1l. Minutes CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
' MAY 14, 1990
Mayor Chmiel called the meeting to order at 7:50 p.m. .
COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Chmiel, Councilman Workman, Councilwoman Dimler
and Councilman Johnson
COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: Councilman Boyt •
STAFF PRESENT: Don Ashworth, Roger Knutson, Paul Krauss, Gary Warren and Todd
' Gerhardt
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Workman seconded to
approve the agenda amended as follows: Councilman Workman wanted to move item
' 13 and item 1(k) to item 4. Under Council Presentations, Councilwoman Dimler
wanted to discuss the trees on Kerber Blvd. and Councilman Workman wanted to
discuss street signs. All voted. in favor of the agenda as amended and the
' motion carried.
Per Councilman Johnson's request, Mayor Chmiel read off the items which had been
deleted from the May 14, 1990 agenda.
' PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS:
' Mayor Chmiel read a Proclamation establishing May 19, 1990 as St. Jude
Children's Research Hospital Day and a Proclamation establishing May 20-26, 1990
as National Public Works Week. Don Ashworth stated that the City of Chanhassen
was having an Open House for the Public Works Building on Sunday, May 20, 1990
from noon until 4:00 p.m. .
CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Johnson moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to
approve the following Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's
recommendations:
' a. Adminstrative Subdivision to Divide an Existing Double Bungalow, 7611
Iroquois, Anita Thompson.
b. Approve Agreement for Soutwest Mutual Aid Association.
' c. Approve Development Contract for Chanhassen Lakes Business Park 6th
Addition.
d. Accept Proposal from Barton-Aschman for Trunk Highway 5 Crossroad Entry
Monuments, Project 88-280.
g. Resolution 990-53: Accept Feasibility Study, Waive Public Hearing, Order
Plans and Specifications and Adopt Connection Charge Policy for Harvey/
I‘ O'Brien Sewer Extension Project 90-5.
h_ Resolution $90-53A: Approve Petition for MnDot to Enter into a Cooperative
Agreement for Frontage Road Improvements at Trunk Highway 5 and Lone Cedar
11 Lane, Joseph Mitlyng.
1
.City Council Meeting - May 14, 1990
i. Approval of Accounts.
' j. City Council Minutes dated April 23, 1990
Planning Commission Minutes dated April 18, 1990
Planning Commission Minutes dated May 2, 1990
' Park and Recreation Commission Minutes dated April 24, 1990
Public Safety Commission Minutes dated April 12, 1990
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
' 1(L) APPROVE AMENDMENT TO 1990 BUDGET TO PURCHASE A NEW CSO VEHICLE.
Councilman Workman: I wasn't a part of the majority on this item to approve
this. I wasn't interested in providing animal control services for all of our
neighbors and so I'm not in favor of buying a new vehicle to do it.
Councilman Johnson: I move approval.
Councilwoman Dimler: Don't you think we should discuss it a little?
' Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. There should be some discussion.
Councilman Johnson: We've got a commitment to our neighbors. We've already
committed. . .approved it. We've told our neighbors to do this. We've entered
into contract agreements to do this and I think it's good that Tom continues to
let his opinion be known but we have to approve that. So I move approval.
That's my discussion.
Mayor Chmiel: Don, maybe you'd just like to clarify what this is about so the
' public is aware?
Don Ashworth: The budget as it was established in working out a cost system
' back with the neighboring communities, included a cost figure of $10,000.00 for
a vehicle which at that point in time Public Safety was looking to a used
vehicle. That has really concerned me because with the number of miles we put
on and recognizing that the newer the vehicle we can get the better gas mileage,
' etc. you're going to get with that type of vehicle. The other part was that in
that contract we have outlined a cost of $.25 per mile back against each of
those communities. Typically the $.25 per mile includes, a portion of that $.25
in fact is depreciation or replacement of a vehicle. So in fact we really have
an additional, I can't remember what it was at $3,200.00 per year so almost
$9,000.00 built into the budget in addition to the $10,000.00 for a vehicle. If
we would be looking to a pick-up type vehicle very similar to the existing one.
One that we could put a camper top over the back end and have that serve for the
contract system, we're estimating that that would be about $15,000.00-
$16,000.00. Again, in comparison to looking for a used vehicle, hoping that it
would meet the specs and everything that we would hope for, it just seems that
as long as we have the money why not go for the new vehicle.
' Mayor Chmiel: Do you know what the existing mileage, I think that was one of
the things I had requested before? Indicating as to total miles on the vehicle
that you're proposing to making replacement on. Do we know what that is?
2
City Council Meeting - May 14, 1990 1
Don Ashworth: I do recall that you asked for that information and I do not have I
it for you. Do you know Todd? What, are you going to run and look?
Councilwoman Dimler: Don, while you're looking can I ask, what is the length of
II
this contract with our neighboring communities? How many years?
Don Ashworth: It's a 3 year contract but we put in there a provision that
II
basically would allow the City to get out of it before that length of time.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. So we're saying here for 3 years we're going to buy II a vehicle for approximately $16,000.00. If we decide not to contract after that
3 year period or pull, the contract before that time, what could that vehicle be
used for?
I
Councilman Johnson: It's still the CSO vehicle.
Councilwoman Dimler: Well you're using it for animal control and is it going to
II
have a problem with odors or?
Mayor Chmiel: They utilize the same existing truck presently for their normal
CSO duties as well as with the. . . II
Councilman Johnson: Animal control is a big portion that they have now. I
Councilwoman Dimler: So they don't have a special thing to put the animals in?
Mayor Chmiel: No. It's existing.
I
Councilman Johnson: Aren't there cages in the back of that thing? I've never
looked in the back. i
Don Ashworth: They have cages. I don't know if they keep them in there all the
time. I would suspect that they do.
Todd Gerhardt: 67,000. II
Councilman Johnson: How long have we had that? 2 to 3 years?
II
Don Ashworth: I'd say 3 to 4.
Councilman Johnson: It wasn't before I came on Council because it's been since I
I was on Council.
Todd Gerhardt: I think around February of 1987? I
Don Ashworth: That's a much lighter pick-up than you use with associated with
public works. Any of those type of functions. It really is more of a road type
II
of a vehicle.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, I have one other question. Was the vehicle II specifically included in the contract as part of the deal?
3 1
II
11 .City Council Meeting - May 14, 1990
Mayor Chmiel: I think at that specific time, if I remember, it was discussed
but I don't know if it was part of the contract.
Don Ashworth: If we did not furnish another vehicle and somehow simply used any
other vehicles available, I'm sure we'd still be in compliance with the
contract. I mean what we're saying is we're estimating the, we put dollars in
' there to insure that we would properly be reimbursing ourself. However we were
to be able to accomplish that. If you had to use a street sweeper. I'm being
facetious but I mean that would meet the intent of the contract.
' Councilwoman Dimler: Okay.
Councilman Johnson: But in our discussions with them did we not indicate that
we planned on buying a new vehicle? That is why our cost is as high as our cost
was for that?
Don Ashworth: Yes.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, any other discussion?
' Councilman Johnson: Now can I move approval?
Mayor Chmiel: You're anxious to move it Jay.
' Don Ashworth: I'd also like to mention that when we did meet, we had looked at
again that Fire Chief vehicle and we were looking at that point in time were
looking at a cost factor of about $23,000.00 to $24,000.00. We were able to
purchase a used piece at that point. In fact the Council authorized $14,500.00
and the following day we were able to negotiate that down to $13,500.00 so
' again, I think the staff has continued to show that we're trying to save
dollars. I think in this particular instance you're going to get a better bang
for your buck buying a newer vehicle that will meet the specs of what we're
looking for than a used vehicle.
Mayor Chmiel: We're not going to find another one like we found for the Fire
Chief?
Don Ashworth: We could look and if we found that, we would surely come back to
you with it.
' Councilman Johnson: This doesn't preclude that.
Don Ashworth: This doesn't preclude it.
Councilwoman Dimler: In other words you'll spend less than $16,000.00 if you
can?
Don Ashworth: That's correct.
Councilman Workman: Well my reason for bringing this up isn't to drag this out
' all night. My purpose isn't the vehicle. A new vehicle or a used vehicle. My
purpose is. ..
4
I
r-
City Council Meeting - May 14, 1990
II
Councilman Johnson: We shouldn't be in the business at all.
II
_ Councilman Workman: We shouldn't be in the business of catching neighboring
city's dogs. They're in the business of inspections and fire and providing
their own police and everything else but all of a sudden you get down to this
I
one thing and they want us to do it and it's the dirtiest of them all. And
we're doing it for them. You know my comments so it doesn't have anything to do
with the•vehicle. I think we're working towards the City Council members all II getting their own vehicles. Mine will be a BMW so it has nothing to do with the
vehicle per se as it does with the principle of a private business that perhaps
these cities should be obtaining their services and not from us because it just II• means further growth and somehow down the road a further cost to us somehow, and
that's what. We've indicated by doing this that we don't have enough of an
animal control problem ourselves so we've expanded it to take care of everybody
elses in 5 other communities. I
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah I think some of the discussion was at the time as to the
additional hours that we would have for our CSO's to work was one of the reasons II behind it as well. But also to provide a better service for ourselves too.
I guess the vehicles are not the issue in itself but yes, there are dollars that
are going to be spend and there are some concerns about those dollars. Any
I
other discussion? Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion.
Councilman Johnson: Gee, I think I might have one.
Councilwoman Dimler: He's never been seconded. II Councilman Johnson: Yeah, I've never been seconded before so it might be a II first to get seconded. I move approval of having staff prepare specifications
for a new CSO vehicle and modifying the 1990 budget for such as recommended.
Mayor Chmiel: Maybe as a friendly amendment to that indicating, unless there's
II
availability to find another vehicle such as we had found in a good used one
with low mileage.
Councilman Johnson: That meets the specifications, yeah. - II
Mayor Chmiel: At a better price. At a better cost I should say. Okay, there's
a motion on the floor. And you accept the friendly amendment. Is there a II
second? Oh Jay, you're dead.
Councilman Workman: You're not going to second it Don? I
Mayor Chmiel: No, I'm not. Dying for lack of a second. As it appears it's
dead. I would like this to be reviewed a little closer and possibly to hunt
II
around to see what we can get.
AWARD OF BIDS: II COUNTRY SUITES HOTEL SITE IMPROVEMENTS, PROJECT 89-25.
Gary Warren: Briefly Mr. Mayor, we received bids for the Country Suites Hotel
II
site improvements recently and we, as anticipated, have very competitive bid
5 I
II
1 City. Council Meeting - May 14, 1990
climate. Receiving 6 bids with the low bidder was Alber Construction Company at
$288,937.95. We are recommending award of the project for the Country Suites
Hotel site improvements to Alber Construction in that amount.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Anyone wishing to address this? If not, any discussion by
Council?
' Councilman Johnson: Just interesting how everybody was really, there were a lot
real close there at $300,000.00 and $12,000.00 less. Alber found something in
the bid where he could cut $12,000.00 out but he has to meet the performance.
What were the minor tabulation errors? Do you know in Albers?
Gary Warren: I don't recall exactly. Usually they're just an extension when
' they multiply the units times the quantities they drop a decimil point
sometimes. I don't know exactly which ones they were.
Mayor Chmiel: Have we used this contractor before Gary?
Gary Warren: I personally have not but we do have experience with them through
BRW's experience and such. They're a reputable contractor, yes.
' Councilman Johnson: Some of the other bidders are their subs on it.
Gary Warren: Well yeah, in that regard. Northdale Construction is one of the
subcontractors. They are our Lake Drive general contractor for the Rosemount
project. We've had acceptable work from them. That's a major part of the
effort here is the sewer and water work.
' Mayor Chmiel: Can I have a motion?
Resolution 190-54: Councilman Johnson moved, Councilwoman Dialer seconded that
the construction project for Country Suites Hotel Site Improvements, Project No.
89-25 be awarded to the firm of Alber Construction in the amount of $288,937.95.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
WELL NO. 5 PRODUCTION WELL, PROJECT 89-4A.
Gary Warren: Once again Mr. Mayor we advertised for bids for the production
well now based on the good results we've had from our observation wells at Well
No. 2. This is for the new well, pumping facilities and expansion to the
chlorine dosing system to accommodate the additional flow. Low bids again were
very favorable. The low bid of $88,243.00 was provided by Bergeson-Caswell of
Maple Plain. A reputable firm. Has done a lot of work in the area and it's my
recommendation that we award production well for Well No. 5 to Bergeson-Caswell
in that amount.
' Mayor Chmiel: I just have one question. In our contracts that we have, do we
have penalty clauses contained in there if the contractor does not complete it
by the specific date?
' Gary Warren: Yes. We typically have liquidated damage clause in the contract.
Off the top of my head I don't recall the dollar amount on this one but it's
typically $200.00 to $500.00 per day.
