 beer within
the park. The Sheriff's deputies were taking that into consideration when they
did the patrols at Lake Ann and citing people for having strong beer. Giving
them a citation. How this came about is that then went to court. It came back
to us in a letter from one of the County Attorneys and we just went about
clarifying that through Roger Knutson so it's just a clarification in signage at
the park and as well a clarification of our City Code.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Thank you. Maybe just for your information if anyone
would like to address this. The ordinance basically reads that the definition
' in Minnesota Statute Section 340A.101 apply to this section. (b), no person
shall consume or have in his or her possession while within a city park any
bottle or receptacle which contains intoxicating liquor except malt beverages
which has been opened, the seal broken or the contents of which has been
' partially removed. Is there anyone wishing to address this specific item? This
is a public hearing.
•
Councilman Johnson: I move we close the public hearing.
Councilwoman Dimler: Second.
4
11
City Council Meeting - October 22, 1990 1
Councilman Johnson moved, Councilwoman Disler seconded to close the public
hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was
closed.
Councilman Johnson: Does this basically mean that we can now have strong beer I
in city parks?
Todd Hoffman: Which we could previously but it was. . .
Mayor Chmiel: This basically clarifies that. Okay, any other discussion?
Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah. I have a question on the way item (b) is stated. I
When I first read it I thought it sounded a little obscure in the fact that
you're saying here that no person shall consume or have in his or her possession
while within any city park any bottle or receptacle which contains intoxicating
liquor. That I agree with. Then it says, except malt beverages which have been
opened or the seal has been broken or the contents have been partially removed.
It sounds like that's legal. Could we restate it to say, you know put a period.
Take out except malt beverages in the first sentence. Put a period after
removed. Have a second sentence that says, the only exception is malt beverages.
Did anybody else think it was? i
Councilman Johnson: Because the except malt beverages.
Councilwoman Dimler: Which have been opened and have been partially consumed. t
Councilman Johnson: I think which have been opened isn't, I agree with you.
Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah. It sounds like you can have that. To me it did 1
anyway.
Roger Knutson: Maybe I could suggest that if you put. I
Councilman Johnson: You can't have closed malt liquor. See that's the way it
reads.
Mayor Chmiel: Go ahead Roger.
Roger Knutson: If you took out where it says except malt beverages and started 1
that sentence to read, Except for malt beverages, no person shall consume or
have in his or her possession.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. Just the way it's placed there, it sounds like you
can have malt beverages which have been opened or the seal is broken or the
contents have been partially removed. ,
Councilman Johnson: But you can't have any closed cans of beer. You have to
open them at the gate. I
Councilwoman Dimler: Yes. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. If no other discussions, can I have a motion? ,
5
I
City Council Meeting - October 22, 1990
11
Councilwoman Disler moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to approve the City Code
Amendment amending Section 14-61 concerning the definition of salt liquor as
presented with item (b) amended as follows:
(b) Except malt beverages, no person shall consume or have in his or her
.]
possession while within any city park any bottle or receptacle which
contains intoxicating liquor which has been opened, or the seal broken, or
the contents of which have been partially removed.
' All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER MODIFIED PLAN FOR TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT NO. 2-1.
MCGLYNN.
Todd Gerhardt: This is a public hearing.
' Mayor Chmiel: Yes.
Todd Gerhardt: Included in your packet was a modified plan for tax increment
district No. 2. Included in that plan are the changes on page 6 and 7
highlighting the expenses. I've also included in my report construction costs
and administrative expenses that will occur on this project. Planning
Commission at their October 17th meeting reviewed the proposed changes and found
them consistent with their overall development plans and comprehensive plan.
Just to remind the City Council, at our last meeting of October 8th,
11 Councilwoman Oimler requested the detailed outline of those costs and I've
included those.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. This is a public hearing. Is there anyone wishing to
address this at this particular time?
' Councilman Johnson moved, Councilwoman Disler seconded to close the public
hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
Resolution #90-139: Councilman Johnson moved, Councilwoman Dialer seconded to
adopt the Resolution modifying the Tax Increment Financing Plan for
Development District No. 2 and Tax Increment District No. 2-1. All voted in
favor and the motion carried unanimously.
' PUBLIC HEARING: PROPOSED VACATION OF A PORTION OF STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY OF FOREST
AVENUE AND ORIOLE LANE. APPLICANTS: ZIEGLER. REED. SCHIFERLI AND GOWEN.
Public Present:
Name Address
Gary and Jan Reed 2461 West 64th Street
Ben Gowen 6440 Hazeltine
Marcia & Bob Schiferli 325 George Street, Excelsior
Delores Ziegler 6441 Oriole Lane
Sandy Lehmer 6461 Oriole Lane
' Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, very briefly we received the request from 5 property 1
6
I
City Council Meeting - October 22, 1990
owners to vacate portions of Oriole and Forest Avenue. The portion requested
for vacation is undeveloped and in staff's opinion is unneeded for any public
purpose. It doesn't contain any public utilities either. In response to their
vacation request we saw no reason not to support that and we are recommending
that the vacation be approved and processed accordingly. I
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Is there anyone wishing to address that?
Please come forward up to the microphone and please state your name and your
address please.
Bob Schiferli: I am Bob Schiferli and my wife owns the property where most is
being vacated. A question I have in regards to a 20 foot easement. Can I show
you on this map?
Mayor Chmiel: Sure. Go ahead. '
Bob Schiferli: Now the present blacktop road, the property line runs through
here. The present blacktop road stops right here. Now they stated in a letter
they want a 20 foot easement to the park right? Do they want it 20 feet down
the side of this road and in regards to the 20 foot easement here, does he want
half on each side of these two pieces of property or just on one side of the
property? Do they plan to keep the road in up to this point and then get an
easement from here down? See we own this piece here and also this one. The -
reason we're requesting it is so it can be sold as one piece of property. This
actually all the land down below here is such that it cannot be built on.
. . .and this would make a nice lot in that respect. That one piece and we
requested this, oh it's been about 5 years now and we'd like to get it done.
They haven't moved on it yet but we're sure appreciating moving on it.
I understand our taxes now, last year they were 13 70. This coming year they're
going up to 21 50. We have to get rid of it. Can you clarify, does the 20 foot
easement over here all the way down or does the road come to here and the
easement . . . I'd like to have that clarified. I
Paul Krauss: I believe Todd Hoffman can respond.
Councilman Johnson: I don't think we're vacating the western portion. Just ,
from the park back.
Todd Hoffman: To address that question, yeah. This would be the portion which 1
is to be vacated. An easement to the park along your property and then the Lang
property is in the process of being acquired. You'll be contacted at a date in
the near future to do that. The easement which we'd like to be retained would
be along this portion to gain access to the east for these persons in this area
to access the park down along that trail system to get into the future Herman
Field Park area.
Bob Schiferli: I believe there is proposed from this blacktop here and come
down here with the road. . . Is that what you're proposing your easement to come
down through here? 1
Todd Hoffman: No. This would be the access which will be developed.
Bob Schiferli: Then you're not vacating across our property at all? ,
7
11
City Council Meeting - October 22, 1990
Paul Krauss: No, we would be vacating ownership. We'd be retaining the right
to have an easement for a trail.
•
Todd Hoffman: A trail easement.
Paul Krauss: But it would show up as one tax parcel.
' Bob Schiferli: Then why can't they bring their easement down through here into
the park then? The park runs from here to there. I'm not objecting to the way
they want to do it. I just want to get it clarified. Either you come down
through here or if you have to go that way, go this route. The road stops here.
Todd Hoffman: But then the development of the road, the gravel access road with
' the parking lot will eventually happen. Then you want the easement here.
Bob Schiferli: Not all the way across here.
' Todd Hoffman: Then this would be a trail easement for pedestrian access from
the east.
' Councilman Johnson: Not cars.
Marcia Schiferli: Then it goes right through our property.
Bob Schiferli: You're going through our property. You're going through this
property too. That doesn't sound very logical to me. I want this clarified
when you plan to put that easement.
Councilman Johnson: Todd, do you have the drawings for the park and could
access come from the east just on this back corner or could we move that trail
' access along the back lot lines versus going through the center of their lot?
Instead of putting it where the street's platted now, put it at the back lot
line and give them the vacation.
Todd Hoffman: Yeah, there's the possibility that a trail, internal trail could
be connected within the park. It is separated by a wetland area in here but
that certainly is a possibility.
Bob Schiferli: . . .go through here rather than cut off two pieces of property. I
wouldn't want to buy a piece of property and have an easement going right
through the middle of it. On the side is fine. No difference. Same with him.
I'm sure they wouldn't want. . .
Councilman Johnson: Do we know what's the territory's like? Swamps or what?
' Gary Warren: It gets pretty wet so.
Todd Hoffman: Again, that would just be a possibility. Without taking a look
at the overall park plan and again taking a look at-changing the recommendation,
it would be premature at this time.
' Mayor Chmiel: Todd, what would happen if we vacated that end piece all the way
8
11
1
City Council Meeting - October 22, 1990 1
down? Got an easement through there. Vacated the other piece that goes over to
that trail or where the road would be with the easement extending down also to
20 feet. Wouldn't that work out? You understand what I'm saying?
Todd Hoffman: Along this side? 1
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. Get a trail easement there. Vacate the other piece that
extends from there to there.
Todd Hoffman: Yeah.
Mayor Chmiel: And then get a 20 foot easement in that location where you show I
it presently to enter into the park.
Gary Warren: Mr. Mayor I think the, I didn't mean to interrupt. The concept 1
plan for the parks there relate to this and I think they ought to be looked at
because I think the access for the land where the squiggle kind of goes off
meandering is a little bit questionable as far as wetlands and such.
Councilwoman Dimler: The topography there?
Paul Krauss: If you'd like us to look into that, I'd recommend that you 1
continue action on this and let us bring it back to you at an upcoming meeting.
We'll have looked at that.
Todd Hoffman: That could be a possibility to make a compromise situation. If
this is not navagiable down here, to bring that easement along the bottom or the
southerly half.
Mayor Chmiel: Rather than cutting through the entirety of the property.
Gary Reed: My name is Gary Reed and I don't know when this all started but my ,
son now owns part of that property that's adjacent to that and I don't think
he's been notified but.
Mayor Chmiel: Adjacent to?
Gary Reed: To that extension of Oriole Avenue. 1
Mayor Chmiel: Oh, okay.
Gary Reed: And also you said there were no utilities in there? There's ,
sanitary sewer and then storm sewer now right?
Gary Warren: On Oriole, yeah. I
Gary Reed: Doesn't the sanitary sewer cut right through there? Or does it dead
end down there? '
Gary Warren: It goes to the south.
Gary Reed: There's a manhold I know right down in that 20 foot Oriole and I
9
I
I/ City Council Meeting - October 22, 1990
thought it went west from there.
Gary Warren: Right, it goes west to a pump station. That whole thing should be
reviewed Mr. Mayor.
Gary Reed: Yeah, because that goes right through the middle of that property so
you can't build on that part.
Mayor Chmiel: Good, thank you. Anyone else?
Ben Gowen: My name is Ben Gowen. I'm adjacent. . . I'm curious to know why
they've got an 8 foot easement on 64th after you abandoned 64th? You've got an
8 foot path. Why do you now need a 20 foot path for the last 600 feet? 8 foot
is good enough. From here up to TN 41 is 8 foot now as they abandon this
' street . Why do you need 20 feet here? I should think 8 feet would be adequate
if you have to have it at all. There's no people up in this side of town. All
the people that are going to use the park live over here in the Minnewashta
Heights, Lows and Manner. I don't think you have to consider this site at all
' really.
Gary Warren: The path itself is 8 foot but it's within the City's existing
' right-of-way. The right-of-way is wider than the 8 feet. The path itself is 8
feet wide.
Councilman Johnson: That's been partially vacated when Mr. Reed subdivided.
Mayor Chmiel: Alright, anyone else? Let's go the direction we had mentioned.
Councilwoman Dimler: I move we close the public hearing.
Councilman Johnson: Second. Or move to continue it?
Mayor Chmiel: I would say we probably move to continue it.
Councilman Johnson: I'll withdraw my second then.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. Then you're not going to table this for tonight?
Move to continue. Alright.
' Mayor Chmiel: No. Move for a continuance so we don't have to take any action
on it.
ICouncilwoman Dimler: Alright, move to continue the public hearing.
Councilman Johnson: Second.
' Mayor Chmiel: And staff come back with those recommendations or suggestions and
take all these things into consideration.
Paul Krauss: I'll assume that it's going to be on the next meeting but we'll
renotify.
Mayor Chmiel: Right. More than likely it will be on next Council agenda so
10
City Council Meeting - October 22, 1990
. then once we check out the different things that we discussed, we'll have a r
better idea. Then we'll see.
Ben Gowen: The people that are on the petition, 2 of the 5 didn't get notified. ,
I don't know why they don't.
Mayor Chmiel: Do you know who those were? I
Ben Gowen: Myself and the Schiferli's.
Marcia Schiferli: No, we got one. '
Ben Gowen: Oh you did? It wasn't on the agenda upstairs when I tried to find
out. '
Marcia Schiferli: No, we got a letter.
Gary Reed: My son didn't either. 1
Gary Warren: Does it show as an ownership?
Gary Reed: Yeah. And also, you know the plat. . .proposing along 64th Street. . .
Councilman Johnson: Right. This is an old street map. It shows 64th going up
to the highway. Yeah.
Don Ashworth: Mr. Reed? Your son's name is? ,
Gary Reed: Gary also. Gary S. Reed. That's Excelsior mailing.
Mayor Chmiel: Very good. So we'll have it continued until the next Council 1
meeting.
Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to continue the public
hearing on the proposed vacation of a portion of street right-of-way of Forest
Avenue and Oriole Lane until the next City Council meeting. All voted in favor
and the motion carried. ,
PJ'S BAR AND RESTAURANT LOCATED IN SEVEN FORTY-ONE CROSSING SHOPPING CENTER.
INTERSECTION OF TH 41 AND TH 7. JEFFREY IRRTHUM:
A. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST.
B. ON-SALE INTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSE REQUEST.
Public Present: ,
Name Address
Gary and Jan Reed 2461 West 64th Street
Ben Gowen . Hazeltine
Marcia & Bb Schiferli 325 George Street, Excelsior
Delores Ziegler 6441 Oriole Lane •
Sandy Lehmer 6461 Oriole Lane
11 1
1
City Council Meeting - October 22, 1990
Jeffrey Irrthum 3667 Falcon Way, Eagan
Tim Whitten 15352 Village Woods Drive, Eden Prairie
Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, the applicants are requesting approval of a conditional
' use permit to locate a 5,800 square foot restaurant with approximately 192 seats •
in the Seven Forty-One Shopping Center. The restaurant's being referred to as
PJ's. It's been, I believe you had a sample menu in the packet. It's been
described as sort of family oriented sports bar I guess type of concept. Hours
' of operation are projected to be 11:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. . It's location in the
shopping center is the far eastern corner of the shopping closest to TH 41.
When the applicants first approached staff with this proposal we were somewhat
concerned with the long lengthy history of neighborhood interaction and project
development that occurred on this site. Since it occurred before my time with
the City, I attempted to others who were involved at the time and read the
Minutes as to what was committed to and basically what we have there is a
' neighborhood retail center. There was nothing specific that we found as to
restaurants of this nature which is consistent with the neighborhood business
district designation. The only liquor licensing issue that have cropped up
before with the SuperAmerica station which was an off-sale permit. This of
course is an on-sale request. Moving on from there we realized that the
shopping center was designed for retail use. Restaurants with liquor licenses
' generate significantly greater parking demand and we spent quite a lot of time
with the applicant working out parking issues. Along those lines and also to
satisfy our concerns with, or some of our concerns with placing them in this
shopping center. The original restaurant proposal envisioned a 50-50 split
between full dining tables and tables located in the bar area. Upon calling
other communities that had similar types of restaurants, we concluded that that
was unacceptable for two reasons. It didn't create the image that we thought
' was consistent with an operation in this shopping center. We felt that a more
dining room approach was more appropriate. . .significant impact for parking.
Consequently the applicant who was attempting to work with us, did redesign the
' restaurant so it had a 60-40 split. 60% of the tables being full dining tables.
The parking plans have been resolved through the use of proof of parking concept
which we've used on several sites to date. As the Council's aware, in the past
I've said that parking analysis is somewhat more of an art than a science and
' we're never quite perfectly sure how these things are going to function. We
believe that when the restaurant is up and running, assuming it's doing well and
the rest of the shopping center is full, that there's going to be, you know
' parking will be tight. To meet ordinance requirements, the proof of parking
plan was developed such that if a parking problem does make itself apparent, we
can require that the parking lot be rebuilt basically. Reoriented to
accommodate sufficient numbers of cars. One of the things that the applicant is
' giving up to make this proof of parking work is that there is an undeveloped
4,000 square foot retail building. Free standing retail building that will not
work if the proof of parking plan is in place. What we have told the applicant
' is that right now we're assuming that that thing is out of the picture. However,
after the shopping center is completely leased and PJ's is operating, if they
wanted us to go back in and re-open the issue, we would through the use of some
' consultant time paid for by the applicant reassess the parking and if there was
sufficient parking at that point, we may consider the reinstatement or
recommending the reinstatement of that building. But for the time being, that
is not included in the proof of parking concept. One of the other issues we
dealt with with this project was compliance with previous conditions of
12
City Council Meeting - October 22, 1990 1'
approval. As the Council is aware, staff has been attempting to work with the
original developer to gain satisfaction of conditions pertaining to landscaping.
There was a problem with weed control. There's another problem with completion
of drainage improvements. There's been a lot of difficulty with the retention
pond located to the west of the shopping center. There was another issue with
the inclusion of a street light at the entrance because there was a visibility
problem.
Mayor Chmiel: That's in place now. '
Paul Krauss: That's in place now, yes. We've been working with the applicants 11 to resolve a lot of these things and there's been something of a change in, I
don't know if it's change in ownership but a change in the parties that we're
dealing with. We've met with them quite frequently of late. They have cut the
weeds. They are working with us to replace the dead plant material and complete
their landscaping plan. The PJ's restaurant, should it be approved, also
require improved screening around the south side of the building which is now
very visible from Mr. Reed's lots or will be visible as those lots develop in
the future. We'd like to offer them some more screening. A November 15th
deadline was established by staff in working with the applicants to resolve
these issues. We do have a significant letter of credit outstanding and so we
do have the financial wherewithal to guarantee that these things are going to
occur. In addition the Planning Commission seeking to increase it's comfort
level in working with this situation put a condition of approval on such that if
the restaurant is approved, it will not be given a certificate of occupancy
until all these matters are resolved. Since winter is rapidly approaching, that
basically gives the developer a window of probably 2 to 4 weeks to jump through
to fix everything over there. Otherwise the restaurant won't be allowed to open
until next spring when these things can be done so they're really under the gun
in that regard. We did ask the developer to hold a neighborhood meeting.
There's been a lot of neighborhood interaction on this in the past. They did,
in fact, we pulled them from one agenda from the Planning Commission because
they couldn't coordinate to hold their neighborhood meeting initially. They did
hold one prior to the Planning Commission. We understand it was fairly sparsely
attended but there was some good dialogue. Planning Commission acted on this
earlier in the month and they did recommend it's approval adding that
condition I spoke of earlier about the satisfaction of conditions prior to
certificate of occupancy. There were some issues that cropped up though at the
Planning Commission public hearing. Some of them weren't necessarily
specifically related to the restaurant or even to the shopping center but issues
that are occurring in the area and they had to do with traffic. One of the
concerns was the Oriole/Orchard intersection. It's a bad intersection now. ,
There's a concern that traffic seeking to turn on TH 7, from TH 7 into the
shopping center may miss TH 41. Go past and turn into Orchard and make, you
know go into the neighborhood. Of course there's no connection from that
neighborhood to the shopping center so anybody that does that once won't do it
again but it is a bad intersection and we have a recommendation from the
Assistant City Engineer on some re-signage for that that will help alleviate
that problem. We also sought to investigate the potential of posting a highway
sign on TH 7 such that westbound traffic is notified ahead of time that if they
wish to go onto the shopping center site, that they need to turn to TH 41.
MnDot has told us that they are generally unreceptive to posting those green
signs on anything but a limited access free which TH 7 is not. There is an
13 ,
1
City Council Meeting - October 22, 1990
•
exception formula that they use where you basically have to prove to them that
11 this is a highly unusual situation. We're willing to make the attempt. I'm not
sure that we can do that. If we do that however, they charge us for the sign.
Now if you want us to pursue that, I would ask you to add a condition that the
developer or the applicants be liable for the cost of that sign should our
application be looked on favorably. But again, we are willing to look into
that. And with that, with the conditions recommended by the Planning
Commission, we are recommending that this application be approved. Mr. Mayor,
as you noted, there is a corresponding request for a liquor license that's being
acted on after this issue.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you Paul. Is the applicant here? Is there anything you'd
like to say?
Tim Whitten: On which issue? On both?
Mayor Chmiel: On any of the things that Paul has just gone over.
' Tim Whitten: My name is Tim Whitten. I'm with Heise, Ryan, McRae and we are
representing the landlords and also the Jeff Irrthum with PJ's. Jeff's
available to answer any questions as we go along. We did have the meeting with
.the neighbors and we discussed a few things and feel that we've come a long way.
' We have changed the guards if you will with Roger Zahn who was running the
project up until recently and I have now taken over Roger's responsibility and
have dealt with the City staff. Have met with the planners on site in regards
to the landscaping. Talked to the engineers. We talked to all the consultants
involved with the project. Our schedule is such that we plan on making all
these improvements by the 15th. We have everything in place as far as the road
construction. We're dealing with the engineers as far as the retention pond.
' My understanding is that as of yesterday that the dead planting material has
been replaced. We're dealing with the landscape firm to come up with a plan to
present to the City adding somewhere in the range of 8 to 12 more evergreens to
' the site to satisfy that concern. Our only, we agree with the staff. Have been
working with the staff on all the issues. The only question I have is the
• request for the additional 9 parking spaces that's listed on there. That was an
' item, I believe that was put in place to satisfy the employee parking for the
restaurant when in fact we did not have 14 spaces in the back of the building
itself. I think Paul can probably identify that. The 9 was to be placed in
' that location. Can you show where the 14 parking spaces were previously?
Paul Krauss: Yeah. If I could expand on that? When we originally were looking
at this, there was a proposal to locate a daycare center in this shopping
' center. The daycare center would have had a rear recreation area that would have
intruded into this space requiring the elimination of 14 stalls. On a site that
has tight parking anyway, you don't want to lose any of it to employees. You
' want to make the employees park behind the building. We were concerned that
without these 14 stalls, that the 9 stalls on the proof of parking plan over
here should be installed. We've since been informed that the daycare center
will not be locating in the shopping center so we still have those 14 stalls and
we can eliminate that part of the condition dealing with those 9 stalls. It's
number 2(c). I
14
I
City Council Meeting - October 22, 1990 1
Tim Whitten: Otherwise we're in support of the report and would be happy to
answer any questions.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. I
Jeff Irrthum: My name is Jeff Irrthum. I'm from Eagan, Minnesota. I'm the
proposed owner of PJ's restaurant. I guess I just wanted to touch on the fact
that there's been some, Paul mentioned that the 60-40 split in the dining/lounge
area. The reason we put the lounge area in was for the convenience of overall
of the people. During the lunch period when we expect to the majority of our
business, we will be serving meals in that area. In that lounge area so I
guess, I know there's been some fear of being like a bar or even like a sports
bar like a Champp's type situation. Even though obviously I would love that to
happen, I don't believe my facility is nearly as big as theirs. Obviously
I know it's not as big as their's nor do I attempt or want to attempt to try and
achieve that type of a situation. I'm trying to be a. dining establishment
serving alcohol as a compliment to the food. I just wanted to bring that up.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Is there anyone else wishing to address any of this?
If not, any discussion from Council?
Councilwoman Dimler: I do have a question of Mr. Irrthum. You know I read the ,
concept of your restaurant. I find it quite interesting the name PJ's and
I guess I was reading that it's a family restaurant but your waiters and
waitresses will be wearing pajamas.
Jeff Irrthum: I'm going to try to be a family restaurant. Yeah. Exactly. The
decor was going to be, I want it to be a very fun, light atmosphere where
someone can come in with a family as well as an individual or a date in a
variety of clothes. You don't have to feel like it's, we want of make it as
upscale as possible without eliminating a family or vice versa so yeah, the
decor will be such that it will be a real light pastelly colors and yes, our
employees will be clad in men's pajamas as a uniform.
Councilwoman Dimler: Alright. Is there another PJ's in the Twin Cities? '
Jeff Irrthum: No., there's not.
Councilwoman Dimler: Anywhere in the world? '
Jeff Irrthum: No. I think I'm on the only one. ,
Councilman Johnson: If I could expand on that. What sport's played in PJ's?
Jeff Irrthum: The whole idea was to make it as fun and light and casual as '
possible and it's kind of a play on words actually.
•
Councilwoman Dimler: I agree we need a restaurant in town. I thought that was
quite interesting.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any other discussions?
Councilman Johnson: When does our letter of credit expire?
15 1
I
City Council Meeting - October 22, 1990
I
Gary Warren: December 31st.
11 Councilman Johnson: What does it take to extend that if things aren't done by
November 15th?
Gary Warren: We either request it and they comply or we go and we draw.
Councilman Johnson: Okay. On the signage. How many staff hours do we think it
' would take to convince the DOT that we're special? We know we are and who pays
for those staff hours?
Gary Warren: We talked to Joel Katz from the Department of Transportation as
Charles referenced in his staff report and to be frank, we think it would take
quite an extreme situation beyond what this is to really allow or to have MnDot
buy into it. I guess I question personally whether is it really going to be
' that much of a problem. I can see a few people may be initially making a wrong
turn but we really haven't had any complaints that I know of of people making
the wrong turns trying to get into SuperAmerica for example or any of that type
I of problem. So I think MnDot may be indirectly saying the same thing that they
really wonder if it really warrants a sign with all the sign clutter that we
have going around.
' Councilman Johnson: I'm not sure how effective the sign's going to be anyway.
Everybody's looking the other way for the place anyway because they're trying to
find it. What I'm getting at is, all the work we've done with MnDot, this
1 sounds like one of those lost causes that we're out, what did it do to the
windmills? Well anyway, he's taking our lances and attacking the windmills here
and I don't want to spend any city money trying to do this.
•
Councilwoman Dimler: I agree.
Mayor Chmiel: Maybe we can have a couple members of Council. We are very
11 inexpensive.
Councilman Johnson: I feel like we've tilted windmills anyway.
Gary Warren: The one who isn't here tonight would be happy to do this.
Councilman Johnson: That's right. We'll nominate Tom to do the work. And have
' Bill come back from New York.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, is there any other discussion?
Councilwoman Dimler: I guess on the parking I had one question too. I know
that's precious but we are including the proper number of handicap spaces aren't
' we?
Paul Krauss: Yes ma'am. That's a building code requirement.
' Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: And as I noted here, that there has been discussions taking place
with neighbors even though it was sparse. It appears as though there weren't
16
II
11
City Council Meeting - October 22, 1990 1
any that are really objecting to what's being proposed. There was also one
other location on site that I talked to one of the residents there, that needs
some cleaning up and I can specifically get that location and I'd like to see
that taken care of. I guess I'd just like to get, give me a clarification of a
standard restaurant. What does that really mean?
Paul Krauss: We asked the City Attorney that very question. '
Roger Knutson: And I have a definition. Restaurant standard. It means an
estabslihmelit's principle business is the sale of food and/or beverages to
customers in a ready to consume state and it's principle method of operation
includes one or both of the following, and I'll summarize this. Sitting at a
table or cafeteria style. Page 1151 of your City Code. That's a standard
restaurant. 1
Mayor Chmiel: Yes, I read it. Thank you. Okay. Any other discussions?
Councilman Johnson: Gary Reed has something to say. ,
Gary Reed: My name is Gary Reed. I just wanted to reiterate that they
shouldn't get an occupancy permit and I know that's part of this whole package, I
until West 64th Street is completely done and the people are satisfied back
there. I guess that last statement needs to be looked at. You know that we are
satisfied when they do complete the work. That it's not just a glazed over job.
That south facing bank that faces our property. . .weeds because they did put some
seed down but there was no topsoil on there. It was just sour dirt that they
bilged out of the draining pond. It was black but that's about it and so
nothing grew on it and it's going to be a problem in the future if they don't
treat it properly or landscape it smooth enough to be mowed. It's going to be
tough to deal with. We just don't want to sit and look at a lot of weeds every
summer growing up on that bank and in the pond too. A ground cover would
probably be acceptable as something that you wouldn't have to mow if it was
something we could, you know just some foliage.
Mayor Chmiel: If you have problems with weeds, we do have a weed inspector. I
I'm the one you call.
Gary Reed: So anyway, I just would like to reiterate that the pond be taken '
care of. The street be completed. The catch basins be put in and that's kind
of a big order by November 15th I think. Thank you.
• Mayor Chmiel: Gary, can you just touch on that? What modifications have to be
done with 64th Street?
Gary Warren: 64th Street basically has to be completed to transition into the ,
existing pavement section. We have a retaining or guardrail that has to be
installed where the pond is very close to the road right on the bend and then
that pond area on that site needs to be re-established. Those are the things
that we were provided a letter on from HRMA stating that they were getting bids
on it and that's what I presume they mentioned earlier here that they're ready
to proceed rapidly with. Bituminous plants close typically at Thanksgiving so
that work really needs to move along. Concerning vegetation and vegetative
cover, we have in the past, when we have dormant seeding and other things where
17 ,
I
City Council Meeting - October 22, 1990
1
you don't know until the springtime if it's going to germinate, we have retained
some security to verify that so it may be appropriate in this case to retain a
certain amount of letter of credit after the planting through the wintertime
here to be assured of germination and proper vegetative restoration.
Mayor Chmiel: Any other discussions? If not, can I have a motion on the
conditional use?
Councilwoman Dimler: Let's see how we want to state it.