' 6
r
City Council Meeting - May 14, 1990
Mayor Chmiel: Any discussion?
I
Resolution $90-55: Councilwoman Disler moved, Councilman Workman seconded that ,
Improvement Project No. 89-4A, Well No. 5 Production Well, be awarded to the
firm of Bergeson-Caswell, Inc. of Maple Plain, Minnesota in the amount of
$88,243.00. All voted in favor and the motion carried. 1
1(K). ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT PERTAINING TO EXCAVATING, MINING, FILLING AND
GRADING, FINAL READING.
AND
REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF PLATTING APPROVAL FOR 2 1/2 ACRE LOTS BY GIL LAURENT,
BRUCE JEURISSEN AND SEVER PETERSON, PLANNING DIRECTOR.
Paul Krauss: Item (k), the second reading to the ordinance for grading, mining, ,
filling and excavation. On April 23rd the City Council approved the first draft
of the ordinance with some proposed modifications that have since been
incorporated by the City Attorney. We've also asked that I meet with anybody
who's interested, in particular Mr. Beauchane, he and I met on this several
weeks ago. One thing I would like to point out though however is, at the last
meeting I was absent at, the administrative review procedure came into some ,
question. The original proposal was that staff be allowed when they're
comfortable to do so for these guidelines to authorize grading, removing enough
.. .up to 1,000 yards. The Council, or several people on the Council were
concerned with that and proposed a lower total amount to 500 yards. I guess I
would ask that you reconsider that 1,000 yard cap. Speaking in favor of it, I
guess I have a few points. I drafted an ordinance similar to this in another
community and had an opportunity to work with it for about 4 years and found
that the 1,000 yard total was a reasonable one. It covered a lot of items that
you really would not want to be bothered with frankly. If there were any items
that I think that the Council or Planning Commission be concerned about, it'd be
our obligation to bring it to you and we of course would have that option to do
that. I'd also like to point out that we're working with two parties right now
to take care of some dirt that's been contaminated by gasoline leakages. We're
going to be bringing one to you at your next Council meeting because we want you
to see how this will be handled because I think it's going to be occurring more
and more. It's obvious it's something. ..to clean these things up.
Interestingly enough, both requests that we're looking at, one's a city request
and one's a private party are 600 to 800 yards. In the future if we can do
this, we'd like to be in a position to expedite the removal and treatment of
black dirt if we can. Right now, one final question kind of sitting out in
front of the Manus site where...so again we'd like you to reconsider that 1,000
yard total if you're comfortable doing that. Otherwise the ordinance is drafted
right now with the 500 yard cap. . - - - - • . - - I
Councilman Johnson: In support of the 1,000 yard total, I calculated since I've
been working with soccer so much lately, what the minimum size youth soccer
field for an under 12 game is 70 yards by 110 yards. That's what's recommended.
We're putting in a smaller one here in our town for older youth but that's a
different question. If you took just that area, 70 yards by 110 yards, 500
7
City Council Meeting - May 14, 1990
cubic yards is 2 1/3 inches of dirt over that area. So you know you're only 1
talking about yea much dirt over a soccer field and if they did anything more
' than that. If they wanted to put 6 inches of dirt or move 6 inches of dirt for
the soccer field, they'd have to come before us. 1,000 will be a little less
than 5 inches as a matter of fact so to build a soccer field where you have to,
on the average move 5 inches of dirt, it'd have to come before the City Council
' at 1,000 cubic yards. So while 1,000 cubic yards sounds like a lot, it's not
really that much when you look at earth moving.
Mayor Chmiel: How many truck loads would that be Paul?
Gary Warren: How many truck loads to 1,000 yards?
Resident: About 100. 10 yards a load.
Gary Warren: If you've got a 10 yard truck.
Mayor Chmiel: Any other discussion?
Councilwoman Dimler: Co you want to amend that right now? I would second that
we go to 1,000.
' Mayor Chmiel: Well that would be something after once everyone has a little
more discussion.
Councilman Workman: Is that number 7-35(A)?
Councilman Johnson: It's in a couple actual places. It is in A.
Roger Knutson: 7-30. The first two sections.
Councilwoman Dimler: Wherever it's 500, we change it.
' Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, increase that to 1,000.
Councilman Johnson: Something way in the back too has it too.
Mayor Chmiel: There's a couple different locations. In the front page it's 500
also.
Councilman Johnson: I'm sure they can find all the locations and change it.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, if there's no other discussion, can I have a motion to make
the change rather than being 500 cubic yards, putting it to 1,000 cubic yards.
Councilwoman Disler moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to amend the Zoning
Ordinance Amendment Pertaining to Excavating, Mining, Filling and Grading to
change the 500 cubic yards to 1,000 cubic yards. All voted in favor and the
motion carried.
Paul Krauss: On item 13, staff received a request for the extension of
preliminary plat approval for Gil Laurent, Bruce Jeurissen and Sever Peterson.
You may recall that these individuals received conceptual approval for 2 1/2
8
1
City Council Meeting - May 14, 1990 _ f
acre lots prior to the date of adoption of the ordinance which eliminated that
from the ordinance which was 1987. Since that time you have to have 1 per 10
acre zoning. They have been given several time extensions. Most recently I
believe in January, to bring in a plat with the concern being that until the
location of TH 212 was defined with some certainty, that it was difficult for
them to design around it. Highway 212 has been officially mapped and the
individuals are asking for further extension. I understand their concern in
wanting to establish the fact that they credibly do have the ability to
subdivide into 2 1/2 acre lots. With a further understanding that there's a
continued difficulty with TH 212 placement, we discussed the RALF funding ,
program with them. However, we had a similar request by Gil Laurent in February
where we indicated that we were concerend with extending these things ad
infinitum. We did sign a contract with the Metro Council and did change our
ordinance as a result of that telling them that we would no longer plat these
lots in the future. We are of course in the process of working on a major
comprehensive plan amendment and frankly we'd be concerned with alienating the
Metro Council. ..letting these things continue on. We do however want to have
some documentation by way of official Minutes and letters to the individuals
saying that at this point in time that we are in fact. . .for 2 1/2 acre
subdivisions and we understand that the reason you did not proceed is that TH
212 is a pending roadway improvement and that they could use that official
record when Mn0ot goes to acquire the property to show evidence of what they
could have achieved on that. So we're recommending against the extension of the
preliminary plat for those reasons. There's a somewhat related matter that
you're aware of concerning one of the properties and I might defer to Roger to
explain a little further. There has been grading activity occurring on
the Jeurissen property. We became aware of this, well we've been aware of it
for some time but last fall we were very actively involved with it relative to
what was going on on that property relative to how we interacted with the Moon
Valley issue. Mr. Jeurissen had received the permits to grade his property some
period of time ago. We understood what we tried to honor this permit. We
understood last fall that the amount of materials...had been removed. We became
aware that operations were starting up again this spring. We went and posted
the site with a stop work order which was ignored and we have since been trying
to contact Mr. Jeurissen's attorney and the contractor to get some compliance
with that. If you have additional questions with that, we'd be happy to field
them. Fill you in with what we understand now. '
Councilman Johnson: Mr. Mayor?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes Jay. '
Councilman Johnson: You know we changed one part of 1(k). =Are we going to come
back and finish the rest of 1(k)? We had a motion to change it from 500 to
1,000. .
Mayor Chmiel: That's correct.
Councilman Johnson: But we haven't approved the whole thing.
• Mayor Chmiel: No we haven't. ,
9 1
City Council Meeting - May 14, 1990
II
II Councilman Workman: Jay, I requested that they be looked at together because as
Paul mentioned, one of the properties is excavating and in discussions with the
property owner and the excavator and everybody else, continued interest in item
I (k) was brought up and that's where, since that is a second reading and final
reading, I'm sure they wanted to make some comments.
Mayor Chmiel: So that means we'll be going back to (k).
ICouncilman Johnson: We'll be going back to it?
ICouncilman Workman: And I figured we'd be bleeding over into either and each of
them somehow or the other and that we might as well...
II Councilman Johnson: But 13 is only for extending preliminary plat. It doesn't
talk about excavating anyplace in 13.
Councilman Workman: Right but I just figured we'd be talking about them in that
IIlight.
Mayor Chmiel: As discussion is going.
ICouncilman Johnson: It may be but it has, so what are we discussing now? Are
we discussing platting or are we discussing excavating or?
IIMayor Chmiel: We're discussing both those issues. }
II Councilman Johnson: Simultaneously? 1
Mayor Chmiel: Platting as well as the excavation.
I Councilman Johnson: Well I'm against extending the plat any more. It made
sense to continue extending it as long as TM 212 was available and once it got
to that point when they found out what TH 212 would do to their property, they
had the choice of either going in for the RALF funds to plat or plat it or ,
I whatever. To continue to hold out to say in the future we can plat 2 1/2 acres
is against the contract that we have and really has no basis I don't think.
We've extended it for over 2 years now. The ability to do something that Met
II ' Council has been trying to get us not to do for equally long period of time.
Councilman Workman: Paul, does the incomplete draft EIS have any bearing on
II their ability at this point to peg whether or not, where TH 212 will be or
should be? Is the TH 212 laid pretty well?
•
Paul Krauss: TH 212 has been officially mapped. Theoretically the EIS could
I come up with, there are several alterantives of the EIS and it could be changed
but realistically it's been officially mapped. I guess to answer your question
Tom, I don't think it's going to change anything substantially from our point of
I view but I don't think it changes it either from the applicant's point of view.
They'd like this continued until the highway's actually under construction.
Whenever that point is. The EIS is not going to firm it up in any way that
I satisfies them because they still want to know, they have a difficult time
thinking about how to develop with a pending highway somewhere on the horizon.
Even though you know where the center line of the highway is going to be, what's
II 10 •
11
City Council Meeting - May 14, 1990 1
the impacts of. . . How do you build access roads? There are a number of issues f
that won't be resolved until it's actually under construction.
Councilman Workman: So is what you're saying their ability to hang onto their
window of opportunity for 2 1/2 acre lots, can they hang that request on the
uncertainty of TH 212?
Councilman Johnson: Into the next century. '
Councilman Workman: In 95.
Paul Krauss: I think that's a matter that you really need to decide. I think
that the City's gone the extra mile on this one. Frankly I. don't believe that
Metro Council's aware that we've been doing this and it's not something we want
to make a lot of waves about. The City's trying to be cooperative with
individuals for quite some time. It's been my opinion and I guess I'd like to
defer to Roger on this possibly but if we can demonstrate that at this point in
time they were eligible to do this, that that's documentation that will be
considered by MnDot when they actually go for condemnation for purchase of
right-of-way. So that value that they could have had, had they platted it into
2 1/2 acre lots, bill be a consideration.
Councilman Johnson: Or they could just plat it right now.
Councilwoman Dimler: I guess I'd like to hear from the applicants that are here
but before we do that, Paul you mentioned something about putting it in the
permanent record regarding the current ability of these properties to develop
into 2 1/2 acre lots. What did you mean? What's the permanent record there?
Paul Krauss: The permanent record is the Minutes of this meeting and possibly a
letter of the resolution that you authorize to give to the applicant. Mr.
Laurent...out of this thing in February and at that time I scheduled an agenda
item with a letter to Mr. Laurent stating that we understand that you're
withdrawing your potential subdivision application but for the record we
understand that you were eligible to do that and the reason you didn't go
ahead was because of pending TH 212 construction. So that he would have
something official to go sit down and talk with appraisers with.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, but he still has the ability to go with the 2 1/2
acres right now?
Councilman Johnson: No.
Paul Krauss: Well technically not. Technically Mr. Laurent opted out of this
in February. We're not standing on a technicality. He's aparty to this
request.
Councilwoman Dimler: The other two applicants still have the ability for 2 1/2? ,
Mayor Chmiel: Maybe what we should do is hear from the two applicants. Would
either one like to or both come up and indicate their position? ,
11 '
11
IICity Council Meeting - May 14, 1990
ISever Peterson: Mr. Mayor, Councilpersons and staff, my name is Sever Peterson
and I have one of the properties that you're discussing here in question. I '
appreciate very much Paul's comments. I'd say that they're accurate in many I
1 ways. The Council has been patient with us as landowners here and has been
supportive. Staff has been particularly supportive of our landowner concerns
here related to Highway 212. I do feel that there are some cicumstances here
1 and I believe that Paul is attempting to take them into consideration. I'm
confident of that but maybe as a landowner and taxpayer I might be a little more
sensitized to them personally. And to express those specifically, that I have a
real strong concern that Highway 212 may never be built and that's a real
1 concern and number two is that the roads that would be. necessary. Yes we could
subdivide as I understand, my property and my neighbor's property there, if they
desired. Speaking for my own property, I could subdivide it into 2 1/2 acres at
I . this time because of the extension that the •city of Chanhassen has offered me
and availed to me but a concern I'd have in doing that would be that the roads
that I'd be putting in. For example my property has 3 proposed corridors going
II through it. It has the TH 212 proposed corridor. It has the proposed
relocation of Pioneer Trail and has the proposed relocation of Bluff Creek Road.