Mayor Chmiel: It's located on page 14.
' Councilman Johnson: 2(c)'s gone.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah., 2(c)'s eliminated. Is that right Paul?
' Paul Krauss: Yes sir.
Mayor Chmiel: Now what happens, let me ask a question. What happens if they
get something back in there, then what happens with those 9 stalls that are no
longer going to go in?
Paul Krauss: Anything that they would do that would alter the parking situation
would throw the whole parking situation up for review so we'd have to take it on
a case by case basis.
' Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. Then I move approval of Conditional Use Permit
#90-4 for PJ's Restaurant with conditions 1, 2 minus (c), 3 and 4.
Councilman Johnson: Second.
Mayor Chmiel: And what about going to drop that as far as the sign cost
developer? If we were to pursue it.
Gary Warren: Excuse me?
Councilwoman Dimler: That's not part of this.
' Mayor Chmiel: On the sign? We're not going to have that in there then?
Paul Krauss: If you want to pursue the MnDot sign, there should probably be a
condition added that the applicant will be responsible for charges associated
with the sign.
Gary Warren: My recommendation would be that I don't think that's it's. . . I
think it'd be a waste of effort and time.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. I'll go along with that.
' Councilwoman Disler moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to approve Conditional
Use Permit 190-4 for PJ's Restaurant with the following conditions:
I
18
1
City Council Meeting - October 22, 1990
It
1. A revised landscaping plan shall be submitted providing additional
coniferous trees and other vegetation south of the shopping center and a
letter of credit covering the cost and installation of the trees will be
required and held for one year after planting. It is understood that the
object here is to provide a visual buffer to the south.
2. The proof of parking plan is accepted with the following conditions:
a. Calculations shall be provided verifying internal parking lot
landscaping meets the parking ordinance requirements.
b. A revised landscaping plan shall be submitted providing description of I
internal parking lot landscaping.
c. Deleted. ,
d. No additional restaurants will be permitted in the Seven Forty-One
Crossing Shopping Center. 1
e. The additional parking shown on the proof of parking plan will be
constructed within 6 months of being required by Planning staff. 1
3. All trash shall be stored internally.
4. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, there shall be I
compliance with all conditions previously attached to other approvals on
this site.
All voted in favor and the notion carried. 1
Mayor Chmiel: Second item on the agenda is item 5(b) which is the on-sale
intoxicating liquor license request.
Don Ashworth: Again, this is the application for the same restaurant facility.
We did have the City Attorney review the financial statements of the applicant. I
We also had the Public Safety Department review the history of the applicant to
determine if there were any liquor violations in the past or any other type of
problems that should be noted. We did not find any and accordingly, we're
recommending approval.
Mayor Chmiel: The only thing I see here Jeff, is maybe you'd like to move from 11 Eagan to Chanhassen.
Jeff Irrthum: Gary already brought that up. As another neighbor did. He
offered his property for sale so I don't think that's a problem. No, we have
considered that once we get under construction and get the restaurant up and
moving. Of moving into this area because obviously it's quite a distance to
travel and since I will be running the restaurant and spending a majority of my
time there, it would be very much a good idea to move into the area so that will
be taken seriously.
Mayor Chmiel: Good. '
19 ,
I
11 City Council Meeting - October 22, 1990
11 Councilman Johnson: About 6 months of doing that drive, you'll be real serious.
Mayor Chmiel: Any other discussion?
Councilwoman Dimler: Seeing that he meets all the criteria, I move approval of
item 5(b).
Mayor Chmiel: As recommended with items 1 and 2?
Councilwoman Oimler: Right.
' Councilman Johnson: Second.
Councilwoman Dialer moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to approve the on-sale
' intoxicating liquor license and Sunday sales request for P.J.'s Restaurant
contingent upon the following:
1. Receipt of the pro-rated liquor license fee, a $5,000.00 surety bond and
the liquor liability insurance certificate.
2. That the City Council waive the requirement that the manager of the
' restaurant live in Chanhassen.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
I
PRELIMINARY PLAT REVIEW TO SUBDIVIDE 78.37 ACRES INTO 76 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS
I LOCATED JUST SOUTH OF TIGUA LANE, LAKE RILEY HILLS, JOHN KLINGELHUTZ.
Mayor Chmiel: Item 6, Preliminary Plat review to subdivide 78 acres has been
withdrawn. There are no Council Presentations. Any Adminstrative
' Presentations?
Councilman Johnson: Can we add something? This is ridiculous. I mean it's
' only 8:30.
Mayor Chmiel: We are ready for an adjounment.
' Councilwoman Dialer moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to adjourn the meeting.
All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 8:30
p.m..
' Submitted by Don Ashworth
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
1
1
20
I
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING UNEDITEI
OCTOBER 17, 1990
Chairman Conrad called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m. .
MEMBERS PRESENT: Steve Emmings, Ladd Conrad, Brian Batzli and Joan Ahrens
MEMBERS ABSENT: Tim Erhart, Jim Wildermuth and Annette Ellson
STAFF PRESENT: Paul Krauss, Planning Director; Sharmin Al-Jaff, Planner 1 ;
Charles Folch , Asst. City Engineer and Todd Gerhardt, Asst . City Manager
PUBLIC HEARING:
II PRELIMINARY PLAT REVIEW TO SUBDIVIDE 8.7 ACRES INTO 15 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS
ON PROPERTY ZONED RSF-AND LCOATED SOUTH OF PLEASANT VIEW ROAD AND VINELAND
FOREST PLAT AND EAST OF PEACEFUL LANE, TROENDLE ADDITION.
IIPublic Present:
Name Address
IIDaryl Fortier Fortier and Associates , Applicant
Jules Smith Attorney for Applicant
I Jim & Mary Stasson 6400 Peaceful Lane
Brad Johnson 1001 Lake Lucy Road
Jim Duchene 961 Lake Lucy Road
Craig Weinstock 1101 Lake Lucy Road
Rodd Johnson 1061 Lake Lucy Road
Linda Barrk 960 Lake Lucy Road
Sharon Morgan 940 Lake Lucy Road
II Rob Drake 980 Lake Lucy Road
Richard Wing 3481 Shore Drive
Sharmin Al-Jaff presented the staff report on this item. Chairman Conrad
called the public hearing to order .
Conrad: We 'll open it up for public comments and we'll give the applicant
who is Fortier and Associates and Frank Beddor Jr . , if Daryl you have
anything to say. A presentation or any comments on the staff report. We'll
start it with you .
IIDaryl Fortier: My name is Daryl Fortier . I represent Mr . Beddor . We are
purchasing this property from Mr . Joseph Troendle. I have a larger drawing
here and I believe each member of the commission has received an 8 x 10
copy of this so perhaps it'd be easier if I just show it to the audience
off to the side here so they can see it a bit easier . For the most part we
are in agreement with the staff report. We do have two items that we'd
II like to bring to the Planning Commission's attention. The first addresses
the additional right-of-way off of Pleasant View Road. We understand that
staff is of the opinion that eventually Pleasant View Road will be widened.
II We also understand that the Pleasant View Homeowner Association as well as
other people along the Pleasant View Road have fought this issue before and
it is a highly charged politically. Previously, I believe it was 1981
I there was a proposal to widened the road and that proposal was rejected by
the City Council after lengthy debates. We don't believe that there is any
policy or program in place that would suggest that the widening of the road
11 Planning Commission Meeting
October 17 , 1990 - Page 2
is indeed going to happen . Therefore , Mr . Beddor is not of , he is also PP a so one
of the people , one of the many who are opposed to the widening of the road .
Therefore he would not like to take any actions which would favor widening
the road and that would include the giving of additional right-of-way for
that purpose . He is therefore requesting that that be striken from the
staff report or not be accepted . Be rejected . Whichever word we would
choose . He is not in favor of giving up the extra 7 feet and he would like
to see his property treated the same way any other piece of property along
Pleasant View Road would be treated . Should the City decide that they will
widened Pleasant View Road let's say 3 years from now or 5 years from now ,
this piece of property should be treated no differently than any other
piece of property including Mr . Beddor 's residence across the street . You
would use whatever political consensus and finances are necessary to
achieve to take the land by condemnation or to purchase it and widened the
road.. It will be part of the same battle as the remaining 2 miles
of Pleasant View Road would be . So with that background Mr . Beddor is not
in agreement to granting the 7 foot easement . The other issue we have to
discuss is the Troendle garage which staff correctly points out is 21 1/2
feet from the right-of-way and this would put it in violation of the 30
11 foot setback requirement . We have been unable to reach Mr . VanEeckhout who
is the adjacent property owner but we believe , we have reason to believe
that we may be successful in altering the alignment of the road such that
the 30 foot setback can be required . If I can direct your attention to the
overhead projection , under Block 1 , Lot 2 , which is the Troendle property
where the garage sits , if you will look at where the road comes in from the
east which is the Vineland Estates , you 'll notice that the road does not
I come in at a right angle . It comes in at about a 97 degree angle . We
would like to see that changed to 93 1/2 degrees . If we change it to 93
1/2 degrees , it only affects 7 feet of property , less than 7 feet of
I property on Vineland Estates . Mr . Beddor is willing to buy one of those
lots to help achieve this . We believe Mr . VanEeckhout will cooperate .
This will allow us to make a subtle adjustment to the road such that the
road will not angle but the road will be closer to a true east/west . This
will put Mr . Troendle 's garage 30 feet back from the right-of-way in which
case the issue will disappear . However , we haven 't reached such an
I agreement yet and so as a result we are asking that consideration be given
to a variance , a temporary variance . The reason we are doing this request
and we are going through these extraordinary measures in trying to
accommodate Mr . Troendle is that his folks originally purchased this land .
II He was born on this land and he is now 80 years old and has always lived on
this land . We , Mr . Beddor is granting him a lifetime estate and has agreed
that there will be no development in the four lots off Pleasant View Road
I as long as Mr . Troendle resides in his residence . He would like to make it
as comfortable for Mr . Troendle as possible to see the ultimate development
of his property without impacting his lifestyle or causing him any
II distress . Mr . Troendle does use that barn . I 'm not sure for the exact
purposes . He does park a car in there . he does do a number of hobbies in
there . He is constantly in the yard so we are requesting that a temporary
variance for a non-conforming use of that garage in terms of setbacks be
II granted only so long as Mr . Troendle personally resides in the residence .
If he should become ill and require long term care which would not enable
him to return , we would agree to immediately dismantle that garage or
I remove it . Similarly , if for some reason he were to decide to sell his
piece of property we would similarly agree that it would be immediately
removed . We are asking this only as a consideration for Mr . Troendle 's
1
I
Planning Commission Meeting
October 17, 1990 - Page 3
comfort and care and it really does not affect the development . We will
try our best to get the road moved but failing to do that , we would ask
that the variance be granted. The other items we have are really no longer
issues . I 've not had a chance to review the issue of a shared access off
Pleasant View for Lots 1 and 4 and I 've had a brief chance to review with II
Mr . Beddor the idea of park dedication fees in lieu of parkland . I 've also
talked to staff and they've indicated that they have some concern with Lot
4 of Block 1 which is immediately off Pleasant View . There was concern as
to whether or not this area was filled or whether it was a wetland . We
would like the opportunity to talk to Park and Recreation and consider
giving that lot to Park and Recreation for a vest pocket sort of park . And
depending upon how the wetlands adjacent to it on the Art Owen 's property II
is defined , it may turn out to be a very fine addition as a park . We are
not in favor or opposed to that . We are simply saying that option should
be left open . Park and Recreation may not have a chance to realize that well
would be willing to donate that land . Any questions I 'll be pleased to
answer?
Conrad: Okay . We 'll probably have some later on . We 'll open it up for II
other comments . Are there any?
Jim Stasson: My name is Jim Stasson . I live at 6400 Peaceful Lane . My 11
house is this house right here with the brown roof on the corner . Back
when the Vineland Forest thing was developed, we were never notified
through mail by the City that anything was going on there and as
I understand when it was first developed it really didn 't affect us because'
the access to that was going to go right out to Pleasant View Road . Right
now if you could see , they plan on running this right over here to Peaceful.
Lane and we 're going to have , instead of 3 houses connecting to
Peaceful Lane , an infinite amount of houses. That Peaceful Lane also has a
very wide radius corner which people do not slow down to go around at all .
With 3 houses there it 's not too bad , although Art Owens has a big family II
and Sunday afternoons it can be quite a traffic jam in there . Mr . Beddor
seems to be going to gain out of this and we 're going to pay the bill by
having all the traffic go by our house . We don't really think that 's fair .
He's so far off of Pleasant View Road, you can see his tennis court between
the road and his house . He moved his driveway and took a good half a dozen
trees off of Mr . Troendle 's lot . We're talking big trees and planted them
all on so he doesn't see any of the traffic . I guess I 'd do the same thing!'
if I was in the position to be able to do that . Peaceful Lane is a 27 foot
road . The mouth of Peaceful Lane is 130 feet . If nothing else , we 've
talked to Jim Chaffee when he was the safety guy . We talked to him 2 years
ago the last year . I realize he 's no longer here . He said he would report.
back to us on you know , whether they could square that corner off and we've
never heard anything from him , or from anybody . So thank you .
Conrad: Good comments . Thank you . Other comments .
Rodd Johnson: I 'm Rodd Johnson from 1061 Lake Lucy Road . The issue I see I
at hand for myself and the homeowners along the street that we 're on is
number one , it 's open already back to Nez Perce and we get a lot of traffic
that way . Sure I 'd like to see that closed off at the end but I know that 11
won 't happen necessarily from what I can see . And I 'm not necessarily
opposed to developing the land in here in that I also built a house and the
land was developed but what I have a problem with is that if the , and this
11
11 Planning Commission Meeting
October 17 , 1990 - Page 4
is corrected to what I see , is that they 're going to put it through but I
don 't like the way that it 's going to go through number one . I think it
should go straight across . Due to the fact that if it doesn't go straight
across to Pleasant View , people are going to be more apt to come down the
road that I 'm on now anyway because it 's straight . I mean they 're already
going down it at 40 or 45 which has been witnessed by everybody that 's on
the road . And the second we have emergency vehicle access. I look at that
and think the route in and out of there would be better facilitated to go
straight through. I have to kind of chuckle the way that it 's been all of
a sudden altered around the guy that 's developing his property . It 's not ,
it seems a little like he doesn't want to bear his part of the burden yet
he 's going to make the money on all this and that is kind of outrageous .
Conrad: Thanks . Maybe I should just interject and maybe you weren 't
involved in previous hearings but we have been and maybe you weren 't
notified simply because you may not have been within the notification
distance and we have some standards of who gets notified . I 'm not sure but
that 's a quick guess . In the past when we 've looked at this parcel , other
homeowners in the area have been real concerned where the road 's go and it
wasn 't Mr . Beddor as much as it was other homeowners along Pleasant View .
They weren 't , although it does look like it benefits Mr . Beddor and it
probably does , I think the other homeowners were pretty consistent in terms
of what they wanted . Especially the neighbor that that road would have
gone right next to , within a few feet of his door and I recall that very
clearly feeling rather concerned for a roadway given what he 's lived in for
a while . You probably have the same concerns understandably .