I'm not certain where those are going but that may be my own ignorance and maybe
those have been literally established. As I understand, there is an issue of
1 the Environmental Impact Statement. I don't even know how that affects me. I'm
speaking now from a practical point of view of these 3 roads and then to put in
the roads necessary to service the subdivision would seem to me, and now I'm not
1 a subdivider. I'm a farmer. Introducing myself as a farmer for those of you
that don't know but it would seem to me to have a subdivision one needs roads
into that subdivision and to have 3 proposed corridors cutting through it at
II some time in the future, I would think would be very difficult for a reasonable
subdivision. And in the past, the City of Chanhassen has granted me, I believe j
it was in 1986 or there abouts, if my understanding is correct of this, that
they had given me preliminary plat approval on a piece of ground of this farm
1 that I have that lies south of Pioneer Trail. And I had preliminary plat
approval on 5 acres there and I believe that was in 1987 and this property, we
cannot find interested people in those lots because people say, well where is
1 the Highway 212 going to be? And ethically you know of course you tell them and
they say well, how's it going to lay? I mean I have no idea how it's going to
lay but they aren't interested and I'm saying that to relate if it is
applicable, that the corridors are a hardship to the development there. I might
IIsay in closing that if TH 212 came through, that it might be you know in the
better interest of the City in order to serve the City as well here. I mean I
consider it my property as the landowner but I consider it within the City of
1 Chanhassen and their interest come to bear as well but that the best use of that
property may not be 2 1/2 acre lots at that time. It may well be but if a
highway's not built, it very well may be. But as a farmer right now, I would
II like to request an extension because of the hardships that I've mentioned. If
the Council would• feel that they are applicable, I would like to have them
considered. Thank you may very much Mr. Mayor. Councilmembers.
IICouncilwoman Dimler: Mr. Peterson, how long do you want the extension?
•
Sever Peterson: Well I have not specified a time but I would like to have it
1 until the highway is actually being built so that we knew where these roads were
and that we could act accordingly in some reason to the best use of the property
in terms of not only myself but also the City. If that could be possible.
1 12
11
City Council Meeting - May 14, 1990
Loren Habbeger: My name is Loren Habbeger and I'm representing Mr. Jeurissen.
What my situation is, I had talked to Tom here earlier today, is the
Environmental Impact Statement from the State standpoint will not go to the Feds
until June 6th and at that time it may take time before it's fully accepted.
The highway; you may have endorsed the corridor but the highway is no certainty
until the federal level approves the Environmental Impact Statement. So what
Mr. Severson, what he's talking about. Mr. Peterson, I'm sorry. But what the ,
situation is here, you're looking at something here that it may not happen. I
mean it's not a certainty that the highway's going to be funded. I'm working on
TH 169 by-pass right now on a couple development situations. The second phase
of 169 has not been funded. And it may never happen. 212, in it's situation
right now, has been approved to a certain point but what I think here is, I
think there should be an extension here on the time element here until an
environmental impact statement is done. There's nothing that there's a
certainty. I mean you people may have endorsed this but it's not for sure. And
the appropriations have not been granted totally for the funding of the highway.
Mayor Chmiel: Correct me if I'm wrong. I thought there was 54 million dollars '
allocated for 212 corridor, isn't that right?
Councilman Workman: That's to Lyman and they're looking to appropriate '96-'97
for the rest of it. And there is a request for construction financing in
Congress right now for 12 million which would finance it TH 41 in Chaska.
Loren Habbeger: But I guess what I'm looking at here is, you know until the ,
appropriations are met, you know you don't have a sure thing here. I guess the
thing is, from the corridor standpoint, you may have endorsed it but it's not a
definite situation.
Mayor Chmiel: 212 is definitely a corridor that's going to be needed for the
additional flow thru the city and it's in the best city's interest to of course
see that go as well as our expansions that we're doing on TH 5. 212 is, I sort
of understand some of the positions that you're taking but hopefully you can see
the same position as what the City is here. We sort of get put into a bind as
well.
Loren Habbeger: Well the thing is, what we're looking at here with Mr.
Peterson's property and with the Jeurissen property, to basically lay out
frontage roads or anything that's right now, it's a tough situation. I mean I
think if the property can be developed in an orderly fashion, until the
Environmental Impact Statement is done and you've got a concrete situation, that
you've actually got a commitment, we've got a pig in a poke here is what we've
basically got. I guess what I'm saying is here, we're asking to extend that
permit for 2 1/2 acre tracts and I think it's a very feasible situation. You
can build some good homes in that area and make it worth while because I do not
feel that utilities are going to be out there for some time. So it's not an
immediate situation as far as service.
Councilman Johnson: Oo you understand RALF funds?
Loren Habbeger: Right but what I'm saying to you right now, until you've got
the, the RALF funding situation will not transpire until the Environmental
Impact Statement is done. You don't have a commitment totally. You may have
13 '
I
City Council Meeting - May 14, 1990
endorsed it. It will go to the Feds June 6th. I've talked to Mr. Evan Green. )
Councilman Johnson: Later than that.
' Loren Habbeger: June 6th is when they're. . .
Councilman Johnson: That's the public hearing here at the grade school.
Loren Habbeger: The public hearing and then the Feds take it from there. The
Feds can say, hey we're not going to give the money. So as a result, there is
not assurance that you've got the funds.
Councilman Johnson: Okay, Paul could I ask you on RALF funding?
1 Paul Krauss: Yes.
Councilman Johnson: At what point can we purchase his property?
Paul Krauss: We could process an application today. It would have to be
approved by the Metro Council but the funding is there and we could handle that
' today.
Councilman Johnson: So he's got a preliminary .plat that's approved before the
' Council. He can go into final plat at which time you would apply for RALF funds
to purchase the property at a fair market value for 2 1/2 acres, therefore
keeping his value of his property. And that's what he's concerned about doing.
Paul Krauss: Right.
Councilman Workman: But the road doesn't go through the Jeurissen property.
Loren Habegger: No it doesn't. The situation, it goes through Mr. Peterson's
property but to run a frontage road or anything that you come into the highway
situation at this point there's nothing concrete. You could put a road in to
come out to TH 212 but until it''s established, you don't know where it's going
to go.
1 Councilman Johnson: So what you're saying is that Jeurissen wouldn't be, your
client would not be eligible for RALF funding because he's not affected directly
by the highway?
Loren Habegger: What I'm basically saying is that we're ready to go ahead and
work on developing the property but the 2 1/2 acre situation, what I'm saying is
to give an extension until you know where you're going to take your road and
' where TH 212 is going to be placed so that you can make a plan for the whole
situation.
' Councilman Johnson: We've got a map. The map shows the entrances. The exits.
The access roads.
Loren Habegger: But it's not, is not concrete at this point. The Highway
Department cannot give me an answer because there may be some changes until the
Environmental Impact Statement is done.
' 14
11
City Council Meeting - May 14, 1990 1
Mayor Chmiel: Paul?
Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, the original time extension was granted until the thing
was officially mapped which was done last fall. Then a time extension was given
because there wasn't enough notice to do that. Frankly, if there's a date
certain and the ,date certain was whatever date the EIS gets approved by the
Feds, I don't have a real objection to that. That's a finite point in time. I
guess what concerns me is keeping the foot in the door from now until 1997 or
whenever, open ended as has been requested. That's something that I really
think contravenes the intent of the ordinance. ire think the EIS is probably
going to be approved late this summer or early fall and if it was tied into
that, we wouldn't have an objection.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay.
Councilman Johnson: And say at that time they're going to come back and say
let's now tie it into funding. ,
Councilwoman Dimler: Well I was just going to ask. When the EIS is approved,
does that mean how much. . . '
Councilman Johnson: It's not funded yet.
Councilwoman Circler: How long before the funding is approved? '
Councilman Johnson: The phase that goes through this area. The EIS has nothing
to do with the funding. It's already funded. I
Loren Habegger: But it revolves on the Environmental Impact Statement. The
corridor can change. It's not a definite situation.
Councilman Johnson: The primary environmental impacts are east of your
property. The main change it would happen would probably be east of all those
properties rather than that area that we're talking about with the Environmental
Impact Statement. The wetlands. There's some historical areas west of you.
Councilman Workman: Either the North Mitchell or the Riley. '
Gary Warren: Yeah, I don't think the alternatives, I'd have to look, that they
impact this property.
Councilman Johnson: They don't even get to this point.
Paul Krauss: When you get to this point there's only the one. ,
Gary Warren: They've only shown one concept through this.
Councilman Johnson: That's what I'm saying is the EIS should not change ,
anything here.
Councilman Workman: Gary, I think it's plate 16A on the EIS on the aerial. The
reason I brought this up was because of the excavating that's going on in the
Jeurissen property so they're kind of intertwined because they'd like to
1S '
11
1 City• Council Meeting - May 14, 1990
Icontinue to prep property and excavate on the property which conincidentally is
related to the need for clay, etc. over in Eden Prairie and whether or not they
have the capability to go ahead with 2 1/2 acre lots or not probably has a lot
' to do or something to do with continued excavating although I believe the
landfill is what is driving the excavating at this point but ultimately for
preparation for development on that parcel.
Councilman Johnson: As I. read our packet, the excavating is in our City
Attorney's hand. They've been given a stop work order and they're refusing to
' follow it and that's going onto the Courts. I don't see the permit or anything
to even discuss the excavating tonight that's going on there because it's not
even on our agenda or in our packet. In the adminstrative section of the packet
there was a letter telling them to stop work again and again. But before I
decide anything on the excavating, I'd like to see excavating on our agenda in
the future or in the courts in the future.
' Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, that's I think a separate issue.
Loren Habbeger: I think what you should look at here though is from a
development standpoint. You take France Avenue off of 494. The Hedberg
' property was a mining operation for years and leveled off and put to it's best
use for development. To shape a piece you know it takes time and money and it's
the same thing with Mr. Peterson. He's going to have a considerable amount of
excavating but if you can remove material in an orderly fashion and shape the
parcel so that you put in proper roads and level it off, I think you people as
from a tax standpoint should be looking at a 2 1/2 acre tact with a substantial
' amount of investment as far as what the housing would come in from a tax
standpoint and work with people that are trying to develop rather than. What
we're doing is we're taking a hill out that's completely useless as far as
leveling off the site. It has to be taken out. I mean it's, the elevations are
' a problem so I mean as a result what I'm saying here is, if you can see the
future development as far as to benefit the property and put it on the tax rolls
from an agricultural standpoint back into a residential development, I think you
' people should be looking at it. And it can be done in an orderly fashion. I
guess that's what I'm saying.
Councilman Workman: Is this directly related to what happened with the Halla
situation?
Mayor Chmiel: Sort of, yes.
' Councilwoman Oimler: Except Halla was not impacted by 212.
' Councilman Workman: But he requested the window and we said develop or don't.
And he's not or is he? He wanted it all the outlot.
Mayor Chmiel: That's correct.
Councilman Johnson: This is pretty much the same I see it.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay.
16
11
K
City Council Meeting - May 14, 1990
Sever Peterson: Mr. Mayor, Councilpersons, Sever Peterson again. As I recall,
Mr. Laurent's property and my own property and my Jeurissen's property were 3 of
the properties at the time that we had extensions that were either damaged or
intersected or cut or whatever the word is by TH 212 was the reason for the
consideration originally. I might say that I have spent considerably money on
the lots that I mentioned. I'm not sure that Mr. Jeurissen, although I do know
that they have spent money but speaking for myself, just how much I've spent
that I know that I have spent and not that it's relevent but just for your point
of information, that I have spent I would absolutely believe more than
$15,000.00 and I'm quite certain it's less than $20,000.00 in surveys and so on
that it takes to do the things that we've done just to this point. I'm only
saying that to let you know that I am serious and I would appreciate
Councilwoman Dimler's question about how long, you asked me how long .I thought
maybe I should be allowed to continue if you will in a grandfather type position
•
and I certainly respect Mr. Krauss', what I understood to be a comment
Mr. Krauss made about that and I would defer to that. As a property owner I
would defer to that. Referring to Councilman Johnson's comment that well, then
it depends on the funding and that may be. I'm not saying that I wouldn't come
in and say yeah but now I don't have the funding. I wouldn't come in and this
will bring up another issue. I would hope that it wouldn't be that but if there
is a hardship case that I believe would make sense in a specific situation, I
would hope that I would not be renascent about raising it to the Council. I
mean if it were a unique situation, I believe that that's a priviledge that I
have as a citizen in the community to raise that to the Council and to then
depend on their decision related to that. I'm only saying that at this point I
do feel that there are really some real problems with our properties there being
intersected by even more than one area and Councilwoman Dimler, I didn't mean to
say just open ended with my foot in the door. I mean that sounds to me to be
unreasonable. I'm not demanding that or expecting that. It sounds like. . .