Mary Stasson: But that neighbor was also a renter .
Conrad: I wasn 't aware of that . Yes sir .
Brad Johnson: I 'm Brad Johnson . I live at 1001 Lake Lucy Road . We 're
just concerned about additional lots here . It looks like there 'll be what ,
13 additional lots that would have their only access to the trunk highway
through Lake Lucy Road . ' I don 't believe Lake Lucy Road east of CR 17 was
intended as a major thoroughfare from it 's construction , design and width .
As Rodd already said , we 've got an awful lot of traffic there as it is . I
think it 's unfair that we bear the full burden of the traffic out of both
the current development and this proposed one . I know that they 're showing
11 this road supposedly going through to Peaceful Lane . That 's kind of
presumptious . They don 't own the land. They don 't know that they can
acquire the land . They don 't know that they can develop there even when it
II would be available for acquisition . I 'm sure people on Pleasant View have
some concerns . So do we . The burden should be shared fairly .
Conrad: It's a funny thing how everybody does sell their land and we wish
they didn 't , some of us who 've been around a while but you 're right .
There 's no guarantee that that property will be subdivided but it 's, land
in Chanhassen is extremely valuable .
IIResident: Someday . 20 years from now when my kids have maybe been run
over by one of the fast cars on there . We get a police car through there
Ionce every 3 months .
Conrad: Other comments .
I
11
Planning Commission Meeting
October 17 , 1990 - Page 5
Daryl Fortier : If I can just address some of the concerns of Mr . Brad
Johnson has raised . The extension of the road through Mr . Owens ' property II
is not as presumptious as it may seem . We have already studies grades .
We 've already studied roadways . We 've already studied utilities and we
have submitted much of that material to staff . We 've also more importantly
talked to Mr . Art Owens , the owner of the land who would favor this and he II
is on public record of favoring it .
Resident: When? .I
Daryl Fortier : We talked to Mr . Art Owens within .
Resident: When would this happen?
Daryl Fortier : We don 't know . Mr . Owens is right now tied up . It is
similar to the issue of when does Pleasant View get widened . We don 't
know.
Resident: We live there now . i
Daryl Fortier : Yes . And people are driving down Pleasant View right now
and people are driving down Nez Perce . Nez Perce at points only measures II
22 feet wide and people are flying through there . We believe , now I don 't
want to expand this whole argument on one parcel of development to a whole
city wide issue but we know there are apparent limitations in every city 11
and some of the limitations are particular bottlenecks and I 'm sure the
city will do it 's best to correct them . That 's beyond the scope of this
proposal . The proposal will really reduce density as proposed to other
proposals . Not to you and not to other people but the overall development ,"
it is following in a fairly good comprehensive plan that has been directed .
My whole point of being up here is not to defend all of those issues but
simply to point out to you that Mr . Art Owens is aware of this . Mr . Art II
Owens has been cooperative and he would favor this proposal .
Resident: I noticed you said bottleneck , making sure that there isn 't one .
Wouldn 't it be more of a bottleneck going that route than it would be to go
straight through to Pleasant View?
Krauss: Mr . Chairman, could I address this because there 's some misleading
information in Daryl 's plan and I 'd like to give some background on it .
Conrad: Why don't you address the Peaceful Lane issue too if you can .
Krauss: Yeah , I will . We first became involved with this with the
Vineland Forest plat which is the chunk of land that 's immediately east of 11
the subject site . There were a number of alternative access concepts
looked at for that including cul-de-sacs from Pleasant View . Cul-de-sacs
from Nez Perce . Throughout it all staff advocated a thru street . We
thought from a public safety standpoint , emergency vehicle access and the II
need to provide proper service , since there really is no north/south route
between Powers and the lake , that a thru connection should be made through
there . And we looked at a number of alternatives to do that . Ultimately 11
and correct me if I 'm wrong Ladd , but the Planning Commission wound up
approving that without a recommendation on the street as I recall because
it was such a complex issue . It went up before the City Council and the
11 Planning Commission Meeting
October 17 , 1990 - Page 6
Planning Department with the Engineering Department looked at a variety ets of
alternatives to provide access into that area . There is no particular
order . In this one you can see the dashed line was one of the originally
proposed plats of Vineland Forest . . .cul-de-sac from Pleasant View . Staff
had a problem with this one as did some of the property owners . But this
' alternative had the thru street coming through down to Peaceful Lane . It
was hooked into basically I think what was Art Owens ' plat . Art Owens had
approval to subdivide his property and that plat has since lapsed . But he
apparently did intend to develop at some point in time . Another
alternative here was a loop back basically from Pleasant View to Peaceful
Lane . We didn 't think it accomplished what the City needed to obtain
through here which was a thru movement . Alternative 4 . Here was the thru
' movement directed . . .by Vineland Forest but there was also a link through
here so we didn 't have an inordinate number of dead end streets . They
weren 't cul-de-sacs to provide the residential atmosphere . Ultimately the
one that the City Council went with was Alternative 3 and this is what the
Vineland Forest was built to . There 's a temporary cul-de-sac which I 'm
sure you 're all aware of that sits sort of right over here right now and
there 's a sign on the end of it that says this street is intended to
extended in the future . What we did is lay out a route that made grades
and made some sense from a design standpoint that really is . . .cul-de-sacs ,
we were most concerned with the thru movement , that obtained a reasonable
connection to Pleasant View Road . One difference with the plan that Daryl
showed tonight is the thru movement comes through here . Now it was never
intended to go straight into Peaceful Lane and it was always assumed that
when and if this is done , that this whole intersection needs to be rebuilt
and that question of the 127 foot wide road would be resolved at that point
in time . There is no replat on Art Owens ' property right as I understand
and this is kind of hearsay , that the property is tied up with a tax issue
or something like that or an estate issue . But basically the City Council
adopted a concept that was supposed to guide these decisions as properties
are developed in the future . Is that the only way to serve it? No .
Clearly there were other alternatives but this was talked about for a good
3 months or so and this was the compromise that came out of it . As to
traffic on Pleasant View which was one of the comments that Mr . Fortier
1/ raised , nobody denies the fact that improvements to Pleasant View would be
a long and arduous process and nobody envisions a 4 lane street going
through there necessarily at some point in the future . I believe at one
point in time the extension for the crosstown highway was supposed to come
through there . Around through there but there 's no denying that Pleasant
View Road is a highly inadequate and often unsafe road . It 's underwidth .
The turn radaii are too tight . We 've got over 1 ,000 cars a day using it
today . We 've just gotten the Eastern Carver County Transportation Study
and in a weighted model that basically says that people will realize how
bad a street this is and try to avoid it , even in the weighted model it 's
anticipating that in the next 10 to 15 years , traffic on that street will
grow up to about 2 ,500 trips a day . Now at that point in time , while
you 're not seeking to widened it to 4 lanes , you certainly will be seeking
to widened it so that there 's sufficient pavement width for people to pass
one another in opposite directions and that you can safely take curves .
Nobody 's looking forward to dealing with those issues . We realize it 's
going to be tough but it 's something that somebody sitting in this chair at
some point in the future's going to have to deal with . That gives an
overview of the process .
I
11
Planning Commission Meeting
October 17 , 1990 - Page 7 I/
Conrad: Other comments?
Mary Stasson: I have a comment . Alternative #4 . This one . I live on the
corner of Pleasant View Road and Peaceful Lane and this proposal shares the
access by everybody . Pleasant View Road which I 'm a part of , Peaceful Lane
which I 'm also a part of and Nez Perce and Lake Lucy Road . Here I see this
is the perfect way to go because the burden is shared by everybody in this
proposal . I
Conrad: I think the concern at that time , and there were a lot of
concerns . A lot of different opinions . What a lot of residents along
Pleasant View were concerned with was to get the access as close to CR 17 II
as possible .
Mary Stasson: But see the thing is , if they want to go down Pleasant View
Road , they 're still going to go up Peaceful Lane and then they 're going to II
turn and go down Pleasant View Road . You 're talking just a minimal amount
of space .
Conrad: That was their opinion . To get the access as close to CR 17 .
Mary Stasson: They 're still going to go down Pleasant View Road . . . I
Brad Johnson: . . .that stretch can be what , a quarter mile if not a half
mile at the most? I
Conrad: But the other end of Pleasant View as it dumps out on TH 101 had
the same . The residents had the same concern . Same exact concern and I
heard both those .
Resident: The traffic I don 't believe would be going that direction .
They 're going to go out to CR 17 . 1
Krauss: No , that 's not true really . You 've got to realize that
Crosstown Highway is going to be extended to TH 101 in the next two years
and that 's going to introduce a lot of movement to the east through there.
they 're going to get there we frankly don't know . Pleasant View Road's
the only road that goes there .
Brad Johnson: I acknowledge that you did the Vineland Forest . Those of us!'
on Lake Lucy, we are naive . We saw the way they were doing things and we
thought that street was going through there . It was at one time . We
didn 't know anything about these processes so we weren't here . We were
quite upset when we found out it wasn't and we realized it was a little
late then . We don 't really . . .
Jim Stasson: Also at that time the way this is shown on Art 's property ,
that was already done . We knew about that and okay we 're going to have 15
more houses on there . We can live with that but now when you connect it
all up and you get rid of the other access to Pleasant View Road , we 've got,
50-100 houses coming by now. Or after that .
Mary Stasson: Our driveway , it comes out right here . I
I
11 Planning Commission Meeting
October 17 , 1990 - Page 8
Jim Stasson: You 're looking at t he wrong side . We 're right here . Our
driveway comes out right there and the people that come around this corner ,
like I said before . They 'll come around it at 30-40 mph .
Mary Stasson: This is 130 feet across here .
Jim Stasson: Right now there 's 3 houses accessing that . With 50 or 60
houses accessing that , my dog won 't be safe more than 2 steps off the
driveway .
Mary Stasson: We have a 30 foot driveway that empties out on that road .
Conrad: As Mr . Krauss said , if development goes through that road has to
change . Period . In terms of access to Pleasant View . It just has to and
the City 's committed to doing that . It can't stay the way it is .
Mary Stasson: We 're not going to be able to get out of our driveway .
That 's what 's going to happen to us and that 's why we 've already been
trying to get ahold of Jim Chaffee to have him come out there and look at
the situation for us . Even the way it sits right now .
Jim Stasson: You mentioned that this , Nez Perce is 22 feet on the corner?
1 Krauss: No , I never .
Jim Stasson: Where it ties into Lake Lucy? Right down here .
Krauss : Oh!
Jim Stasson: Is that 22 feet?
Krauss: Yes . Nez Perce is an undersized street . Lake Lucy Road was built
to a better standard . Nez Perce road and that whole neighborhood to the
southeast of there , I think we 're all painfully aware of the fact that it
was built with inadequate roads . It was buit without storm sewer and the
11 utility systems are old and beginning to fail and something 's going to have
to give in there but that is the only thru street in that neighborhood .
Brad Johnson: Have you done a study on how many cars are going on it now?
Jim Stasson: That street wasn 't there until what , 3 years ago .
I Jim Duchene: 2 1/2 years ago when they put Lake Lucy thru . There 's
another street down , Carver Beach Road which is down . I 'm Jim Duchene on
961 Lake Lucy Road and what I guess I 'm opposed to is the traffic that
II we 're getting back from the other side of Nez Perce . We 're getting a great
deal of traffic feeding out onto our road our front . It is a bad corner .
If you haven't been down there , 22 feet . They come around on probably a 90
degree corner . It 's a problem . I don 't know . I think the City ought to
I look at that . I think it should be closed off . I think they should take
that road out and still leave a fire lane through there . It wasn't there
before . We 're feeding now these other homes . We have a new development
and I 'm not sure how many lots are back there .
Krauss : 15 . In this plat?
1
11
Planning Commission Meeting
October 17 , 1990 - Page 9
Jim Duchene: No . In the previous one?
Krauss: Oh , in Vineland was about 21 but 2 of those accessed out
to Pleasant View .
Jim Duchene: 21 . We're talking another 15 plus we 're feeding everyone
else off Nez Perce now off of Lake Lucy Road . I have not seen any traffic
studies . I don 't know if you have as far as cars on Lake Lucy Road but
being out there I do know and the homeowners that are here , we 're all here I
tonight . Every home that 's on that street is represented here . We have
one missing? And it 's a problem and that 's why we 're here in front of the 11
Planning Commission .
Conrad: Okay , thanks .
Jim Stasson: Lake Lucy tends to become a dragstrip . You 've got a 30 mph I
speed limit . You 're got lower speed limits on roads that are wider around
here. They come off Nez Perce and they , especially the younger people , and
they are really flying . •
Brad Johnson: Because it goes downhill . They have a good time on there .
Then they go up . . .S curve before it gets to CR 17 and they 're all over the II
place there . Then last spring when Vineland Forest was in , all the heavy
trucks were coming through before the road restrictions were off fully
loaded . Our street 's going to be torn up . You put development . . .
Conrad: Anything else? Is there a motion to close the public hearing?
Emmings moved, Batzli seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in 11
favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
Conrad: Joan . Questions? Comments? I
Ahrens: Isn 't the option of having Nez Perce Road run down to Pleasant
View Road a dead issue anyway because of the plan? I
Krauss: It 's certainly a dead issue through the Vineland Forest plat .
That plat is over and done . We have no capacity to get that right-of-way
save buying 2 lots I suppose . i
Ahrens: So the only access to Pleasant View Road is in this fashion that's
shown on this photograph that we have in our plans? Is that what you're II
saying?
Krauss: Yes .
Ahrens: Unless they purchase these Lots 1 and 2 and run the . . .
Krauss: At this point in time running the street north through Vineland II
Forest is not possible from the standpoint of the City being able to get
the right-of-way through the platting process . That 's all platted
property . I suppose theoretically you could run that connection over on II
the Troendle property but I haven't looked at the grades over there . If
memory serves they 're not that bad. But if you move at all to the west of
Planning Commission Meeting
October 17 , 1990 - Page 10
Troendle 's house , you start falling off into that low wet area which makes
it impossible to make the road connection .
Ahrens: What about this low wet area on Lot 4 of Block 1? What do you
think about his proposal to turn that over to the City for parkland?
Krauss: The Park Board 's already reviewed this proposal and does not want
the property . I don 't know that they were asked specifically about that
lot but traditionally taking individual lots that happen to be conveniently
located for a developer is not , that does not fit the bill for the Park
Board. That 's pocket parks . Are interesting design features in urban
areas but what they become in communities like ours is a very difficult
maintenance problem and they don 't serve enough people to make them
worthwhile . Consequently there 's a policy that the City 's funds and
efforts should be devoted to more significant facilities .
Ahrens: I have a lot of questions about that wetland in there as I
mentioned to you earlier . There seems to be a question about whether or
not it 's even a wetland , from what you said . And I 've noticed over the
last few years trucks bringing fill in there and it was a low area . I mean
it looked like a wetland to me before they started filling it in . Can you
shine some light on that? What is going on with that wetland?
11 Krauss: A little bit . For more extensive report I 'll really have to get
Jo Ann Olsen to give it to you because she 's been involved with that
I property for some time . But Mr . Owens ' has been filling that property .
The City 's been going out there and having it stopped for at least the last
year and a half to 2 years . That area was never pristine wetland . As
I understand it , it took on wetland characteristics when drainage out of
the area was altered and there 's been some indication that the City may
have altered it somehow during a construction project , whatever . But since
the water 's impounded now , it 's causing wetland vegetation to spring up .
The wetland proper or the more significant part of the wetland does not
truly fall on the Troendle property but to the extent that it does , it 's
being preserved or improved if you will into a retention pond that will
have some water in it . We still have an issue with the fill on Owens '
II property . There was a hope that it would have been rectified . I believe
Mr . Owens wanted to have some lots there with his plat and staff always
said that that 's where your drainage goes and even if it wasn't a wetland ,
it 's a retention pond so there was always an issue there and it was one
that was supposed to have been resolved as I understood it when he came in
for his final plat but in the event he never did .
IIAhrens: How was he going to resolve that?
Krauss: At this point I 'm honestly not sure . I 'd need to get updated by
my staff .
Conrad: Joan , it was not an officially mapped wetland but it sure was one .
IIAhrens : Well that 's what I thought . I 've driven, by it and before he
started filling it it sure looked like a wetland.
IIConrad: It always was what was mapped Paul? Things over an acre and a
half I think . This might have been under so it wasn't mapped. It was a
1
11
Planning Commission Meeting
October 17 , 1990 - Page 11
1
wetland .
Ahrens: The City 's asking for a 7 feet of right-of-way along Pleasant View"
Road and the developer has said that they 're not going to go along with
that at all . I imagine that , I mean I don't know how , if Pleasant View
Road is going to in the future be improved , I don 't know how we can approve
a plat without an allowance for the additional right-of-way along Pleasant
View Road . Do you see how that can happen?
Krauss: Well it 's obviously our recommendation that we do take the 7 foot
right-of-way . As I said earlier , we believe that there is a significant
traffic volume on that street now . We expect that to grow regardless of II
everybody 's efforts to keep it low .
Ahrens: Didn't we require that further up on Pleasant View? I
Krauss: There was right-of-way that was taken off a subdivision across the
street that was for Mr . Beddor 's son . I don't recall exactly how much it
was . Christmas Acres .
Ahrens: And also further east .
Batzli : Did we take it for Vineland?
Krauss: I don't believe , no. We did not take it for Vineland . I
Ahrens: Not for Vineland but for the one that 's on the other end . The
three lots that was , what was that? It starts where Pleasant View curves 11
and goes down the hill . There 's some lots being developed right in there
where it 's going to be divided into 3 lots .
Krauss: I think that 's the Christmas Acres . That 's across the street . I
Ahrens: No , no . It 's way down at the other end. Anyway .
Gerhardt: The east end . I
Jay Johnson: She 's on the other side of the lake . All the way on the
other side . I
Ahrens: Right . Where we just divided those 3 lots .
Gerhardt: Fox Chase? That one? I
Krauss: That 's next door to this .
Jay Johnson: North Lotus Lake Park .
Batzli : Right . Yeah . The one across from the North Lotus Lake Park which
is what Jay just said . Right across the street there where they subdivided
those . The guy that had the water in his basement continuously .
Krauss: Oh , oh, oh . By the street that . I
Batzli : Well those right there and then across the street again.
Planning Commission Meeting
October 17 , 1990 - Page 12
Krauss: Yes . We did take extra right-of-way off of that , yes . The one
where we had the city lift station down by the lake?
Batzli : Yeah . Those and directly west .
Krauss: Baldur Avenue?
Batzli : Yes .
Krauss: Sathre Addition .
Ahrens: I mean that 's a nothing isn 't it? That 's what I thought . You
know it seems to me that Mr . Troendle 's also making a lot of money off this
development . I kind of feel like with all the new proposals that the
developer has brought in tonight , I feel like it 's real difficult to
discuss this . There 's a road change that 's being proposed and a slight
road alteration and he wants a variance . And the 7 foot right-of-way . . .
Conrad: But that road alteration would eliminate the variance .
Ahrens: The what?
Conrad: The road alteration would eliminate the variance .
Ahrens: I have more comments but I agree that the sight lines on Peaceful
Lane are terrible and I realize that the City does intend to fix that road
but boy , it 's bad now .
Batzli : Why didn 't we take 7 feet or additional at Vineland there right
11 next door to the east?
Krauss: Commissioner , we 're really not certain . I think it falls into the
category of being an oversight . I mean things were so focused on which end
you 're coming in on and it was running in a different direction from there .
I don 't offer that as an excuse but just I think it was overlooked . I 'd
also have to say too that the data that we 're using now for the traffic
forcast and it comes out of the Eastern Carver County Transportation Study
and that 's only been completed and delivered to the City in the last 3
weeks .
Ahrens: When was that approved?
Krauss: The Carver County Transportation Study?
Ahrens: No , no . Vineland .
11 Krauss: It was approved in something like November of last year .
Batzli : On the plat it shows a portion of Pleasant View Road to be vacated
on one of the maps here of the plans . Is that assuming I would suppose
that they don't have to give up the additional 7 feet? What is that for?
That 's Lot 4 , Block 1 .
Krauss: Oh, I see what you 're saying . I don 't know . That 's probably a
presumption by the applicant that they were going to maintain existing
I
I
Planning Commission Meeting
October 17, 1990 - Page 13
right-of-way Daryl? We 're looking to maintain 80 feet throughout . Now
that 's 40 foot on either side of the center line and I believe we have a 61
footer there so it 's traditional that you take 7 foot on either side . We
would seek to , assuming the condition is upheld , we would seek to rectify
that . I
•
Batzli : How long is this Troendle Way cul-de-sac?
Krauss: It 's approximately 400 feet . Well from Nez Perce it 's I
approximately 400 feet .
Batzli : What 's our normal guideline on that just out of curiousity? 1
Krauss: We 've traditionally used 500 feet . There 's been a lot of them
approved between 500 and 1 ,000. Until the connection's put through to ■
Peaceful Lane or to Pleasant View , this is quite a lengthy cul-de-sac �1
because you 've got to add in all the distance back to Lake Lucy Road . The
only reason we 're somewhat comfortable with that is that so much effort 's
been put into the concept of how this is ultimately going to be connected II
that we view this as a temporary situation .
Batzli : Is there any problem from staff 's point of view in any of the
realignments of the roads regarding lot sizes after it 's either widened
and/or adjusted?
Krauss: The proposal that Mr . Fortier brought to you tonight? I
Batzli : That as well as the proposal , I think the cul-de-sac road isn 't
wide enough as I understand it .
Krauss: Oh , no . Those lots are all oversized . There 's plenty of give
with that . The lot in Vineland Forest where they would propose to swap
land if they swung that road a little further south , that 's an 18 ,000
square foot lot so there 's probably room for that too. We 'd want to see
how this layout occurs that Mr . Fortier 's proposing . It looks reasonable .
We don 't want to introduce too many curves into this street though because,
it 's already somewhat curvalinear and this is supposed to be a connecting
street . The more curves you introduce , the less utility it will have .
Batzli : I would be much more in favor if it 's possible to realign the
street a little bit than provide a variance even if it 's just for lifetime
estate on that particular structure . If I had my druthers . I
Folch: Just a correction on that Troendle Way. The actual right-of-way
width on the street portion at 50 feet is currently adequate . It 's just 11
the cul-de-sac , the radius of the cul-de-sac that 's being increased to 60
feet .
Batzli : Okay . My other questions had to do with whether Lot 4 is a
wetland or not . I guess we 've already discussed that a little bit and
having been through staff 's study of the various ways to have traffic flow
through these potential developments , I guess I didn 't expect the problem
tonight . It sounds like until the road goes through to Pleasant View and
until they improve that particular corner , there may be some problems and I
don 't know what we do about that in the meantime .
JPlanning Commission Meeting
October 17 , 1990 - Page 14
Conrad: Problems where?
11 Batzli : Regarding traffic both loading up south and as far as eventually
coming out onto Pleasant View from , this small route here .
Conrad: Is that a concern with Nez Perce traffic?
Batzli : Yeah .
' Conrad: Okay . Steve?
Emmings: I support the recommendation that 's been made by staff . Just a
comment on the issues that we 've got that have been brought up tonight . At
least the ones on that proposal . There 's no doubt in my mind that we
should require the additional right-of-way . We have the right to do that
as a condition of the plat and it should be done . As far as treating Mr .
Beddor the same as everybody else . Everybody else isn 't subdividing or
we 'd be requiring it of them too I 'm sure . And with regard to the , the only
other one that kind of caught my attention is the garage that 's located on
I Lot 2 on Block 1 . I guess I 'd make a proposal or there shouldn 't be any
variance granted . That 's clear to me but I think maybe , it 's my
understanding Mr . Troendle is what , 80 years old? I think that we could
make an accommodation here that would be reasonable and I what I 'd propose
is that we simply say that either that the garage be removed or relocated
or the road will be adjusted to create the necessary setback . And that the
timing of that , that will be done prior to the issuance of a building
permit for Lot 2 , Block 1 or when Mr . Troendle is no longer a full time
resident of that property , whichever occurs first . I think I could live
with that , to not change his property until he 's no longer living there .
Otherwise I don 't have anything else .
Batzli : But I mean the road , if it 's adjusted will happen before anything
develops so it 's an either or really . Either the road is adjusted or then
you don 't issue a building permit for Lot 2 . Is that what you said?
Emmings: Right . That 's essentially right . I guess I just said that
either you move the building or you move the road . If you have to move the
building , you do it before there 's a building permit or when he 's no longer
living there full time . I don't know how we'd ever know but that 's a
separate issue .
Conrad: That 's staff 's problem . Anything else?
Emmings: No . I guess as far as the location of the road , that 's done .
Resident: There 's always alternatives .
Emmings : As far as the road goes , that's done as far as what we 're doing
tonight . It 's a non-issue and what I was going to say was I think you have
some valid concerns but I think they ought to be addressed to the City
Council .
Jim Stasson: You mean the existing roads or are you talking about the
proposed roads?
t
11
Planning Commission Meeting
October 17 , 1990 - Page 15
Emmings: I 'm talking about Nez Perce the way it 's lined up to go . If
you 're interested in . . .
Jim Stasson: You mean outside of the development? Where are you talking
about? I
Emmings: The road , as Nez Perce is designed to go through to Peaceful
Lane , that has been determined by the City Council and if you 've got issues"
on that , address it to the City Council .
Brad Johnson: Are you saying that that part over Art Owens ' property is a
done deal? I
Emmings: This path , as I understand it , this path for Nez Perce .
Batzli : It 's not platted . I
Krauss: There 's a conceptual alingment . It only becomes effective when
their property is platted .
Jim Stasson: So it 's not done .
Emmings: Okay , it 's not done . Then don 't address your concerns to the
City Council . I mean I 'm telling you that if you have concerns , this isn 't
the forum for them . This is not an issue in this plat . This fits with the
conceptual plan of the road.
Brad Johnson: We don 't think the plat should be approved unless that issues
is taken care of .
Rodd Johnson: This plat is still open . He can still access the Pleasant
View Road right through . I
Mary Stasson: Lots 1 , 2 , 3 and 4 .
Batzli : What I think , we get our guidance from the City Council and they II
have looked at this and reviewed it and basically given the guidance to us
that conceptually this is what they want to see and for us to tell the City
Council now that no , we don't like that . Do something else . We probably II
won 't take that step because they told us what they think they want to see .
Mary Stasson: But when do we get a chance to speak? I
Batzli : You 'll get a chance to go to the City Council when this goes up to
the City Council and that 's really , I think you have to get your group back"
together and address your concerns to them because they're the ones that
told us this is what they want to see .
Brad Johnson: So what is the purpose for tonight then? I
Rodd Johnson: Why are we all here for an hour and a half?
Jim Stasson: If you guys don 't have anything to say about it . I
i
11 Planning Commission Meeting
October 17 , 1990 - Page 16
I
Batzli : Well we have a lot to say about a lot of issues but on this
particular issue , I don 't think we 're going to change what the City Council
has told us they want to see .
Conrad: I 'm interested . I think we have our input so I guess I 'll reflect
a different opinion . I feel comfortable with the alignment that was
proposed and only because we struggled with it for so long . I think it 's
unfortunate , and there weren 't any good solutions . I think most people
' that live in the area don't want that area developed at all , as I would
guess you wouldn 't but on the other hand it is . Flat out it is and I think
we struggled with that . I think the alternatives that I heard mentioned
tonight were not acceptable to me before and they still aren 't . That
doesn 't mean we explored other alternatives . I guess I 'm interested from a
Planning Commission standpoint . Not that the City Council decree that this
is the road alignment . They did to a degree do that . I 'm curious if
anybody feels that you 'd like to reopen that issue and suggest to the City
Council that they reopen the issue .
Emmings: I can tell you for me I think that this is the plan they adopted
is a good one because it doesn 't put another entrance out onto a road that ,
out onto Pleasant View . So I preferred this one .
11 Conrad: And that was my opinion when we looked at that . I think two roads
and especially the straight that would have connected the Carver Beach area
and the strip straight across to Pleasant View I thought was a negative
alternative . This is a better alternative as I see it . This is just me
speaking . Brian . Joan . Do you have a feeling to want to open up or to
recommend that the City Council looks at road alignment or are you
11 comfortable or do you not know enough at this point in time to even , you
may not have been around . I don 't know . Brian , you were around . Joan , I
don 't think you were .
Batzli : Of the options that we have remaining since Vineland went in and
the road is where it 's at , I think that this is the best alternative that
I 've seen . I mean sure there 's probably other alternatives and I thought
11 we addressed a fair number of them and this was a reasonable alternative at
that time .
Ahrens: I agree . I think that we should be directing as much traffic as we
can as quickly as possible onto CR 17 .
Conrad: Just a comment . Paul , this neighborhood obviously was not
involved when the other neighborhoods along Pleasant View were and they 're
thinking they got the short straw in this one.
11 Brad Johnson: How about know?
Conrad: Don 't be so negative . We 're trying.
IIBrad Johnson: I 'm sorry . It 's our street .
Conrad: I know it is . I empathize . I know what you 're feeling . What was
11 the reason they weren 't involved?
I
11
Planning Commission Meeting
October 17 , 1990 - Page 17
Krauss: I honestly don 't recall who was notified. I know that we had some
comments from people on Peaceful Lane because . . . I certainly got phone
calls from someone .
Conrad: I thought we did too . I
Brad Johnson: I called after I found out what was going on but that was
after it was already going to City Council . Before we even had a shot at
coming in here and saying . This was done in November .
Krauss: The final plat was approved in November .
Conrad: Okay , it might have been.. Mr . Emmings gave you. some input and
probably nothing that you 're really thrilled with . I guess I 'm telling you
from my position I 'm pretty comfortable given all the negatives and
positives and some of the things , requirements we were trying to do and
really it 's hard to reflect back months ago . But I 'm not uncomfortable
with this road alignment . I think you really should be at the City Council
meeting to express your concern. They did say that this is what they 'd
like . I don 't say that we 'll just dump it off on them . I 'm telling you
that I feel comfortable with this road alignment as I looked at the
alternatives many months ago but I think you 've got to stay , as I prefaced II
before , if you all go in with the numbers you had tonight , they may pay
some attention to you to reopen the issue . Okay? Some other questions .