Let's take it one step at a time and if we feel there's a step in the future
that has merit, bring it before us. We'll consider that as a step at that time
but at this time this is how we see it and so on. And I want you to know that
I'm not asking just for an open ended foot in the door here because I certainly
respect Mr. Krauss, staff's comment on that and I think it bears merit. Thank
you.
Councilman Johnson: Most of these areas are in the 1995 study area. There's '
all kinds of possibilities that 2 1/2 acres may not be the appropriate use for
this property long term. That this may be commercial. It may be industrial.
It may be whatever is branded by having this major highway cut through the town.
They start building homes on 2 1/2 acres here, we could be cutting our own
throats..
Councilwoman Dimler: One of my concerns is that we don't create another ,
situation like we did at Timberwood. -We've got a :mess there now because we
allowed residential development and now we want to make it go commercial/
industrial along the highway and those residents are upset. - - I
Councilman Johnson: We had no choice.
Councilwoman Dimler: So I think in an effort to preclude another situation like
that, I would like to see us work with the landowners in a fashion that would
really benefit the City and the landowners in the long run. If that's right
17
I
City Council Meeting - May 14, 1990
Inow, all we can go for is to wait until the EIS is completed and you know, I
would go for that. Give them the 2 1/2 until then.
' Councilman Johnson: About the 1995 study area. When will that study be done?
Paul Krauss: Well the intent of that label on the Comprehensive Plan is that
' 1995 seemed to be an appropriate date to look at that area. You could conclude
in 1995 that it's not appropriate to do it for another 5 years. The reason for
that time is highway construction. Also, Councilwoman Dimler, if there's going
to be a motion to extend this until the EIS is approved, I would ask you to do
it until 60 days after the EIS is approved because we had that same problem with
the official map the first time. We need to give.them some time to turn it
around and submit an application.
Councilwoman Dimler: That's fine. My feeling is that we've got two issues
going here. One with the excavating and one with the 2 1/2 acres so is it
' possible to move the 2 1/2 acres with this proposal and then take up the
excavating.
' Mayor Chmiel: I think we can move on 13 accordingly. What I had written down
here that we propose to extend the period of time of completion of the EIS with
60 days thereafter.
Councilwoman Dimler: Second.
Councilman Johnson: Approval of the EIS.
Councilman Workman: So sometime in the winter? You're saying we're oin to
9 9
keep the door open.
Mayor Chmiel: Leave the door open for that period of time.
Councilman Johnson: It will probably be next spring by the time the 60 days.
' The draft EIS gets public hearing, gets rewritten as a final EIS. The EIS gets
submitted and approved by Met Council. Federal Highways. There's a whole bunch
of people yet to see that thing. We're probably talking a December timeframe
' for final approval of the final EIS rather than the draft EIS.
Councilwoman Dimler: Then you have 2 months.
' Councilman Johnson: Then 2 months after that. So we'd be looking at February-
March timeframe of next year.
' Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilwoman Dialer seconded to approve the request for
extension of Preliminary Plat for 2 1/2 acre lots by Gil Laurent, Bruce
Jeurissen and Sever Peterson until 60 days after approval of the final EIS. All
voted in favor and the motion carried.
Mayor Chmiel: Let's go back to item (k). We discussed the full completion now
' pertaining to the excavating, mining, filling and grading which is basically on
the final reading. Any further discussion? Paul, did you want to bring
something up yet?
' 18
1
City Council Meeting - May 14, 1990 I
Paul Krauss: No sir. I'm through. I'd just point out though that there's also f
a synopsis of the ordinance for publication purposes.
Mayor Chmiel: Right. '
Councilman Johnson: Is that included?
Paul Krauss: Yes. i
Mayor Chmiel: The only thing we've done thus far is the moving of it from 500
cubic yards of material to 1,000 in a 12 month period.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, do you want to address how does that fit into this?
•
Councilman Workman: I guess it doesn't. We've been saying it doesn't.
Discussing this with the other one?
Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah. '
Councilman Workman: I guess we've proven without a shadow of a doubt that it
doesn't so. Jay's words, not mine.
Councilman Johnson: I didn't say shadow of a doubt. That's a lawyer's word.
I'm an engineer. '
Mayor Chmiel: We have before us zoning ordinance amendment and this is of course
as it is pertaining to excavating, mining, filling and grading. The final
reading. Is there any discussion? Any further discussion? Changes that we've
got.
Councilman Johnson: I think the synopsis should be expanded somewhat. It's,
you know we're talking a 10 page ordinance synopsed down to 10 lines. I don't
know exactly what salient points to be put in there but I can see where we are
saving a lot of money in publishing costs. I don't know, a couple of bullets
about what some of the major changes are. Permit are required or this or that.
The 1,000 yards exempt. Lanscaping. Fencing. Conditional Use Permits. Some
of the main bullets of what the ordinance does.
Mayor Chmiel: I think what we're really trying to do is see that the Council
adopt the second and final reading amending Chapter 7 and Chapter 20 of the
Chanhassen City Code pertaining to excavating, mining, filling and grading and
approval of the ordinance synopsis for publication purposes. Right Paul?
Councilwoman Dimler: Second. '
Councilman Johnson: Was that a motion?
Councilwoman Oimler: Yes that was a motion. '
Councilman Johnson: Okay, would you include revising the synopsis to provide a
little more detail. You've seen the synopsis here. That's it. It's page 3. '
So you'll accept that?
19 '
I
City Council Meeting - May 14, 1990
IIMayor Chmiel: I would accept ept that as a friendly amendment, yes. Does the
second accept that?
ICouncilwoman Dimler: Yes.
1 Roger Knutson: Point in question. Are you talking about Section 7-30 of the
ordinance? Oh, the summary.
II Councilman Johnson: The summary of the ordinance. This little thing. Somehow
it's got to say a little more.
Roger Knutson: The Council has to approve the exact wording.
IMayor Chmiel: And I assume that you'll probably pull that together?
I Roger Knutson: Yes, and I'll have to bring it back to you for your next
meeting.
Mayor Chmiel: We have that motion on the floor with a second, all those in
Ifavor. Paul?
Paul Krauss: I don't have a problem with bringing it back to you for that
1 revised summary but if we have to do that, that delays implementation of the
ordinance.
,
Mayor Chmiel: Okay with staff direction to make sure Jay? Would that satisfy
I you? With staff to grab onto that to make those changes accordingly and maybe
you can work with them if you feel. . .
II Councilman Johnson: The City Attorney just said that we have to approve the
exact wording.
1 Roger Knutson: If you'd like, I will sit here while you're working on yoir
other items tonight and I will write it for you and believe you will have
something you can read.
1 Councilman Johnson: Then we can approve it tonight?
Roger Knutson: Yeah. Gary laughed because he couldn't read my writing.
IIMayor Chmiel moved, Councilwoman Disler seconded to adopt the second and final
reading amending Chapter 7 and Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code pertaining
I to Excavating, Mining, Filling and Grading with approval of an amended Ordinance
Synopsis for publication purposes. All voted in favor and-the motion carried.
IIVISITOR PRESENTATIONS:
Mayor Chmiel: Somewhere along the line, we've been jumping around, I did go
Ipast Visitor Presentation and I'd like to back up.
Don Atkins: Mayor and Council, I'm Don Atkins. I live at 9580 Eden Prairie - -
IIRoad. We are basically erosion control contractors. Explain a few things. I
20
11
I
City Council Meeting - May 14, 1990
II
talked to Don Ashworth the other day. We got involved in this Lake Ann Park and II
we did the work on it. Now we have to redo it all basically to erosion
problems. i want to just discuss erosion problems for a little bit. I think
Chanhassen does a terrible job of erosion and I will explain why. I belong to ,
the Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek. I'm on the Advisory Board for that. I'm also
President of the Minnesota Erosion Control Association. I've been in this
business longer than anybody in this area so we see a lot of faulty things that
are coming around. One of the things from Lake Ann Park, there should have been II
a lot of erosion preventative measures put in, there was not so it's going to
cost me pretty good money to redo it again. I've got about S questions I want
to ask the Council. Does anybody know the proper methods of silt fence II
installation? What's recommended. The other question is, why do we put hay
bales in front of silt fence? Wood fiber blanket and the property useage. I
see it all over Chanhassen. It's not used properly. Why, when you I
say Rosemount Engineering down here for example. Didn't get, let's
like you go from Rosemount to the Church to Empak building otohthe Opus whatever you want to call it back there, why wasn't there not rye seeded rye
IIitself? Grain rye put in so that a quick means to hold the soil so it wouldn't
all erode away. Waiting for a year for somebody to come along and do it. The
cost of that is very minimal and some of the things that I see that have
happened and I'll go on to just name a few. Powers building in Lake Susan Hill. II
The Powers Blvd. . The erosion on the south end of that even yesterday, today it
eroded clear down into the opposite field. There's probably a foot to 2 foot
wash out there so there's nothing been done in that
II
101. Two years that has not been seeded or mulched.�oOpus LLake,Berosion sofo the
H
dirt into the pond. Why wasn't there a silt fence or bales put in the bottom on
it? Woodwere in front at the very southeast corner of it. They dug and put the
I woodwere in but they left all the dirt in front of the woodwere so the II
principles are completely destroyed. Rosemount Engineering. Do they pay a
little bit extra? No hay bales in front of silt fence. All the other places
II
have got it but why not Rosemount? Stakes, 7 to 8 foot centers. Every plan
that you pick up it says the stakes should be on 4 foot centers. Empak, wood
fiber blanket on the north hill, it's not overlapped. It's laid the wrong way.
Hay bales staked with lath and I think the City did that themselves when they ell
had a problem early this spring. The City crew. So there's a couple of
recommendations and then I'll go back just a little bit. Use the heavy duty
silt fence if anybody knows what that is. The heavy duty silt fence, rather
than putting hay bales in front of silt fence, I would love to sell. I bale II
40,000 bales a year so I'd love to sell Chanhassen all my hay because I'd make
more money off it than I do silt fence but looking at it in the right
perspective, if you put the heavy duty silt fence in which has a nylon backing
II
with squares in it. It has a small rope put in the top of it. Use steel posts.
1 foot of silt fence, if it's the proper silt fence and again.I see all kinds
of, it says in any spec, merify 100 or recommended use of it. There's a lot of '
cheap stuff out that is absolutely you might as well just leave it at home as to II
use it because it does not meet specifications. So if you went to the steel
posts, the nylon backing with the rope in top on 10 foot posts would be probably
the best solution you could have. Okay, we had an education program. I've been I
to the City Engineer probably 3 times and talked to him. We had on March 16th
we had a meeting of there were 2 inspectors for example from the City of Eden
Prairie. We had about 40 people there. I had RSVP on it and about 2 days
II
previous, 3 days previous to the meeting I was in the inspector's office in the
City of Chanhassen and he said he might be there. Well he didn't make it. I
21
I
II
City Council Meeting - May 14, 1990
think that we are trying to educate the people. Sever Peterson was up here a
few minutes ago talking. Sever's on the, what are you on? One of the boards
anyway. The farmers basically have got their stuff pretty well together but the
' developers are raping your land without you knowing it. I'm not after the
developers. I'm just after it's what I believe in because I've done it for many
years. I spent a lot of money on my own place doing it. So if anybody wants
any questions and what I guess is about all the information I need. Any
questions?
.� Mayor Chmiel: No. Thank you Don for providing that information. I think
that's something that maybe we will look at within the City.
Don Atkins: Okay.
Councilman Johnson: You talked about Lake Ann Park and how you're going to have
to.. .
Don Atkins: Well we have to redo it because I took Bob Obermeyer who probably
everybody pretty well knows from Barr Engineering. He went out there and he
said most of the problem is erosion. 75% to 80% of the problem was from erosion
so we are redoing the park but with the recommendations that Bob Obermeyer comes
in and puts, say this is where we have to have all types of whatever it might be
to stop the soil erosion. But the city has to, I'm just saying, then we're
' doing that. It's going to cost us quite a bit of money but in the due
respect, I'd like to see it done to everybody elses too and some more things
that go on you know that could be curtailed in this thing. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there anyone else wishing to address Council at this time?
Loren Habbeger: My name is Loren Habbeger again. I guess what we're looking at
here is where do we stand on this permit here? We're trying to level the site
off and get it ready for future development.
Mayor Chmiel: Let me refer that to our Attorney.
Roger Knutson: There's been a lot of discussion but, was it you? I thought it
1 was someone else.
Loren Habbeger: You've probably talked to our attorney is who you've talked to.
I guess what we're trying to do here.
Roger Knutson: I've called him once and I've called him for the last 3 days and
I've not got a response to my phone calls.