Block 1 , Lot 4 . That 's a buildable lot?
Krauss: Frankly Mr . Chairman I don 't believe it is . It 's very tight which
is why we 've recommended a shift of lot lines to increase the building pad .
And some of that pond is being excavated out and it 's also possible to
shift that excavation somewhat further to the south.
Conrad: So , okay . I missed that . I
Ahrens: How could you adjust the lot line of 3 and 4 . . .buildable. It
looks like the only corner that 's buildable .
Krauss: No , not between 3 and 4 . Between 1 and 4 . We require 90 foot of
width and that lot 1 is 140 . Basically you skew the property line so that
it runs to the northeast . I
Conrad: Help me Paul . Where 's the recommendation that we do what you just
said? I 'm scanning real fast and maybe I just can 't pick it up . I
Ahrens: You talk about it in the report .
Krauss: I 'm sorry , it should be in there . I know we talked about it in II
the text .
Conrad: Yeah, it 's not there so I don't know that I can approve that
unless there 's a motion to claim it an unbuildable lot right now until it's
proved that a building pad could meet setback . I too , I don't have any
problem with the 7 foot requirement in the staff report . That 's the way
it 's got to be . It 's an absolute . We 'll take it . Now's the time to do
it . Not that I 'm really wild about expanding Pleasant View to tell you the
truth but I think now 's the time to do it and that 's not even a debate in
11 Planning Commission Meeting
October 17 , 1990 - Page 18
my mind . I ag ree with Ste ve in terms of his motion . I think that road
should be realigned to try to meet the setbacks . I don 't know , I could
never say what you said but I hope you can reconstruct what you said Steve .
And from the neighborhood standpoint , we 'll look into finding and Paul , can
you get back to me next , 2 weeks from now . Is that a public hearing for
the Comprehensive Plan? What 's 2 weeks from now , anything?
Krauss: It should be a regular meeting .
Conrad: Okay . I 'd like to know why this group was not involved . Every 2
weeks we come here and we talk to our neighbors like yourselves and there 's
always somebody saying he wasn 't informed . As Paul says , the first thing
he learned in planning school is the neighborhoods come in and say why
wasn 't I informed of this so it 's pretty standard but it appears to me that
they 're are a lot of you here that were not informed so I 'd kind of like to
11 look and find that out . It may not help you , you know right now and you 're
sort of at the end of a process which is unfortunate . I think if the
Plesant View owners that were here in the other time periods , they 're
' probably double your numbers that were here talking about they don't want
this at all . Maybe very similar to what you 're saying and then okay , if
we 've got to have it , how do we minimize the traffic coming from Carver
Beach? How do we minimize the traffic going down Pleasant View? How are
we safe? How are we this? How are we that? Here 's what we came up with .
I know you don 't like it but that 's what we tried to , we tried to satisfy
some of those needs and now you have another one . I think the only other
thing I can say is that the road access out to Peaceful Lane will be
improved to be acceptable when that link is made . It would be acceptable
to according to standards . There couldn 't be any other way . That may not
feel comfortable either but it would have to be .
11 Resident: . . .would that be south where it used to run down CR 17?
11 Krauss: Yes .
Resident: That was looked at?
Krauss: There 's actually a stub right-of-way that comes up from Lake Lucy
inbetween two homes .
Resident: They did look at that?
Krauss: Yeah . As I recall the grade was too significant coming through
there .
Brad Johnson: That 's our big problem. . .Art Owens property . The access
to Pleasant View . And to approve this thing now when that is , people can
say what they want but nobody here knows when that 's going to happen .
Conrad: That 's true . Yeah . We have situations like that all the time .
1 Is that good or bad? It 's probably bad but there 's no perfect way to solve
that problem . You can 't hold up somebody 's right to develop unless you can
prove that it 's unsafe .
11 Rodd Johnson: When you talk about being unsafe . . .Nez Perce and Lake Lucy
corner that we 're talking about that was 22 feet and I believe . . .
I
I
Planning Commission Meeting
October 17 , 1990 - Page 19
Krauss: No . A normal right-of-way which is the land we own is 50 feet .
Charles , normal pavement width is what curb to curb now?
Folch: It is 28 feet face of curb to face of curb on a minor residential
street . I
Rodd Johnson: Is Lake Lucy a minor residential street?
Jim Stasson: Lake Lucy it would be okay but it 's that Nez Perce corner . . . 1
( There was a tape change at this point in the meeting . )
Conrad: I think the comments from Mr . Fortier , I understand them but I
don 't agree with them . I do agree with Steve , your comments and I don 't
want Lot 4 , Block 1 to be a buildable lot at this time until it 's proven toll
be buildable . So how do we handle that one Paul?
Krauss: Well I 'd add a condition . It was an omission on our part because
under the grading/drainage section we do discuss the fact that that lot is 11
marginally buildable and there 's no rear yard for the homes should they
build one there. Put in a condition to the effect that the lot lines and
grading shall either be reconfigured to enlarge the buildable area on that II
lot or it should be combined with Lot 1 to make a single larger lot .
Conrad: Okay . Any other comments? Is there a motion? I
Emmings: I 'll move that the Planning Commission recommend approval of
Subdivision #90-15 of the Troendle Addition as shown on the plans dated
"Received September 17 , 1990" subject to the conditions in the staff
report . 1 thru 13 as presented in the staff report and then an alteration
to 11 as follows . That one will read that the garage barn on Lot 2 , Block
1 will be removed or relocated or the road shall be adjusted so that no
variances are required . If it is necessary to remove or relocate the
garage or barn , that shall be done prior to the issuance of a building
permit for Lot 2 , Block 1 or when Mr . Troendle is no longer a full time
resident of that property , whichever should occur first . The balance of II
that 11th condition will stay the way it is . Then add a condition 14 that
would state the following . . That Lot 4 , Block 1 appears to be an
unbuildable lot . That the applicant must either adjust the lot lines or
otherwise combine the lot with the other 3 lots in Block 1 or in some other
way insure it 's buildability to the satisfaction of the City staff .
Conrad: Okay , thanks Steve . Is there a second? I 'll second it . Any 1
discussion.
Batzli : Yeah . I 'd like to make two minor amendments to the plan and the ,
third point of the 8th condition I 'd like to add the following sentence .
This is after the additional 7 feet of right-of-way . No vacation of
Pleasant View Road shall occur notwithstanding the plans submitted by
applicant . And then the 10th condition I 'd cross off , will be accepted and
insert the words , shall be required from the applicant .
Conrad: Would you modify your motion? I
Emmings: Sure . I
IIPlanning Commission Meeting
October 17 , 1990 - Page 20
Conrad: Any other discussion?
' Batzli : Yeah . I think that that 's the first motion I 've ever heard you
second and I was really impressed .
Emmings: I 'll second that .
Emmings moved, Conrad seconded that the Planning Commission recommend
approval of Subdivision #90-15 for Troendle Addition as shown on the plans
11 dated September 17, 1990, subject to the following conditions:
1 . A tree removal plan shall be submitted for Lots 1 , 2 and 3 , Block 1
prior to issuance of a building permit . Clear cutting , except for the
house pad and utilities will not be permitted .
2 . The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the city and
provide the city with the necessary financial securities to guarantee
proper installation of the improvements .
3 . The applicant shall obtain and comply with all conditions of the
Watershed District permit .
4 . The developer shall dedicate the utilities within the right-of-way for
permanent ownership .
5 . The cul-de-sac on Troendle Way shall have a radius of 60 feet and the
street name shall be modified to either Troendle Circle or Troendle
Court to eliminate any confusion in applying it as a through street .
Final street plans shall be developed for approval by the City
11 Engineering Department .
6 . The applicant shall install erosion control silt fence around the
' ponding area until such time that turf is established . Turf or sod
shall be placed behind all curbing .
7 . Shared driveway access off of Pleasant View Road for Lots 1 and 4 ,
Block 1 is required and a cross access easement shall be provided .
This common section of the driveway shall be constructed to a 7 ton
design paved to a width of 20 feet and have a maximum grade of 10% .
8 . Provide the following easements and rights-of-way:
a . The drainage and utility easements along the westerly property line
of Lots 9 , 10 and 11 , Block 2 and the ponding area on Lots 3 and 4 ,
Block 1 that are shown on the grading and erosion control plan
shall also be shown on the preliminary plat accordingly .
b . The acquisition of a drainage easement through the property
immediately west of Lots 3 and 4 , Block 1 will be required for the
discharge of the detention pond .
c . Additional 7 feet of right-of-way along Pleasant View Road . No
11 vacation of Pleasant View Road shall occur notwithstanding the
plans submitted by applicant .
I
I
Planning Commission Meeting
October 17 , 1990 - Page 21
9. The applicant shall submit storm sewer calculations verifying size and
capacity of the storm sewer system and ponding basin . Eight inch
sanitary sewer at a minimum rate of 0 .4% shall be constructed on this II
subdivision and service locations for all of the lots on this plat
shall be shown for final submittal review. The final plans and
specifications shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and II
approval .
10. Park and trail fees will be required from the applicant in lieu of
parkland dedication .
11 . The garage barn on Lot 2 , Block 1 will be removed or relocated or the 11
road shall be adjusted so that no variances are required . If it is
necessary to remove or relocate the garage or barn, that shall be done
prior to the issuance of a building permit for Lot 2 , Block 1 or when II
Mr . Troendle is no longer a full time resident of that property ,
whichever should occur first . Lot 2 , Block 1 shall be serviced by
Nez Perce Drive and the gravel driveway to Pleasant View Road shall be 11
removed .
12 . The temporary cul-de-sac should be provided with an easement to
accommodate the temporary pavement and be provided with a barricade
equipped with a sign indicating the road will be extended in the
future .
13. Lots 1 and 11 , Block 2 are required to have access from Troendle Way .
14 . Lot 4 , Block 1 appears to be an unbuildable lot . The applicant must
either adjust the lot lines or otherwise combine the lot with the other"
three lots in Block 1 or in some other way insure it 's buildability to
the satisfaction of the City staff .
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously .
Conrad: This goes to the City Council on the 5th. Are you telling them
that? Okay . I think you 've got to go into them with some specifics . It 's
pretty characteristic . What you said tonight is pretty standard for what
we hear from neighbors on a lot of things . If you want a particular road
alinement , if you don't like that one you know, you should have a
recommendation that says City Council we would like you to do this . We
would like you to study the traffic patterns from Nez Perce . It 's
dangerous now and we can prove it . You 've got to go in with some solid
stuff because we hear this all the time . They really were the ones that II
did set this alignment in terms of the general direction and I think
they 're the ones that can take another look into it . So thank you and
don 't stop your interest .
Mary Stasson: Will they again look at the safety?
Conrad: I 'm not sure . It was a major issue of all other homeowners who I
came in at previous times and safety is an issue with the Planning staff .
We just don 't like to do things that don 't make sense . This is not a high
intensive use of that land. It 's a pretty low intensive use . You know if
we were talking about 12 ,000 square foot things and high rises and what
have you , we 're not talking a whole lot of intensity here . Even though
Planning Commission Meeting
October 17 , 1990 - Page 22
I
it's far more than what 's acceptable to you because you 're dealing with , it
is . It 's not out of character with what Chanhassen is becoming . And so
it's , the safety issue was a concern before as we made that link between
the Carver Beach area and Pleasant View because it was simply a straight
shot across and that was the concer . It was going to be a dumping ground
for , you know it 's just going to be the quick route to the Crosstown . Paul
is telling us tonight , it 's still going to be a quick route to the
Crosstown no matter what so you know , we dealt with that information
before . Well , I just wanted to talk to you a little bit .
Brad Johnson: Lake Lucy now is a dumping ground and a quick shot for
everyone down on Nez Perce so , talking about safety , that corner is bad . I
think that 's what our homeowners are concerned about .
Conrad: I appreciate you coming in .
Brad Johnson: Is there a record that goes to City Council?
Conrad: They get this . We have a City Council member here tonight so .
Emmings: They get verbatim Minutes also .
'
Batzli : Tune in every Saturday and watch the video broadcast of this
thing .
PUBLIC HEARING:
MODIFICATION OF THE PLAN FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 2-1 . THE
PURPOSE OF THE MODIFICATION IS TO AUTHORIZE ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENT TO
AUDUBON ROAD.
Todd Gerhardt presented the staff report on this item . Chairman Conrad
called the public hearing to order .
Batzli moved, Emmings seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in
favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
Conrad: Steve?
' Emmings: I don 't have any comments .
Conrad: Brian?
Batzli : I don't have any questions . I think it 's a wonderful resolution .
Perfectly consistent with the development of the city of Chanhassen .
' Conrad: You go along with anything the government wants right?
Batzli : Right .
Conrad: Anything else? Is there a motion?
Resolution #90-2: Batzli moved, Emmings seconded that the Planning
Commission adopt the attached resolution finding the Modified Plan for Tax
. Increment Financing District No. 2-1 consistent with the City's
r
I
Planning Commission Meeting
October 17 , 1990 - Page 23
Comprehensive Plan and the development of the City of Chanhassen. All
voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. I
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: I
Conrad: We have approval of Minutes but we can't approve them .
Emmings: Why? '
Batzli : We did it before .
Emmings: Three of us were here right? Oh no .
Batzli : Only two. See we did that before where we had less than a quorum
and we approved it and our city staff was going to come back and tell us if,
we couldn 't do that .
Emmings: . . .A majority of the people who are here now who were there then
Conrad: I don 't think that 's right .
Emmings: I made it up. I 'm willing to accept that it 's wrong . ,
Batzli : We could always move to approve them and then this time we could ,
actually find out later if we can do that .
Ahrens: Why don 't we be daring and do that?
Emmings: Why do we care? '
Batzli : The City Council actually adopts them once we approve them don 't II
they?
Krauss: No , they accept them .
Batzli : They accept them , oh .
Emmings: What do we need to do here? What can we do? '
Conrad: I think there are cases if you don 't approve the Minutes , well
you 're a lawyer . i
Emmings: So what?
Conrad: That 's what I 've always said. Makes no difference to me . I
Surrounded by legal people and you 're all saying break the rules . I don 't
understand that .
Batzli : Well you two are going to vote . We 're going to abstain so we
don 't care what you guys do .
Conrad: Yeah , if you would like to, let 's just do it and see what .
I really do think Paul you 've got to get back to us on how we , what are the
rules regarding approval of Minutes . But anyway , is there a motion?
11 Planning Commission Meeting
October 17 , 1990 - Page 24
Emmings moved, Ahrens seconded to approve the Minutes of the Planning
t PP 9
Commission meeting dated October 3, 1990 as presented. Emmings and Ahrens
voted in favor and Conrad and Batzli abstained. The motion carried.
OPEN DISCUSSION:
Conrad: Paul , what else do you want to take us through tonight?
' Krauss: Well on the Open Discussion stuff , number 3 , Review City
Notification Policy for Ordinance and Development Review , that was put on
here . Tim Erhart called me up and wanted to discuss that and since he 's
not available .
Conrad: Let 's bring it back next meeting .