Loren Habbeger: I guess what we're trying to do here is we're trying to level
off a site and make it practical for future development. I don't think the
' issue, if you can improve the site and make it work with the 2 1/2 acre
situation for future, I don't think you should hold back progress on that. I
just feel that we're not doing something that's going to be detrimental. It's
going to improve the overall development.
Roger Knutson: I don't think anyone on the City Council and the City is holding
back progress. I think the City wants you to go through the proper procedures
22
I
1
City Council Meeting - May 14, 1990 1
to get a permit. I
Loren Habbeger: I guess what it amounts to is what permit was issued here?
This goes back to early 1988. I went to the Department of Natural Resources. I
went through all channels as far as Watershed and so on and so forth. Mr. Brown
I started out with and what we're basically the understanding was we were going
to level the property off and take it in segments of an acre at a time and
that's what we're looking at. We want to take and take that hill which is, it's
got a bad elevation. Tom was out there today. We went over the whole
situation. What we're trying to do is pancake the hill so that we can run our
roads in there for future development and make it work. So I guess, Tom you
know looking at the thing, there's excruciating circumstances because you've got
some elevations there that, all we're trying to do is make something work.
We're not out here to hurt anybody or cause any problems. I
Roger Knutson: And the City is just trying to get compliance with it's
ordinances. I don't know if this is the best forum to resolve this tonight. I
Mayor Chmiel: I don't think it's a point that we should resolve it. We can't
resolve it anyway under Visitor Presentations.
Loren Habbeger: I guess the whole thing is what I'm looking at. Mr. Waingren
who did quite a bit of work for Naegele along 494. There were a lot of hills
there that were leveled off which is all highway business now and residential
areas. I think the thing is, what we're looking at here. It's definitely
suitable for housing rather than commercial or anything like that. It's
definitely a residential area. I don't see a value there as far as commercial
because of the I would say the view situation and so on. It would be more adapt
to housing and I think the same thing with Mr. Peterson's property. It
definitely should be a residential aspect that you people should be looking at.
I guess that's what we're trying to do and we may as well go into Mr. Peterson's
later on and develop that also. I guess what I'm asking here right now. . .
Mayor Chmiel: I guess we're at a position where we can't resolve the particular
question that you're asking right now. I think the resolvement will come from
further discussion with staff and 2 attorneys with that final determination
being made then.
Loren Habbeger: Well I appreciate, what we're trying to do here is we're just
trying to accomplish something here in an orderly fashion and we're not out here
to cause a problem. We're trying to improve the overall situation. I
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you Loren. Appreciate it. Is there anyone else?
VARIANCE REQUEST FOR A MOTHER-IN-LAW APARTMENT, 8628 CHANHASSEN HILLS DRIVE I
NORTH, ARLETTA BRAGG.
Paul Krauss: Earlier tonight the Board of Adjustments reviewed a variance I
request to establish a mother-in-law apartment in a new home that's currently
under construction for the Bragg's. The ordinance provides for a variance
procedure for these types of situations. Staff reviewed the request and felt
that it met the 4 standards that are located in the ordinance right now which
basically demonstrates that there's a need based on disability. That the
23 I
I
City.Council Meeting - May 14, 1990
building externally looks like a single family home and that separate utility
services are not being provided and relative to the variance's impact on the
surrounding neighborhood. Staff had recommended that the variance be approved.
The Board of Adjustment unanimously did that but there was some neighborhood
interaction. I think Mr. Mayor maybe you were here to hear that and there's
_ some reason to think that that decision would be appealed to the City Council
' tonight.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Is there anyone wishing to address Council at this
particular time?
' Councilman Johnson: Paul, the rights to appeal is what time length? 14 days I
believe?
' Paul Krauss: Within 10 days?
' Roger Knutson: 10 days is my recollection.
Councilman Johnson: 10 days? No Council action is required on this at this
time.
Paul Krauss: Not unless it's appealed.
' Councilman Johnson: Unless it is appealed and it can be appealed within 10 days
and at our next Council meeting it will come up again. What is the procedure
for appealing it?
Paul Krauss: We simply need a letter from anybody that's agrieved by the
decision.
Robert Long: Can I ask a question?
Mayor Chmiel: Certainly.
Robert Long: My name is Robert Long and I live in Chanhassen Hills, what is the
address? I don't know the address. Wherever. I've only lived there 9 months.
' I don't know where it is. I guess what I wanted to understand is what is the
appeal procedure. It's a new one on me so I don't know.
Councilman Johnson: It's what we were just going through.
Paul Krauss: In the past we've allowed appeals to come directly right now to
the City Council where you would state that you're agrieved by the decision of
' the Board of Adjustments and ask the City Council to reconsider. If you don't
do that tonight, you have 10 days to do that but you can do that right now.
Robert Long: Okay, let's try it right now while we're here. I think most of
you heard the arguments we brought up or maybe you didn't. I don't know.
Mayor Chmiel: Some did. Some did not.
Robert Long: Again the problem that I have with the duplex going in is that I
don't feel it's a mother-in-law apartment. I feel it's a duplex. It's set up
24
I
I
rCity Council Meeting - May 14, 1990
as a duplex. It looks like a duplex. If it's a duck, call it a duck. You know
the old argument for that. I do not want my neighborhood a duplex when it is
zoned single family dwelling. I've got roughly $200,000.00 invested in my home.
I bought that home there and I built the• home there with the idea that there
would not be a duplex in the neighborhood. It's single family dwelling. My
objection, maybe to clarify it a little more, given the fact that it is a
mother-in-law situation it is a fact that the building is set up precisely as
I understand a duplex to be set up. Carry the argument a little further, I know
what a duplex is because I had a couple of them. I know exactly what they look
like. I know how they're set up and I have one set up similar which was the
grandfather clause in and there was a lot of, this was before I purchased it but
it was grandfather claused in and it is single utility going in. It is a side
by side unit but it is a duplex. This particular unit happens to be an up and
down unit but I can't understand how you can turn around and call it a mother-
in-law apartment by fine tuning a definition. My objection of course is that
not the fact that it's going to be a mother-in-law apartment or mother-in-law's
living there or a family. That's fine with me. I'm comfortable with that but
the way the building is set up, when that building is sold, and it will be
because the average length of time that people own a home is roughly 7 years I
think, it is set up as a duplex. I've heard the Planning Commission's argument
that well at that time this is set up for mother-in-law apartment for one
individual. Named individual, on and on and on and that part of it is
comfortable but my objection is the way the building is set up. I would urge
the Council to take a look at it and maybe requesting that the building be set
up as a private, single family residence. Mother-in-laws live there, fine.
That's very comfortable. I guess that pretty much outlines what I have to say.
Chew on that for a while is my favorite comment. Thank you. '
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Is there anyone else? Hearing none, I'll just bring
it back to the Council. Jay. You sat in on the specific hearing on it. '
Councilman Johnson: This is a case where the applicant meets all of our laws
and all of our ordinances. If you're driving 55 mph down the road in a 55 mph
speed limit and you're in the right lane and you're going the right direction,
there's not much we can do about it. As long as you're still in a car. In this
case they're still in a car and they're doing everything by the law and we
can't, in my opinion, we can't make up our own laws and ignore what's written in
front of us here in the zoning ordinance. They have met the specifications,.
Whether these ordinances need to be modified or not, I don't know. I don't see
that the mother-in-law houses are that bad of a problem. I have no reason to
reverse my earlier vote.
Gail Aneson: My name is Gail Aneson and we live at 8625 Chanhassen Hills Drive
and I just have a question. This house is already is well started. It's
enclosed. Windows and doors are in and we're just now hearing about the
variance. What if one of the criteria was not met? What if it does have
separate utilities coming into it at this point? '
Councilman Johnson: It's already been checked.
Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, we review the plans when they're submitted. In fact '
the original plans did have a kitchen downstairs and we made them take it 'out
25 1
1
City• Council Meeting - May 14, 1990
and get a variance which is what they're doing now, before we would allow them
to build that.
Gail Aneson: Okay, so my biggest concern then is, in the future, since we let
this come in and it's a masked duplex, what happens because there's a lot of
vacant lots that haven't been built on yet. When someone comes in and starts
building a duplex with double entrance and a garage on each side and it gets to
the point that this house is at and they say, oh we just noticed that this is a
duplex and this is single family zoned? What happens then?
Paul Krauss: If it got to that point, we're not doing our job. We review it.
The building inspection department reviews it. A lot of departments in the City
review it before ground is even broken and we would not allow a duplex to be
built in a single family neighborhood.
Councilman Johnson: Paul, what you're saying is that the building plans that
were approved, you've removed the kitchen and stuff from the building plans.
Paul Krauss: Well when the building plans came in it was apparent to us that
there was an apartment in the basement and we made that an issue and said look,
' if you want to go ahead and start construction, you're going to have to take
that out of the plans and if you want to go ahead, and apply for a variance and
that's in fact what they did.
Councilman Johnson: So the current building plans do not include the kitchen in
the basement that are approved and they are building with?
Paul Krauss: That's my understanding of how the permit got issued, yes.
Councilman Johnson: So currently we're building a single family residence.
Once the variance is approved, they can then resubmit changes to their building
plans and put the kitchen back in.
' Paul Krauss: They clearly have the intent to do that and the plans are
adaptable to it but that's the way we handled it.
' Councilman Johnson: And a duplex would be a totally different issue. If they
came in with 2 garages and 2 entrances and everything, that would never get
through. . .
Paul Krauss: . ..and one set of utilities. And frankly, there's no law against
somebody putting an extra kitchen in the basement if they wanted to. A lot of
people do that for entertaining. That by itself does not constitute a duplex.
rGail Aneson: Well thank you. Like I say, our biggest concern is that no, in
the future because you know when you open the door a little bit, it can be
pushed wide open and in the future we do not want duplexes or multiple family
dwellings built in that development.
Mayor Chmiel: Within a residential area, it's a single family unit that can
only be built within that specific area.
' 26
11
City Council Meeting - May 14, 1990
•
11
•
Councilman Johnson: You are in a PUD that has multiples attached to it. 1
Apartment buildings planned for right next to you. As part of the PUO approval
there are some R-12 I believe.
Councilman Workman: Not right across.
Councilman Johnson: But it's all tied up with the TH 212 corridor but it was
originally approved with some. I don't see it on the map but.
Robert Long: We've got a big objection to 212 being stuck in there after we
purchased our property too but that's a different thing. ,
Councilman Johnson: Well 212 was there before it was platted but I sat and
listened to a real estate agent tell a guy that the land next to the house that
he was buying was zoned single family residential when it was zoned for
apartments so real estate agents don't always tell exactly the truth.
Mrs. Long: Well now this was something that I got from the City Council that 1
showed 212 way over by Lake Riley. Now you've got it going closer to us.
Originally it was not where you have it.
Councilman Johnson: They may have shown you one of the alternatives.
Robert Long: Before we moved into the area we requested all the information. . . ,
Councilman Johnson: A couple years ago I couldn't say that because the Mayor
was a realtor. That was the previous mayor. This guy only sell electricity.
Mayor Chmiel: Any other discussion?
Councilman Workman: I believe why Chan Hills and Lake Susan Hills, that 212 is
going to be reassessed.
Robert Long: Is there a way we can get some more information on what people are
thinking on that?
Councilman Workman: Sure, give me a call.
Councilman Johnson: There's a public information meeting, public hearing on TH
212 June 6th at the grade school. That one's for the draft EIS. The draft EIS
is in the library right next door and you can go look at it at any time. 1
Mayor Chmiel: 7:30?
Paul Krauss: Right. '
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, any other discussion? If not hearing any, I'll entertain a
motion.
Councilman Workman: So moved.
Councilman Johnson: What did you move? I move denial of the appeal of the
decision of the Board.
27 '
•
i
City Council Meeting - May 14, 1990
Councilman Workman: Second.
Councilman Johnson moved, Councilman Workman seconded to deny the appeal of
' � Y PP the �
decision of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals for a variance request for a
Mother-in-Law apartment at 8628 Chanhassen Hills Drive North. All voted in
favor and the motion carried.
ACCEPT CONCEPT PLAN FOR STORM WATER UTILITY; AUTHORIZE PREPARATION OF FINAL
STORM WATER UTILITY REPORT.
Gary Warren: The majority of the document should be somewhat familiar to
' Council. This was reviewed at the April 30th work session. Basically based on
input received that evening, we've had our consultant Short-Elliott take a look
at establishing a $.50 per acre cost for the undeveloped and agricultural
property and we've pared down, and I should caution I guess that all these
numbers are just kind of concepts at this time but we pared down the capital
improvement program to 1.5 million versus 2 that we had originally put in there.
So the report basically reflects that input and modifications accordingly. Mark
' Lobermeier is here and I'd like to ask Mark if he'd come up and just kind of
briefly run through the rest of the details that are pertinent here for this
evening.