' Krauss: I think it was relative to the industrial and the testing station .
By the way I should tell you that the testing station has apparently
' secured an alternate site . It 's on that outlot that 's next to McDonalds on
the eastern side of there which is in the BH District .
Batzli : Wasn 't there a Class B wetland right in there?
Krauss: No it 's not . This is quite a large lot and it 's on the other side
of 'it .
' Emmings: That 's better? Well , maybe .
Conrad: I don 't think that is better but .
' Ahrens: I would think access would be harder .
' Krauss: Well it 's got two signalized intersections . Dell Road is being
built as one right now and Dakota. You 're looking at a property that the
owner believes can be split up into four commercial sites right now and
' under the BH District , each one of those could be a fast food restaurant .
Ahrens: How exciting .
' Krauss: Yeah. So an alternative that generates half the traffic of a fast
food restaurant may be appropriate . I don 't know . I guess I 've always had
a concern that this is going in a BH district anyway but that 's the site
' they 're looking at . They 're planning on bringing that back to you the
second meeting in November I believe .
Batzli : What happened last week? I didn 't read the Minutes?
Emmings: It was a 3-2 .
Batzli : To go in there?
Emmings: To allow in the IOP and Tim felt very strongly about it and I
think Jim . They both felt very strongly it was inappropriate there so it
was pretty hotly contested . I have a feeling that this is a good
alternative . First of all , I think it 's appropriate in the BH . Second of
I
Planning Commission Meeting
October 17 , 1990 - Page 25
all , it just will eliminate all the bad feelings it generated about it
going into the IOP so I think it would probably be a good idea .
Krauss: Well you 'll get a chance to take a look at it . It will be right
next to the IOP district line but you 'll see it in a few weeks . Or next II
month.
REVIEW OF BERM IN LAKE SUSAN HILLS WEST ALONG AUDUBON ROAD.
Krauss: We did look into the berm issue on Lake Susan Hills West .
Commissioner Batzli I believe was inquiring as to why that wasn 't done on a
recollection that there was supposed to be something there . What was ,
supposed to be there is quite minimal . The trees aren 't there yet .
They 'll be installed after the roadway improvements are done but there is
no significant buffering or berming that was proposed on that site for
whatever reason .
Emmings: I was the one . I distinctly remember . I know and I still II remember that we talked about a berm there and how it didn 't get into the
plan I don 't know but I know that we discussed that .
Krauss: It 'd sure be handy if we had one or had some mechanism to force II
it . You 're aware of the Comp Plan public hearing is being held next week
at the Chan Elementary School .
Batzli : What time?
Krauss: 7:00 . We didn 't send out separate notices because I thought
I mentioned this at the last couple of meetings .
Conrad: Oh no .
Emmings: 7:00 on , this is the 18th . ,
Krauss: October 24th . It 's from 7:00 . They usually shut the school down
at 10:00 . I asked them if we could lock it up at 11 :00 . They agreed to
that . You don't have to tell the public that if you don't want to . We
notified everybody on our mailing list which is , I don't know the exact
count now but over time people who have expressed an interest have been put,
on a mailing list . It 's probably upwards of 150 people have received mail
notice from us . I 've got articles running in both newspapers this week so
anybody that reads the local papers . Commission Ahrens tells me it 's in
the Sailor on the front page . I haven't seen that yet . We do have copies . II
You 've got the entire draft in front of you now . That 's the entire text
plus a new map . In the paper and in my memo I told people that the plan ,
text is available to them tomorrow morning . I 've only got 10 copies of
that because I don 't think really many people , apart from Eric Rivkin who 's
already requested one , are really going to take it home and read it . But
maps are being given out today and as we speak . We 're just handing them
out to anybody that 's expressing an interest . You may want to give a
little bit of discussion . I know Commissioner Batzli and I talked about
this a few weeks ago . To how you want us to manage that meeting . I think
possibly , well both neighborhood meetings we had I thought were good
illustrative examples of how to manage a meeting . There was an overview
given . Time limits were set . The questions were addressed to the Planning
Planning Commission Meeting
October 17 , 1990 - Page 26
11
Commission . In fact I felt very good about the fact that at the second
' meeting particularly that Chairman Ladd , you and the Planning Commission
were responding to the questions and it wasn't staff that was asked to
respond to them .
Conrad: I 'm not doing that anymore Paul . That hurts . No , we 'll try to do
that .
' Emmings: Did you see the Blues Brothers you know when they sang at that
Country Western bar and they had the screen up between them and they were
throwing bottles . Will we get one of those screens? I think we might need
' it . Or could we have a garbage can cover so we can deflect anything .
Jay Johnson: You did Eckankar without a screen , you can do this without a
screen .
' Emmings: That was a piece of cake .
' Conrad: We 'll just put bags over our heads .
Batzli : I feel strongly , let me just follow up on what Paul said . I feel
strongly that we have to speak about our own plan and not just leave it up
' to the staff and consultants . Because if we don 't understand the plan and
if we can 't express some sentiments as to why it 's a good plan , I don 't
think it 's a very good plan .
Conrad: What 's your format for presentation Paul?
Krauss: Well I thought we would do it the way we did it at the
neighborhood meetings where I gave a short intro . Mark stood up and
explained what the plan was pointing it out and then we threw it open . I
think by and large most of the faces that you see there will be familiar
ones .
Conrad: Okay . During those , the reason we had the neighborhood meetings
was to air , to hear their comments . Now we 're going to throw out something
and basically we have not incorporated most of their comments into this
plan .
' Krauss: Well I don 't know that that 's true though.
Conrad: Well , we 've incorporated some but we obviously haven 't taken care
' of Eric . I bet you we 've incorporated a third. So there 's two-thirds that
we haven 't . So I think we have to aggressively deal with the comments that
we heard and how we resolve them . Some of those that we resolved were late
' at night . We said we just plain don 't want to deal with that . I guess I 'm
curious as to how the commissioners want , they 're going to be real
irritated , they 're going to feel like we didn 't pay attention if we don 't
at least describe the concerns that we heard and provide the rationale for
why we didn 't incorporate those . Am I wrong or do you feel we should just
present what we 've got and deal with their comments as they come up and
deal with why as they come up? Deal with why we didn 't incorporate them .
Ahrens: I think the way we should do it . The big issue we discussed at
length like Eric Rivkin 's proposal . It 's real obvious at that neighborhood
I
I
Planning Commission Meeting
October 17 , 1990 - Page 27 1
meeting that a lot of people who were named on his petition who weren 't
necessarily in agreement with him and a lot of people stood up and said
they didn't like , who weren't on the petition, said I wouldn't go along
with that anyway and , I don 't know. We 're going to leave that to you Ladd .
Conrad: I do have something else to do that night . But I guess if nothing
else I need a cheat sheet or a recap Paul of the major issues that were
brought up as well as what you believe our rationale was . I know you 're
taking 7 comments but I think maybe it 's even your creativity that
justifies why we didn't incorporate it . And the only other thing that I 'm II
interested in , we did change the plan based on the community 's involvement
and I kind of what to provide a sense that we listened and when it was
important , when it was relevant and the right thing to do , we changed it soli
therefore most people will only focus in on the one issue that they care
about and if they lost , they lost and as far as they 're concerned , we II weren't sensitive to anything but how do we provide them with the feeling
that we did pay attention? We did try to do the best modifications that
made sense .
Krauss: Possibly we can give them an overview of those . Now in the letter,
I sent out to everybody and in the articles I hope that are printed, I did
ask both newspapers to explore what the main points of contention were over
the summer and that we 've heard and what the response was . I guess there
were basically 5 points that they touched on . In the letter I described
the fact , you know Timberwood was always an issue . Timberwood is now
surrounded by residential development . That Sunridge Court raised a
concern with industrial being up against their property line. As a
consequence the Rod Grams property was changed to residential . That there
was a lot of investigation as to which , should you go with the original I
plan or the alternative plan north of TH 5? Did the Commission determine
that the original plan was historically correct and followed the Lake Ann
Interceptor and made sense to do? There was concerned raised about a
commercial center , neighborhood shopping center at the intersection of
Galpin and TH 5 . As a result of that concern, that was eliminated. Then
as a result of the general issue of how industry interfaces with
residential , we developed a buffer yard concept and that 's now on the plan .
Ahrens: . . .time with the Rivkin plat because I don 't remember any specific
arguments why we didn't go along with his proposal except for it just
seemed like the right area to develop . I mean they're going to say why didll
you change your decision on some areas and not ours . That 's going to be a
tough one I think .
Conrad: I wasn 't here for that gathering and I tell you , whoever is going
to have to . I can justify what the decision was but I don't know , I wasn't.
here to listen to all the different comments .
Emmings: Can I ask something Paul? Now it sounds like people , all of you
who have been talking about this so far feel that the public hearing is a II
place where they have to justify to the public what we 've done in putting
together the comprehensive plan and I 'm not sure that that 's true . A
public hearing is a place for the public to have input into the process .
If they stand up and say I don't like this part of the plan for these
reasons , that 's satisfying what the public hearing is for because then we
get to consider what they say and so does the City Council . I 'm not sure
Planning Commission Meeting
October 17 , 1990 - Page 28
11
we have to justify every decision that 's been made along the way .
' Conrad: Don 't have to . You 're absolutely right .
Emmings: But you want to?
11 Conrad: Yeah, I like that just from a personal , this is how government
works . On the other hand Steve , you have to come to grips with the fact
that it is a public hearing. Those other two meetings don't count . In a
public hearing like we had tonight , if they say something that triggers
something that we didn 't consider , I 'm sure the developers are going to
' come in along TH 5 and sue us . I 'm sure that the lawyers will be here so
you 're going to have to say , well am I comfortable with this? You don 't
have to pass it on to City Council . We don 't have to do anything . It is a
public hearing for their input for us to consider and we 're not ramming it
' down anybody 's throat so we have the option of saying we still believe that
we're right and this is what we want City Council to see or we can deal
with issues that were brought up again and send it back to staff . So those
'
are , you 've got to come in here basically , even though we struggled for 2
years on this thing , you 've got to come in with an open mind and say hey , I
don 't want to deal with it or I should deal with those things and figure
11 out what you want to do with it .
Emmings: Ladd , to me what you just said cuts against coming in with an
attitude of justifying what 's been done . Because it looks like you 've
already made up your mind if you 're there justifying it and I 'm not crazy
about that .
' Batzli : What I would suggest is in the overview at the front explain , you
know touching on these major issues . These were the concerns we heard .
This is what we 've done to the plan and not as they get up one by one
defending the plan but rather as an overview at the start talking about how
' we feel we 've at lease listened to their concerns and try to do some
things .
Emmings: I 'm very comfortable with that .
Ahrens: And these are the changes we 've made to date so that people who
' are eccumating who have new concerns , they don 't feel that they 're not
going to be heard because we have a done deal here and we 're just
presenting it to you and we 're going to justify it all .
' Emmings: See I want to stay away from defending it to each person that
comes up to the podium . If we can tell them why we did what we did , that 's
fine but not in an attitude of oh yeah , well , because it could turn into
that very easily .
A
Ahrens: And it is a public hearing though. I mean there may be new things
that come up that we may say hey they have a real good idea there . We may
want to change something else .
Emmings: Then as another point , some of the explanations for why we did
I what we did . I mean if you went down the row of 7 people , there may be 7
different reasons . There were certainly be several . You know Rivkin as an
example . His point of cutting out these islands to me just conceptually
I
Planning Commission Meeting
October 17 , 1990 - Page 29
that was a bad notion. Well , is that really a justification for doing
it? I mean just sort of philosophically I said you 're either in the MUSA II
or you 're outside the MUSA but we 're not going to carve islands out of the
middle .
Conrad: So you don 't want to say that during the meeting? 1
Emmings: Well no , I will . I 'm not shy . I ' ll certainly say that if that 's
the way I think it ought to be .
Conrad: I think that 's appropriate .
Emmings: But I don 't know, that 's not really based on taking into
consideration what the reasons he wants it . It 's more , it takes such a
much broader view . It 's not very specific . I
Conrad: See , nobody cares . Well they all care about their opinion but the
most important thing to the public is that we paid attention to what they
said and we came up with our own decision and right or wrong , they just
want to know that we paid attention to them . If we can project that ,
that 's half the battle . You still don 't have to agree and they don 't have
to agree with us but you 've got to tell them we paid attention because
that 's the most irritating thing is when , like the group tonight . They say
well why are we here .
Emmings: And this was a perfect example of what we 'll see again because I
they were so convinced that we didn 't have their interest at heart that
they didn 't listen to us when we talked . I tell them this isn't really an
issue for here but you give them something like take your concerns to the
City Council . They immediatley say oh yeah, like you 're trying to snow
them when in fact you 're trying to tell them how to deal with their
concerns within the system that we have . They didn 't hear that .
Batzli : It 's frustrating to . . .person that doesn 't have the authority to do
that .
Conrad: But we 're conducting a public hearing .
Ahrens: How are we going to handle the presentations? I mean I imagine
people will come in, some people with quite detailed presentations .
Krauss: Well I think the meeting management is a real issue and in the two '
previous meetings you gave people a strict time limitation and you gave
them one shot and if time permitted, you gave them a second. I think
that 's real important to keep in mind. We were even more focused during II those neighborhood meetings because we split the city in half . Belaboring
a point . Having 20 people standing up saying the same thing or repeating
the same thing that you 've heard on 3 previous occasions needs to be
directed somewhat so they understand that they've been heard but it 's not II
that matters , it 's content . And I think setting a real time limit on
how long people can speak and if people want to give you additional
documentation for you to peruse at a follow-up meeting , I think that 's
reasonable to do and I don't know but I wouldn 't be surprised if some of
that happened . I was telling Commissioner Ahrens , in the packet you 've got
in the comprehensive plan, in the end of it I have a comment section which
11
Planning Commission Meeting
October 17 , 1990 - Page 30
11 contains the dozens of letters I 've gotten . Neighborhood plans .
Newsletters . Articles . Responses . Basically up to this point in time and
' they 're in chronological order from the most recent to the past .
Batzli : I assume if you get those out , our comprehensive plan would be the
length of Excelsior 's?
Ahrens: I liked that .
Emmings: They 've got 2 ,500 people . I just never realized Excelsior was
that small .
Batzli : I never realized you could put a comprehensive plan in 30 pages .
Emmings: We 're doing something wrong .
Ahrens: Presentations will have to be well organized and I don't know how
you want to do that .
' Emmings: One thing I proposed at one time and I don 't know if it would
work but when you 've had these mass meetings , if it turns out that there 's
100 people there or 150 people , you let somebody speak and then just ask ,
' if there are other people in the audience who share this point of view , put
your hand up and then put on the record some idea of how many there are
because you might discourage them all from feeling like they have to get up
' and say the same thing .
Ahrens: I agree because there are some areas as we know that are more
organized than others and I think it 's frustrating to other people too to
' sit there when they think they have a concern that 's just as legitimate as
25 people who are trying to get up and speak on their issue and it takes up
everybody 's time and it takes time away from . I know we want to listen to
everybody but I think that it 's frustrating for us .
Batzli : What if you give them 5 minutes max?