Mark Lobermeier: Mr. Mayor, Councilmembers. As you recall, I was at the work
session about 2 weeks ago and we went through this, some overheads on the
utility. I guess I'd just like to go through a few of those again tonight to
just kind of bring you back up to speed to maybe generate some questions and
then cover some of the revised numbers in the draft report.
Mayor Chmiel: All within 10 minutes?
Mark Lobermeier: I'll do it as fast as I can. What we're talking about tonight
is financing storm water projects using a storm water utility concept. As Gary
mentioned, the report that we're talking about is a concept report. It's kind
of like a feasibility study to give you an idea that this is the way we want to
go or not. It's not a binding type thing. More information and provide you
with some direction. Storm water utility used to cover expenses such as
planning and engineering, routine maintenance and also operating the storm water
utility or things relating. ..and water quality in the city. Most of the
expenses that we've shown are in planning and engineering and they cover things
like erosion and sediment control that were eluded to earlier. Local water
management planning. Water quality in lakes and wetlands and also capital
' improvements such as new construction and reconstruction of a' facility. Storm
water utility has several advantages. First of all the contributers of runoff
from property who are causing the needs for improvement are the ones who pay.
Secondly, the charges are proportional to the amount of runoff or the pollution
' that runs off of these properties. Third is a self financing method. That is
it doesn't compete with the general fund with other government concerns. The
utility doesn't cause an increase in the property tax levy. The revenues that
the utility generates are kept in a separate designated fund just for storm
water type improvements and it's legally defendable. By that I mean, you don't
need to show benefit to properties in order to operate and chart properties with
the utilities. How will the utility benefit Chanhassen? As we mentioned, it
28
I
City Council Meeting - May 14, 1990 ,
will provide a continuous source of revenue. It's a self financing system. It I
doesn't compete for the general fund dollars and it may even reduce the levy or
allow funds to be reallocated to other areas. Third, by constructing and
maintaining storm water drainage facilities, the City will realize benefits of
flood control which provide property and life protection, safe and open
transportation systems during storms, water quality improvements and enhancement
of recreational opportunities. The report that you have before you outlines the
financing dilemma as we call it, for storm water improvements. The basic
methods that you have available for financing drainage and water quality type
improvements include. . ., general passess or special tax districts, special
assessments which again can be very difficult when you need to show benefit to
properties. Building permits and land development fees. User charge or the
utility that we're talking about is another option and last of all. ..outline
some of the advantages and disadvantages of each of the methods. I think that
the best option that you should be looking at should be a fair method. Should
be dependable. Again, it should have a strong legal basis and should be
something fairly simple to operate. We think that through what's presented in
the report that we find that the best answer to that is a storm water utility.
There's just a couple key elements that need to be understood if you're going to
go ahead with the utility. First of all it is all real property within a
drainage basin will benefit from the installation of an adequate storm drainage
system. Not just those that at the bottom on the hill. Secondly, the cost of
installing an adequate drainage system should be assessed against all developed
property in the basin. To come up with an idea of what the charges might be, we
looked at a couple things. Again, as I mentioned the charges based on how much
water would run off a particular property and how much pollutant loads is
generated so we look at existing land use for the property. For existing land
use we look at how much rain would run off in this case or if we get 2 inches of
rain tonight, how much water would run off and on that basis we can say well
such a percentage of water comes off of residential property. Such a percentage
comes off of commercial property and on that basis we can come up with the
dollar amounts that support the programs that the City needs to implement. We
projected that a 5 year capital improvement cost of about 1.5 million dollars
which would be about $500,000.00 per year. That gave us a residential lot cost
of around $4.00 per lot per quarter or about $12.00 a year. Commercial property
would be charged on an acre basis at a little over $51.00 per acre per quarter.
Industrial lots would be around $40.00 per acre per quarter. And to get to
these numbers, we looked at the agricultural and the undeveloped properties in
the city and charged a flat rate of $.50 per acre. We used the flat rate again
mostly to keep the cost for agricultural and undeveloped land at somewhat of an
acceptable level. This does have somewhat of an affect because the other
properties� do have to pick up a little bit of the difference but if we go just
with the amount of runoff that would come off of these properties, the costs
there are too prohibitive. Again I want to point out that the numbers that
we're showing here are examples only and they don't represent any commitment at
this point by the City. The plan is just under consideration as a concept and
through your approval tonight we'd like to be able to go ahead and try to fine
tune both the capital improvement costs and what the final property charges
should be. One important aspect when looking at the utility is comparing how
the utility is supported to your current tax basis. The top line indicates that
residential properties currently pay about 50% of the taxes in Chanhassen. The
utility on the other hand would be supported only at about 38% by the
residential properties because only about 38% of the total runoff in the City
29 '
1
IICity,Council Meeting - May 14, 1990
II comes off of those same properties. Where that difference gets picked up is the
commercial/industrial properties would be paying a higher percentage into the
storm water utility than they currently would in property taxes. Other points .
I that come up often is who else is doing this? Is this something new that we're
trying to do? A lot of people are doing this and we've listed just a few of the
communities in the metropolitan area that are implementing the unit storm water
II utilities. The City of Roseville was one of the first to use the utility. They
use a charge of a little over $4.00 for residential lot and about $65.00 for •
industrial property. Bloomington is another community that uses the utility.
They're about $7.00 for residential lot and around $16.00 for industrial
I properties and commercial. They felt it was more important to keep the cost
down for the business properties. Eagan is one you may have seen just recently
in the newspaper getting their utilities off the ground. They are similar to
I Bloomington at about $4.50 per residential lot and around $22.00 for industrial
property. Again, these charges are extremely sensitive to how much you're
trying to generate with your overall program so depending on what the acceptable
I charge is determined to be and how much you want to accomplish over a certain
period of time, those charges can be varied to come out how you want them. As
Gary indicated we'd like to get approval tonight to go ahead and just to fine
tune the program. Get some better numbers together and come back again for you
I and for the public. Some of the things that are coming next would be accept the
basic concept and that would be accept this report. Go in and we look at the
cost projections and try to really get, one of the things that Chanhassen's
I going to be doing in the next few years that would be covered by the utility.
Get a real good handle on that. We'd settle in on the fact that we are going to
base this utility on existing land use and we are going to base it on a certain
II amount of rainfall. We used 2 inches because that gives us a certain ratio of
how much residential pays versus industrial. The more rainfall you use the
closer the industrial and commercial rates get. The less rainfall you use, the
farther away those rates get. The report indicates and a table that illustrates
I that, that's one other thing that I think would be decided and finalized in the
next phase of the project. Next an ordinance would be drafted which would
provide legal basis. Would define the fee equation and any exclusions of
I properties that would not be charged and also an appeal process. Item 4 is
probably the most important part if you do decide to go ahead. The utility
method is going to succeed and be a very strong public information program.
We're talking about things like putting newspaper articles. Having some flyers
I going. Getting the word out on exactly what the utility is. More importantly,
having one or more informational meetings where the public can come in and talk
about it. This is where I live. How much is my charge going to be and get that
I input before the numbers are actually finalized and find out what everybody is
thinking about. Try to keep it as open as possible. Once the public input
stage is pretty much complete, you have a good feel for where people are at, we
I can look at going to public hearing and lastly, would be amending the billing
procedure which would essentially amount to adding a line where it says water
and sewer. Underneath it may say storm water utility. So it's again a user
charge just like the sanitary and water services that many of you are used to
Ipaying every month and I guess my 10 minutes are up.
Councilman Workman: Maybe to discuss this. How about the folks that don't have
IIa water and sewer bill?
II30
II
I
City Council Meeting - May 14, 1990 1
Mark Lobermeier: Well it would require to go ahead with the utility program 11
would be to expand your current billing procedure to cover those areas that
currently don't have city services. At some point as development continues to
occur, they will be hooked up to city services and of course those items will
just be added to the billing so to adopt the utility program would mean to
expand your current methods.
Councilman Workman: If we dubbed the $4.00 or something a quarter, that's all
they'd have on their bill. They wouldn't have sewer and water. What really
would we have to enforce that? We couldn't shut off their ability to have
runoff. I'm thinking of specific people who are probably thinking this too.
Councilman Johnson: We're not going to allow it to rain on their property
anymore.
Councilman Workman: My point's well taken.
Roger Knutson: What you could do is you'd handle it the same way you do when
someone does not pay their water bill. It's under the same statute that allows
you to send your unpaid water bills down to the County for collection of taxes.
You can do the 'same thing with this.
Councilman Johnson: Plus interest and everything else. Pretty soon it will be
all the way up to $20.00 a year. ,
Gary Warren: Mark, by your earlier discussion as we've approached this, part of
1 the reason that the storm water utility is good is because it's defensible. It's
based on equations of runoff and runoff impact. Do we jeopardize that integrity
by fixing a flat rate for the agricultural/undeveloped land at $.50 because
we're basically taking it out of the equation and setting that. We're not
saying that it's proportional to it's impact.
Mark Lobermeier: Utilities have operated in a couple ways. I talked with
Bloomington just the other day and they were very quick to point out that gee
here in Bloomington we did establish a charge for undeveloped properties. The
basic utility concept as it initially stands is that just in developed parcels
should contribute so I'm not sure that it's really going to jeopardize the
program. I may offer that if you go straight runoff, that that may jeopardize
the success of the utility because the costs are just going to be too
prohibitive. When we went through it just on a pure runoff basis, we were
coming up with about a $2.00 an acre charge for agricultural property. Now
that'd be per quarter and they can average agricultural landowner...
Councilwoman Dimler: I do not understand where you come up with that because ,
you know to me agricultural land has very little runoff because there's very few
paved surfaces. There's no roofs. .I mean the intent is for the rain to be
soaked up and the only time I can see runoff is when we have a heavy rain that
washes when there isn't property erosion control. Now most farmers that I know
are very good about soil conservation and erosion control so to me even $.50 per
acre sounds like a lot. Where do you get the $2.00? I don't understand.
Mark Lobermeier: The $2.00 that was initially presented is based on a runoff
backer that's assigned to agricultural land. It follows the soil conservation
31
1
City Council Meeting - May 14, 1990
i
service method for determining runoff for different properties. Looking at the
runoff factors or runoff tendencies that are assigned to different properties,
agricultural land depending on how it's treated. Whether there's no crops or
' what have you, often time has a runoff factor as high as residential properties
because you have barer soil that's tilled up. And what happens is, as rain
falls, the soil particals get water around them and if you get enough of the
sand grated layer, you essentially form a layer that won't allow water to soak
' in. If you get a nice soaking rain today, you don't get runoff off of much
property. ..
' Councilwoman Dimler: We haven't had that problem for a few years.
Mark Lobermeier: ...but it doesn't run off your yard either. In a residential
situation as agricultural, if you get a very heavy intense rain, it's all going
to runoff. And the rows inbetween the corn that's out there, you're going to
get a fair amount of runoff.
' Councilwoman Dimler: I've watched the corn rows after a rain and believe me the
water stays right there.
' Mark Lobermeier: Well the factors aren't anything that we made up. They're
pretty well established by the Soil Conservation District.
Councilwoman Dimler: I just don't see it.
' Councilman Johnson: I believe it.
' Councilwoman Dimler: I mean the purpose of the rain is to soak in and water the
crops you know.
' Mark Lobermeier: And there are methods that a lot of farmers do use.
Conservation tillage and conservative farming to try to keep the water on their
land.
' Councilwoman Dimler: So are you telling us then that we're going to extend the
storm sewer out towards agricultural land? I think that would be very
expensive.
' Mark Lobermeier: No. What we're indicating is that runoff, well when it rains
water comes off of all properties in the city so you have a certain volume that
comes off of each property and because that water has to be handled by the City
at some juncture, either through the water management organizations or it drains
into your storm sewer or culverts that have to be replaced, the City incurs
costs for managing this water. Or for trying to improve the water quality when
the water runs off of agricultural land into streams or into lakes, that's a
cost to the City and because of those costs, we're trying to come up with a
method to try to offset the costs that right now come out of general taxes.
' Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, well I guess we'll have more farmers here to discuss
this at the public hearing.
' Paul Krauss: What would we do with large lot residential? If you've got a 3
acre parcel, the home obviously occupies only a small quarter of that. Is that
32
11
City Council Meeting - .May 14, 1990 1
balance of the property developed or undeveloped? i
Mark Lobermeier: It can be treated a couple different ways. I guess for the
sake of the report we treated it just as a large parcel and gave it a runoff
index that would relate it to a 2 acre lot so that accounts for some of that.
If the charge is still deemed too high when we go through some of the public
information program, we could try to make it an overall determination say for ,
lots that are 2 1/2 acres and above will assume the residential lot cost of so
much and undeveloped property. We try to take that into account when we
establish what runoff factors. ,
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, any other discussions?
Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah, I guess I'd like to add some other comments. I see
this as a tax so it somehow here we are increasing taxes. I would guess that in
order for me to vote for this I would go to what page 4 has to say about
reducing the tax levy which supports the general fund at that so we aren't
increasing the taxes. But I'm asking by what amount. 'What's the formula here?