Emmings: Rivkin can 't give his address in that .
Batzli : I know . I know but give them 5 minutes and if there 's time at the
' end of the meeting he can talk again .
Conrad: What 's our timeframe at that school?
Krauss: 7:00 to 11 :00 . And we 've got to be out .
Batzli : At 5 minutes per person, that 's 12 an hour .
Conrad: Jay?
Jay Johnson: I 've been getting anywhere from 2 to 3 letters a week from
the landowners along TH 5 . That is going to be probably the significant
group in there addressing you . That group of landowners . Every one of
' them says the same thing . Not quite exactly the same words . They didn 't
exactly plagerize . . .
I
I
Planning Commission Meeting
October 17 , 1990 - Page 31
Emmings: They all say they 're going to sue the city .
Jay Johnson: Oh no . They don 't say that yet .
Batzli : You got different letters than I did then . I
Emmings: I got letters that said that .
Batzli : I think they will be a significant group . They may not even be II
the most significant group by numbers unless they bring a lot of attorneys
each one of them . I think we 're going to see landowners north and south of
the city that come in as a group will be sheer numbers . Maybe they don 't II
have the most bucks behind them or number of blue suits in the crowd but .
Emmings: So there will be 5 minutes per person and then if they could come"
back up if after one pass through , they could come back up and have a
second shot if there was time . That sounds fair .
Krauss: I guess I envisioned after the public hearing coming back to you II
at a follow-up meeting , a regular meeting and putting an agenda item on .
Are you prepared to pass this along to the City Council with the comments
you receive that you 'd want to do anything else to it . I
Conrad: So it is a public hearing . It requires a motion .
Krauss: Well , you can either act to close the public hearing and act to
pass , or recommend approval of the comprehensive plan is basically what
you 'd be doing . Or you could just close the public hearing and hold over
action on the recommendation to a future meeting. ,
Emmings: That 's what we should do because we should get a summary I think
from staff of the content of the meeting . Consider it and then pass it
along.
Batzli : But those people may want to be at the meeting when we do the
action .
Conrad: They might want to hear what we 're doing .
Batzli : Unless we want to do a second public hearing .
Krauss: You could theoretically do that . I
Conrad: Basically what we have to do is take down a list of their concerns
and we have to decide whether additional thought has to be given to those
concerns . Additional research . Additional whatever . If we decide not , well
could move it onto City Council and they 'd all be in attendance watching
us .
Emmings: You mean do it there? '
Conrad: Right then on the spot . If we don 't have the information , then well
do have to delay .
Emmings: But you 're rather just take care of it there?
Planning Commission Meeting
October 17 , 1990 - Page 32
I
Conrad: I think we should discuss where we want to go and not hide it and
do it at an additional meeting . They want to hear where we 're going . They
want to hear what we 're doing and what we 're giving to the City Council so
I think the way I ' ll handle the meeting , unless you tell me not to , I ' ll
take , we 'll be listing down the comments and when we close the public
hearing we're going to go around the group and respond to each one of those
and decide as a commission . We 'll vote as a commission whether to reopen
the issue or not .
Batzli : If we reopen the issue and do further study or change the plan ,
does that then require a second public hearing on the modified plan?
Conrad: I don 't think so .
Krauss: I don 't think so either but I guess I 'd have to ask Roger that . I
' suspect it might hinge on the extent to which you 've changed it .
Conrad: You should find out .
Emmings: You know in other matters where we have public hearings , we lots
of times change them . We did that tonight .
11 Batzli : But this is of such import that if you changed it with any
severity and then moved it on at a subsequent meeting when there really
wasn 't a lot of people in the crowd , I think there 'd be a lot of cries of
foul play .
Emmings: Yeah if you moved a line . Like all of a sudden something that
' was residential is now industrial .
Batzli : Yeah .
Ahrens: So Ladd , how much time are you going to give us to discuss
things? Are you going to close the public hearing at what time?
' Batzli : If we have to be out of there by 11 :00 , I mean you 're going to
have to close it at 10:30 .
Conrad: Or close it at 10:00 .
Emmings: Is there a World Series game that night?
' Ahrens: It might be .
Krauss: It 's not going to go 7 games .
' Ahrens: Yes it may . Last night was great .
' Conrad: Okay . I gave you , remember what I gave you a couple weeks ago .
Emmings: I gave it to Tim . ,
' Conrad: Any comments at this point in time? Paul , it was on your
recommendation on our Bloomberg deal . Just seeing if Steve , do you want to
talk about that now or should we wait for Tim?
I
Planning Commission Meeting
October 17 , 1990 - Page 33
Emmings: You know , I read that and I can't remember . This is horrible .
I don 't want this on national television . I can't remember what I thought I
about it . I 'm going to have to look at it again. I gave it to Tim and
I told him . Maybe he 'll remember .
Conrad: Okay , we 'll bring it up later . What I was hoping is to float this
around because I got a comment from somebody about how the staff reports
our decision to the City Council . Our recommendation and if the staff
decides to override what we decide , how it 's presented . This was just , youll
know staff has the , it 's sort of like the last word. So the issue that
I just wanted to surface , because it was brought to my attention , is staff
surfacing our opinion and their 's in the right light to the City Council
and that 's what I gave Steve to be circulated to everybody.
Batzli : He immediately , not only lost it but forgot what he thought about I
it .
Conrad: Forgot the whole thing.
Emmings: I read it and gave it to Tim . My recollection is that it didn 't I
bother me .
Conrad: You don't have to sway them right now. It 's just a case where 1
I wanted .
Ahrens: We don 't sway that easily .
Conrad: Okay , anything else we should talk about?
Batzli : Have we received anything from the Moon Valley?
Krauss: Yeah , a Summons . '
Batzli : When did we get that?
Krauss: A couple weeks ago .
Batzli : Okay .
Conrad: Anything else Paul? ,
Krauss: Not really if you read the report from the Director . The only
interesting was the Redmond arrangement .
Conrad: Curb's going in?
Krauss: Yeah . Well what happened with that was that the City Council
accepted your recommendations and ours relative to .
Conrad: See that was sort of tricky . We weren't exactly in the same boat
with you guys as I recall .
Krauss: Well actually that was that test case type of thing? ,
Conrad: Right .
I
Planning Commission Meeting
October 17 , 1990 - Page 34
Krauss: Yeah . I was uncomfortable with that .
' Conrad: So they accepted our recommendation and yours and they were
different so what did they?
Krauss: Yeah , to the extent that you recommended they build it the way
they were supposed to . So they approved the off site parking without any
variances on the Lotus property . Then they left hanging the issue of what
happens on the Redmond site proper because there were two variances
associated with that , the hard surface coverage and the setback variance .
On the hard surface coverage , Redmond proposed buying an adjacent lot that
we own that 's got a wetland on it . Wouldn 't anticipate doing anything to
' the wetland but by their ownership of it , they 've met their hard surface
coverage requirement . I felt a little uncomfortable about that because
I thought it met the letter of the law but not exactly the intent .
However , it seemed to be a relatively comfortable way to get around that
particular issue . We encouraged them strongly to buy the land from Lotus
Garden Center . The owner is not interested in selling . We had put
' Southwest Metro or asked Southwest Metro to contact them and follow up that
way too . But the long and the short of it was , that was the only way that
it appeared possible to do it and to let them put on that plant
modification that they 'd like to do so they can stay on that site with the
$6 million expansion they want to do now there . They confirmed to the City
Council that no way , shape or form are they going to build the new facility
here . The second problem relative to setbacks . Oh , I should tell you . We
' couldn 't agree on a price . The Assistant City Manager calculated it based
off of what we paid for some similar property recently and thought it was
worth approximately , I don 't know , $200,000.00. Redmond calculated their
' way and thought it was worth $36 ,000 .00 so there 's a significant variance .
Conrad: On a price for what?
' Krauss: Well , if we 're going to sell them that 1 .6 acre wetland , we 're
going to be paid for it .
' Conrad: So Chanhassen owns that?
Krauss: Yes . And it 's not a matter of the dollar . I mean it 's a matter
of paying real dollars . What was agreed to was the retention of
' appraisers . One representing us . One them and if they need a third party ,
they can mutually decide and both parties had agreed to abide by their
decision . There 's no clear direction as to what that money might be spent
' on . That 's something the City Council would have to look at . But they
haven 't made a decision on that .
' Conrad: It should be to acquire more wetland .
Krauss: Well that was initially the staff thought too but on the other
hand , we 're not losing the wetland . I mean there have been a number of
instances in the past when a wetland's being altered that you buy a
replacement wetland and give it to the city but this wetland's not being
changed at all . It 's going to look exactly the way it does right now .
Conrad: It 's real clear you 're getting around the law . It 's not what the ,
the intent of the 70% impervious surface is you know , there 's a real intent
I
I
Planning Commission Meeting
October 17 , 1990 - Page 35
for that and they're getting around that intent by acquiring wetlands so
I have no problem taking that money and putting it some other place to try 11
to meet what we have the 70% impervious surface for . There 's just no doubt
about that . It 's clear to me .
Krauss: Well I guess it 's fair to say that Redmond doesn't particularly II
care what we spend it on . It 's up to the City Council . The second matter
of the parking setback is going to be resolved based on a suggestion that
Councilman Johnson made . That we look at a performance approach to that
and the Council ultimately approved giving them a variance on the
assumption that we 're going to change the ordinance to allow them to do
what they 're going to do and have asked us to bring forth to you an
ordinance amendment that does achieve that performance standard . At the
same time too I was going to throw on , I spoke to our City Attorney and the
buffer yard concept that we have adopted in our comprehensive plan needs to/
be reflected in the zoning ordinance and since it relates to mostly parking
lot setbacks , I figured I 'd tie the two together and come through you with
one ordinance amendment that took care of both .
Batzli : Change the BF district back to A-2 in the same fell swoop right?
Krauss: Oh yeah . I
Conrad: When are we going to review the BF district?
Krauss: Well Chairman let 's get , I keep wanting to do these things and
let 's get the comprehensive plan out of here and we can do all of those.
Conrad: Is that pretty much close to a highest priority after the i
comprehensive plan?
Krauss: If you say so .
Batzli : It 's getting to be late fall .
Krauss: Well , whenever it gets real close we just change the date . '
Conrad: Let 's take a look at that . I had a vision for that property . I
did and now I forgot it . It was real clear how to handle it down there .
After one meeting . Yeah, I went home and I wrote it down exactly how to
deal with it .
Emmings: Then you gave that to me and I lost it . '
Conrad: I 've forgotten totally how to do it . It was one of those
illuminations. Gone . Anything else?
Batzli moved, Ahrens seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor
and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 9:35 p.m. .
Submitted by Paul Krauss
Planning Director I
Prepared by Nann Opheim
i
PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION MINUTES
OCTOBER 11, 1990
PRESENT: Craig Blechta, Wayne Wenzlaff, Brian Beniek,
Bill Bernhjelm, Dave Dummer
ABSENT: Barb Klick
STAFF PRESENT: Scott Harr, Acting Public Safety Director
Dale Gregory, Fire Chief
Bob Zydowsky, Community Service Officer
LAW ENFORCEMENT PRESENT: Sheriff Al Wallin, Capt . Ron Holt ,
Sgt. Bob VanDenBroeke
Chairman Bill Bernhjelm opened the meeting at 7: 10 p.m.
Craig motioned, Brian seconded, to approve the 9/13/90 min
written. All voted in favor and the motion lter as
passed.chairperson' s name will be changed to CraigBlechta. ater-
VISITOR PRESENTATION: The Commission Estate resident Mark Pahl , 8056 8056 again Erie Avenue. He
Idiscussed the traffic safety concerns in his neighborhood and
asked the Commission and the City Engineer to again look at the
issues . He also submitted a petition to Scott Harr which will be
forwarded to the Engineering Dept.
Scott distributed radon kits , T-shirts and literature to the Com-
mission regarding Radon Week (10/14 - 10/20) .
Newspaper took photos for article in the Viillager.
FIRE DEPARTMENT: Chief Gregory distributed flyers regarding the
Open House at the Fire Station on Sunday, October 14. He stated
the fire calls are up 12.8% over last year at the end of Septem-
ber; manhours are up 31% and training is up 10.6% from last
year.
Various activities have been planned at the Station for the
school children during Fire Prevention Week.
uted the Fire Department 's five Dale also distrib-
uted plan for Commission review.
Craig Blechta mentioned the 2 hour training meeting on Monday,
October 22, at 7 p.m. , at the Fire Station.
County Deputies and State Patrol will An invitation to the
I go out from Craig.
Bill Bernhjelm commended Dale and the Fire Department for their
Open House, the amount of work involved, and the notable
impression on the children attending such activities.
■M PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION MINUTES
OCTOBER 11 , 1990
PAGE 2
1 SHERIFF' S REPORT: Patrol Captain Ron Holt from the Carver County
Sheriff ' s Dept . was introduced to the Commission. Sheriff Wallin
stated that the communication between Carver County and Public
Safety is going exceptionally well . Brian Beniek commended the
Sheriff ' s Dept . for their radar efforts on Laredo Drive; he has
I noticed a reduction in speed in the area. Scott mentioned the
1991 Sheriff ' s Contract will be voted on at the 10/22/90 Council
meeting.
' PUBLIC SAFETY: The shooting permit boundaries and the jet ski
issue will be addressed at a future winter meeting. An article
appeared in The Villager on shooting boundaries .
' Scott mentioned the issue of the Public Safety Director ' s job
description is coming to a conclusion. He has submitted his
' recommendation to the City Manager to maintain existing number of
staff , yet utilizing the staff in different positions :
1 ) have 2 part-time CSO positions ;
' 2) consolidate Director & Asst . Director for time being;
3) create a position of Code Enforcement Officer .
' The Traffic Safety Committee will be re-established with modifi-
cations .
' Scott and Dale are discussing long range emergency management
planning.
The school speed zones have been established for the Laredo
' Drive, Kerber Boulevard and Great Plains Blvd. area. Signs will
be erected in the near future.
' Scott has discussed with Virginia Martelle at St . Hubert ' s the
school bus drop off sites.
Information regarding Red Ribbon Campaign Week, October 22-28,
' was given by Scott Harr . Red ribbons , literature, flag pole ban-
ners and a letter from Mayor Chmiel will be distributed to the
area schools. Also, the Anti-Drug Task Force has met since the
' last Public Safety Commission meeting.
Scott discussed the new format for the PSC agenda.
' BUILDING DEPARTMENT: Steve A. Kirchman, Building Official ,
discussed the monthly reports of the Building Department . Steve,
Carol and Scott will be deciding what reports will be generated
from the Department , any input from PSC would be appreciated.
Scott mentioned he would like to see the number of inspections
and dollar revenue reported in these monthly reports. Steve is
' involved with the radon test kits, with a kit going in City Hall
and various buildings in the City. Radon codes may be added to
the Building Codes in the near future.
1
EL
PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION MINUTES
OCTOBER 11 , 1990 -'
PAGE 3
Community Service Officer Bob Zydowsky displayed the new animal
control vehicle to the Commission.
The movie "Paradigms" was shown, with positive discussion being
generated.
Meeting adjourned.
•
1
1
1
1
1
1,