Mark Lobermeier: I can't tell you that until we finalize it.
Councilwoman Dimler: What about the other cities that have done that? W hat
,
have they used?
' Mark Lobermeier: I can't give you an exact figures although Roseville did note
a substantial decrease in their overall levy. Some communities say, fine we can
take that money out of general taxes. We aren't going to lower the taxes but
now we have that money to use in other places when we put that together so it
may not necessarily mean lowering. It may mean a reallocation of some of your
funds but now. . .
Councilwoman Dimler: Well I would like to see it as a lowering, that's what I'm
saying. Also, I would be willing to study it more carefully but I would have to
see that we address water quality and not just dealing with water runoff. That
means that this money would be able to be used to restore our lakes. It would
be able to be used to educate the public on use of fertilizers and washing
detergents which pollute our lakes and also anything new that comes down the
pike here that we can do to protect the quality and quantity of our water. I
don't want to see it just being used to create new construction on storm sewer.
My other question is, is the developer still going to be paying?
Gary Warren: Yeah, if I could maybe address a couple of your comments
Councilwoman Dimler. The developers would still pay as they do at our current
situation, to have the actual utilities constructed storm sewers that are a I
pertinance to development. That would not change. That would go consistent
with the developments. What we're looking at I think really is the big picture
to be able to address as you say, water quality issues as well as the storm
water rate issue and runoff issue. We will be faced as we've reviewed in the
past with possibly over $100,000.00 study just to meet the watershed
requirements here for this, it's called Chapter 509 requirements for putting
together the City's total comprehensive plan. It was partly with that funding
commitment or obligation in the future that we were starting to look at this
utility district to see where can we fund this from because we don't have that
33
1
City Council Meeting - May 14, 1990
storm water fund anyplace now. It would have to come out of streets or utility
or someplace. The other issue is, as the article from Eagan was pretty timely
here on the water quality management plan that they have in place now and my
impression is we deal with Eurasian Water Milfoil and Purple Loosestrife and the
other challenges that we've been recently up against here on water quality is
that it is a plan of that nature that needs to be an offspring of this as well
and as a part of our 509 plan so that we have the tools in place to be able to
address and control the use and the development of these lakes. To equate it to
strictly if we implement the utility district, then we will have a comparable
' savings in taxes I don't think is realistic. There could be some savings
because we use the street department for example to clean storm sewers. To
sweep the streets. Around the lakes. To do retention pond cleaning, some things
' of those nature that are happening now, we would not be doing out of the street
sweeping. We'd be doing it out of this fund but there are a lot of things that •
aren't being done now because we don't have the ability, the staff or the time
to keep up with that that will lead to not a savings in the general fund but
would be funded directly out of this commitment.
Councilwoman Dimler: Which brings me to a few of my other things. Do we need
' to increase our personnel for this program?
Gary Warren: Well part of the capital improvement plan that Mark references
here that I have not had a chance to sit down and say alright, this is what we
' want to do but the typical plans that other cities have implemented show several
things. One is increasing equipment. Do you buy another street sweeper so you
can more religiously sweep the runoff areas closest to your more important
' lakes. Increase staff to deal with that . The City doesn't even have a good
storm sewer map right now of our drainage improvements and we maintain storm
sewer culverts for example on a hazard basis. So if we get a storm and somebody
' calls us up and says that this one is plugged and their yard is getting washed
out, then we're out there but it's kind of an out of sight, out of mind issue
for us right now and so I could envision as a part of honing the capital
improvement program that staffing, equipment and these two studies that I
' mentioned earlier would be important parts that we would want to take a look at
and see where our commitment is.
Councilwoman Oimler: Do you have any idea what the initial costs are likely to
be?
Gary Warren: In the plan right now that you have in front of you is a 5 year
program which would be generated 1.5 million dollars worth of revenues.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, but what's the cost to the City to get started? Are
there any?
Mayor Chmiel: There has to be.
Councilwoman Dimler: Start up costs.
' Gary Warren: To initiate the CIP so to speak? Well let me give you a scenario
I guess. If we did not establish the district in time to get revenue in here
for doing the Chapter 509 comprehensive watershed plan which is about $100,000.
34
I
City Council Meeting - May 14, 1990 • 1
$100,000.00 study, we would have to fund that from some interim source until the
revenues would catch up. II
Councilwoman Dimler: So the study is what you're talking 'about as being the II initial cost?
Gary Warren: That's one area, It depends how active we want to get as a city. II If we want to go out and abate Eurasian Water Milfoii on a very proactive
measure, anything that you want to pick up before the utility district receives
the revenues would have to be funded on an interim basis.
Councilwoman Dimler: And one final question. Does having this utility in place II
enhance the City's chances of getting grants or decrease them? Will they say
they have the money? I mean if we were to apply for a grant and they see that
II
we have this in place, they'll say well they don't need it. They've got the
money stored away.
Gary Warren: The grants that I'm familiar with and Mark may want to, he's a II
little bit closer to the grants that I'm familiar with, no. There's no ability
to pay type criteria that falls into the grant program. A clean water program
for the Riley chain of lakes for example, they just wanted to make sure that the
II
City was able to pay their fair share under their criteria. I don't know Mark?
Mark Lobermeier: Most of the grants that are available.. .50-50 basis and there
II
( is no criteria.
? Councilwoman Dimler: They're not going to look and see that we have this in
1 place? Okay. Thank you. That's all I have.
II
Mayor Chmiel: I had some of the same questions unfortunately.
Councilwoman Dimler: Fortunately you mean. We can get out of here. II
Mayor Chmiel: No, unfortunately. I didn't get a chance to ask them. I
Councilman Johnson: I've been in favor of storm water utility for a long time.
I've gone to several classes at the National League of Cities convention on them
and I've seen their effect. I see it as a way of in the future we're going to II
have to pay, if we don't have a storm water utility, we're going to have to take
from the general funds money to address non point source pollution. To address
further erosion rules that will be coming down from EPA and the State and those
II
moneies are going to have to be brought someplace and it's either raise our tax
rates, which the legislature is trying very hard to keep us'from having the
ability to do or create this fund. The cities that I have talked to through
II
these conferences and whatever, have all had a very positive reaction to the
fund. When you're talking. $16.00 per residential household per year, we're not
talking a terrible amount. The other big thing about it is that I think this is
a fairer way to do it because my house pays $16.00. The house at Near Mountain
II
or Trapper's Pass that's a half million dollar house does not contribute to the
problem significantly more than mine does and they pay $16.00. So I think it's
fairer than using property taxes for this purpose. So in that case I think this II is a fair way to do it.
35
II
II
11 City Council Meeting - May 14, 1990
I Councilwoman Dimler: I agree with you Jay but I still think that the only way
we'll make sure, you know the non point source pollution that you addressed will
only be addressed by this if we make sure that water quality is addressed and
Inot just quantity.
Councilman Johnson: Oh it's got to be and I'm in total agreement with you
II there. I think quality, we've addressed quantity for years and now we really
have to address quality and that I think is already in here isn't it?
•
Paul Krauss: Gary and I have talked about this for quite some time. This is
I the mechanism that we would use to do water quality and Wetland rolled into the
same package because they're all co-mingled. I think we should give it a little
more play in the text because it increases the obvious merits of going ahead
I with this or the awareness of what we're going to be doing but it's always been
involved with that yes.
II Councilman Johnson: At this point the text seems to be pretty mechanical. You
know here's the cost to this citizen and this. You know the benefits aren't as
well laid out but I agree that up front the people, a lot of the people who
moved to this city moved to it because of the amenities of the city and they
I want to protect it and most the people I know, $16.00 a year is not going to be,
they would contribute for environmental purposes. And this I think we can't
play this, if this thing gets billed as the City's way of building storm sewers,
I that's a wrong concept. It's a water quality and the overall planning for our
water here that has to be billed as to what this is all about. Protecting our i
waters and our waterways.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay Anything else?II Mayor good. An thing else. Tom. 1
Councilman Workman: I'd like to back up in a general sense of what Ursula said
I and that it is a tax and it is another cost. We always say well $16.00 isn't
going to hurt us and $108.00 isn't going to hurt us for a community center and
on and on and on so you get a lot of them and we should always be cautious that
I way.
Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah, that's why I suggest reducing the tax levy for the
general fund.
IIGary Warren: Mr. Mayor, I think the capital improvement program that we'll
draft up here in a little bit sore finite fashion, will be helpful to us and to
II the Council as far as giving us your impressions on what are the key issues that
we need to address with the funding that would come out of this utility.
Mayor Chmiel: Just so there's no surprises for everybody else, what's the cost
II of this study going to be?
Gary Warren: Of which study is that?
IMayor Chmiel: What you're doing right now?
IIGary Warren: This study has already been funded. Mark what are we?
Mark Lobermeier: $4,500.00.
' 36
II
City Council Meeting - May 14, 1990 • 1
Gary Warren: $4,500.00 is what we had contracted with Short-Elliott to do this I
phase of the work.
- Mayor Chmiel: Upon finalization of it, what's the bottom dollar? I
Gary Warren: Well this takes us through the adoption of the ordinance.
Mayor Chmiel: The $4,500.00 does? Okay. 1
Councilwoman Dimler: I would also like to suggest that we do a community II questionnaire.
Councilman Johnson: What?
Councilwoman Dimler: I would like to suggest that we do the community I
questionnaire. Would that be included in the cost of the study?
Gary Warren: Well Council had budgeted $50,000.00 this year to take on this I
issue so I mean there's money there. By a community questionnaire, would that
be do you have some specifics? .
Councilwoman Dimler: Well it was suggested in the study. Can you address that II
Mark?
Mark Lobermeier: ' There are different ways of getting public input. One would I
be to have some newspaper articles or send a flyer out on that issue. There's a
number of different ways that it can be done and an overall questionnaire would II be another way.
Councilwoman Dimler: I guess I would rather have the community tell us what
they want than us put an article in the paper telling them this side of it. I
Mayor Chmiel: Well I think we have to tell them what we're proposing and be
open to any suggestions to that would be recognized. I
Councilwoman Dimler: Right. But they could back. I think a questionnaire
would be more revealing of what the public is thinking.
II
Gary Warren: Let us take a shot at drafting something up here. We are looking
to try to get something in mid-June for you, a public information meeting and if
we could get that questionnaire out and back so we would be prepared from that,
II
I think that would probably work out well to put it all together.
Councilman Johnson: I don't know about so much a questionnaire as a simple fact
sheet or a mailing that provides and it has to be brief. I've found that II
something like this, if you send something like this out, 1 in 20 people might
read it.
Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah, but I'm a little leery when we send out a fact sheet II
it doesn't leave any room for their input.
Gary Warren: We can do a combination I think. Give a fact sheet because we I
37
I
II
City .Council Meeting - May 14, 1990
have to explain what a utility district is if we're going to ask questions about
it.
'
1
Councilman Johnson: It's an pretty interesting new concept for a lot of people.
Councilwoman Dimler: Right but they should also be able to feed back to us what
they think.
Councilman Johnson: I think there would be an announcement of public meetings
too where they can come and talk about it.
' Mayor Chmiel: I think what we should do is get a motion on this to accept the
concept plan for the storm water utility.
Councilwoman Dimler: Second.
' Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilwoman Dialer seconded to accept the Concept Plan for
Storm Water Utility, Authorize preparation of final storm water utility report
and call for a public information meeting. All voted in favor and the motion
carried.
Gary Warren: Did that motion include scheduling the public information meeting
for mid-June?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes. Well it doesn't that here.
1
' Councilman Johnson: And there's a work session you want June 18th?
Gary Warren: At Council discretion I guess we could have a work session June
18th after we get a little bit better definition on the CIP.
' Councilman Johnson: I will be in Omaha that day.
' Councilwoman Dimler: I won't be here either.
Gary Warren: Well if there's a better date. I'll have Kim try to coordinate
1 schedules.
ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO AMEND SECTIONS 20-30 AND 20-903 OF THE CITY CODE
PERTAINING TO RECORDING OF PERMITS AND ZONING LOTS, FIRST READING.
Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, we have two housecleaning items for want of a better
description here. The first one is pertaining to the filing of permit
approvals, conditional use permits and what not against the property's title.
In the past we've had a requirement, in fact I think it was a State law that
some of these things be recorded but the City's had some difficulty in recording
some of these things that property owners will give certificate of titles after
' the fact it's very difficult to oftentimes to get these things done. We think
that it's imperative that we clear this up a little bit because this is our best
mechanism of putting the conditions in the chain of title and future buyers are
' made aware of it. So the City Attorney drafted an ordinance that stipulates the
recording of permits as a requirement and that whatever we are permitting does
not take place until the permit's recorded and we have some evidence of that.
' 38
1 •
I
City Council Meeting - May 14, 1990 _
The second housecleaning item has to do with a situation that occurs when a
building parcel is comprised of several underlying lots that have been combined
for tax purposes. Technically we still have to apply setback standards to those
individual interior lot lines. Carver Beach is the most notorious example of
these where you might have eight 20 foot lots making up a parcel. The City
Attorney's come up with a concept of a zoning lot which is a lot that's combined
for tax purposes which allows us to only consider the perimeter of the lot for
setback requirements. I think it clears up a little bit of an anomaly that we
have right now. It's not a major problem but we've had a number of these things
come up and this really gives us guidance as to how to handle them. Again, I
think both of these things are relatively minor and they'll facilitate our work
in the future.
Councilman Johnson: If you have a house on 8 of these 20 foot lots and you have
a 10 foot sideyard setback on a 20 foot wide lot.
Councilwoman Dimler: You're in trouble.
. Councilman Johnson: A 20 foot setback on a 20 foot lot, you've got to do
something reasonable.
Councilwoman Dimler: I have a question. I guess when I first read this I ,
thought that sounds great but I was wondering, is there a cost? I'm sure you
have to record this at the County. What's the cost? Is there a cost? ,
Paul Krauss: Yes. There is a cost but I don't know what it's really.
Roger Knutson: It's so much a page depending on how long the document is and
frankly my secretary writes out the checks so I don't know what it is. I think
it's $2.00 a page or $10.00 a document or something like that.
Councilwoman Dimler: So it's liable to cost up to $20.00? ,
Roger Knutson: Well your average variance usually run two pages. Or
conditional use, usually 2 pages.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, and also are you telling me that if I need a permit
to replace my deck, that that would have to be recorded? '
Paul Krauss: No. We're talking conditional use permits.
Roger Knutson: Not a building permit. '
Councilman Johnson: Mining permits.
Councilwoman Dimler: Because on the second page here it says all permits so
that's why I was wondering.
Paul Krauss: No, it applies to variances, conditional use permit, interim use
permits and site plan approvals, wetland permits and mining permits.
Councilwoman Dimler: But I read somewhere where it says all permits so I wanted ,
to clarify that.
39
t
City Council Meeting - May 14, 1990
Mayor Chmiel: That wouldn't necessarily necess a building permit.
' Councilwoman Dimler: I was hoping that was the case. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Any other discussion? Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion.
Councilman Johnson: Is this a first reading?
Paul Krauss: Yes.
Councilman Johnson: I move approval of the first reading of Ordinance amending
Section 20-30 and 20-903.
' Councilwoman Dimler: Second.
Councilman Johnson moved, Councilwoman Disler seconded to approve the first
' reading of Zoning Ordinance Amendment amending Section 20-30, Recording Permits
and Section 20-903, Zoning Lots. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
APPOINTMENT TO HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY.
Todd Gerhardt: Mr. Mayor, this item was placed on the agenda to get feedback
' from the Mayor and Council regarding the appointment of a new commissioner to
the HRA. As stated in my memo, Chairman Cliff Whitehill's term expires at the
end of May 31st and Cliff has requested that he be reappointed for a 1 year
' period of time that he may assist in the transition of the new chairman. Or in
the past the Council has looked at advertising in the paper and requesting
advertising of a new commissioner's position.
' Councilwoman Dimler: Why does he only want to serve one year?
Todd Gerhardt: To help in the transition.
' Mayor Chmiel: To train the chair.
' Councilwoman Dimler: Who's going to be the new Chair?
Mayor Chmiel: Well that would be something that would be appointed.
' Councilwoman Dimler: So then next year we'll have to reappoint someone else to
take his place?
•
' Mayor Chmiel: Yes is what he's saying. Don, did you want to say something?
Todd Gerhardt: Well 2 people.
Don Ashworth: Yeah, I wanted to note that the HRA appointments are different
than really any of the other appointments you have with the city in that the
nomination can only occur by the Mayor and the Council's role is one of agreeing
' or not agreeing to the nomination made by the Mayor. So again I hadn't
anticipated this item being on the agenda. Instead potentially just working
with the Mayor to see how he would like to proceed.
1 *0
City Council Meeting - May 14, 1990
•
Councilman Johnson: It should have been on the agenda about 2 months ago. f
Mayor Chmiel: Right.
Don Ashworth: Well I think we had our joint meeting between Council and HRA and
I think there were some things that the Mayor was looking at as well but anyway, _
the question by Cliff. They are 5 year appointments so there would have to be
someway in which he literally would be giving you notification of his intent to
resign 1 year from today. I don't know of any provision other than the 5 year
because right now they are on a 5 year appointments and each one comes up one
per year. '
Mayor Chmiel: That was my question. How does this deviate from the norm? How
do we go through this particular procedure as such?
Councilman Johnson: Is the 5 year state law?
Roger Knutson: Yes. And if someone resigns in mid—term, you appoint to fill I
thre remainder of that term.
Councilman Johnson: So the Minneapolis City Council has appointed themselves
the HRA there but their terms aren't 5 year terms on the City Council.
Roger Knutson: Excuse me, there is one exception. The exception is that if you
appoint only Council members as HRA commissioners, you can make the terms of the
HRA commissioners coincide with the terms of the Council members.
Councilman Johnson: If you have a mix of council members and regular members, ,
can you take the positions that our council members and have them run with their
council terms?
Roger Knutson: I don't believe so. ,
Todd Gerhardt: No, Clark would have fallen into that position. '
Councilman Johnson: Yeah, but see at that time we weren't even considering
that. I've said that we need members of the Council on the HRA and I see
because of now, I see why what has happened did happen. Of course and then we
reappointed Clark and Clark has said that he would step down too if asked.
Several people got reappointed just as their terms were ending on the Council.
Roger Knutson: If you wanted it mixed that way and guaranteed it, I'd have to '
check to be sure.
Councilman Johnson: Yeah, because see that's what I'd like to almost see. ,
Mayor Chmiel: Whether they be on the Council or they're not, I would assume
that the 5 years would just an automatic. If a Council person no longer was a
council person and his term still continues in my estimation. For instance if
he's on for 4 years as a City Council okay and he has it for 5 years.
Councilman Johnson: Tom's is going to extend beyond that. '
41 '
City, Council Meeting - May 14, 1990
11 Mayor Chmiel: Right. Then I think that that's just an automatic extension to
that fifth year whether they be on the Council or not. If they then become
citizens or they're not part of the Council.
Todd Gerhardt: It would be up to that mayor who would be running at that point
because they would make that nomination. Now the term ends and you've got to
' send in certification of both.
Councilman Johnson: What Don is saying is that when Tom's term ends in 2 1/2
years, he'll still have a year and a half on the HRA that he will continue
' serving until that's over with and that's how we got in the HRA with no council
members on it because we used to have, we almost always had at least 2 council
members on it up until 2 years ago when the 2 vacancies got reappointed to lame
' duck council members, one of which I believe has one resigned. Pat Swenson.
Todd Gerhardt: Tom was appointed rather than Pat.
' Councilwoman Dimler: I have a question.
Mayor Chmiel: Maybe rather than to keep running with this.. .
' Councilwoman Dimler: But I just want to ask a question.
' Mayor Chmiel: But let me state what I'd like to first.
Councilwoman Dimler: Go ahead. 1
' Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. What I'd like to do is table this item. I would like
to then ask the newspapers to put an article in the paper asking anyone who is
interested in serving on the HRA to contact me directly.
Councilman Johnson: Don't we usually pay for that?
•
Mayor Chmiel: Maybe we can get some free press. I don't know, maybe it would
have to be an ad.
Councilman Workman: Which direction are you heading in then?
Mayor Chmiel: What I'm saying is, is to then get those people in who are
interested.
Todd Gerhardt: You want us to advertise the vacancy?
•
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah.
Councilman Workman: What about the proposal that we have?
11 Mayor Chmiel: That's why I said to table it.
Councilwoman Dimler: Are we saying that Cliff cannot just do it for one year? 7 j
' He has to do it for 5?
Mayor Chmiel: I don't know.
' 42
•
City Council Meeting - May 14,. 1990
Roger Knutson: Yeah. That's correct. f
Mayor Chmiel: And he can tender his resignation if he so chooses after that
first year.
Councilwoman Dimler: But he doesn't have to.
Roger Knutson: I suppose if you wanted him to bring a resignation in hand when
you appointed him and say give us your resignation in hand effective.
Councilwoman Dimler: One year from now. '
Councilman Johnson: Could we appoint Cliff as a special advisor to the HRA?
Roger Knutson: Sure. It has no official status.
Councilman Johnson: It has no official status but it says hey, we still want
your advice.
Councilwoman Dimler: I don't understand why, I mean the chairman usually takes
over without being. Did you get special training from Tom when you took over?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes.
Councilwoman Dimler: I mean I don't understand the reasoning. I mean a chair
can just be taken over.
Councilman Workman: Yeah, are we moving ahead towards that councilmember?
Councilwoman Dimler: I would like to see that.
Councilman Workman: If we are, then advertising isn't.. .
Councilman Johnson: See I'd like to see the second council member on there
which means either Bill or Don in that Ursula and I are both on Southwest Metro
Transit which meets at the same time. So we're pretty well.
Councilwoman Dimler: And Bill's up for re-election so it has to be Don. '
Councilman Johnson: Don's up for re-election too. They're both up for
re-election. '
Councilwoman Dimler: Don't you have a 4 year term?
Councilman Johnson: No.
Mayor Chmiel: So we come to a changing of the minds see. ,
Councilwoman Dimler: I really would like to see another council member on
there.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, that's probably very true.
43
1
City Council Meeting - May 14, 1990
11
Councilman Johnson: I like Roger also in that the interim if we table this, to
look at the possibility of having two seats designated as Council members
running concurrent with their terms, whatever their terms may be.
' Councilman Workman: But you can't force one of those persons to also take HRA
when they're elected.
' Councilman. Johnson: No, but whoever comes on the Council in January, if we
appoint Don and Don doesn't get re-elected, he serves until January and then on
January the new Council appoints one of their members to take Don's place. If
that's legal.
' Councilman Workman: What if nobody wants to be on the HRA that's on the
Council?
' Councilman Johnson: I didn't want to be on Southwest Metro Transit and I was
appointed to Southwest Metro Transit. I've appreciated it. I like it now.
' Councilwoman Dimler: What's that term there? Is that a 2 year term?
Councilman Johnson: It's 3 years. I've got one more year. I've been
' reappointed. I'll have one more year ifter I'm off the Council.
Mayor Chmiel: Let's just table this. Roger can look into that and then get
' back to us and let us know. Okay?
Todd Gerhardt: Advertising? No advertising?
Mayor Chmiel: No, I don't think we'll do that until once we find out where
we're at with it.
1 Councilman Johnson: How about this Don? If Roger gets back to us real quickly
saying that my idea can't work, that you've got to go 5 years, you can't have a
hybrid, that we then advertise.
Mayor Chmiel: I don't have a problem with that .
' Councilman Johnson: That way we don't waste as much time waiting for another
Council meeting to tell.
Councilwoman Dimler: I'll second that.
Mayor Chmiel: It's been moved and seconded. We're tabling it right now though.
We can't take action on a table.
' Councilwoman Dimler: We tabled it.
Todd Gerhardt: There was no vote on tabling it. You just said, we didn't have
' to do anything.
Mayor Chmiel: Right. So I don't think we have to vote on it. Just proceed
with what we're doing. With your suggestions.
' 44
City Council Meeting - flay 14, 1990
Councilwoman Dimler: We tabled it with your suggestions. I
COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS:
Mayor Chmiel: Ursula, trees.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. I had a call from a Mr. Hoffman from Saddlebrook.
He's concerned about the trees on Kerber Blvd. and they all look dead to me.
The evergreens there. And I know it's been going on for a while. I don't know
why nothing has been done. Also he says they are infested with some sort of a
bug. '
Councilman Johnson: Pine beetle.
Councilwoman Dimler: Pine beetle. He wants to plant some in his yard but he's
relunctant to do so while this pine beetle is there. I've already called Dale
Gregory on it and I didn't hear anything back so I'm bringing this up so that; I
would like a report and would like Council to have a report. '
Councilman Johnson: I talked to Paul on it also. Or Jo Ann.
Gary Warren: Those are not city trees. '
Mayor Chmiel: No, that's the developers.
Gary Warren: Rick Murray, I've talked to him about a year ago about the trees.
They are not a part of his approved landscaping plan either. He just got the
trees at a deal or whatever and installed them to try to dress the area up.
Unfortunately they didn't make it.
Councilwoman Dimler: Can we make him take them down?
Gary Warren: I would imagine if they're infected or have some problem of that
nature.
Councilman Johnson: I talked to you or Jo Ann or somebody on this.
Paul Krauss: It's the first I've heard of it but I would assume that if it's a
hazard, if it's infected, under the nuisance ordinance we can order that it be
abated.
Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah, it will affect the other trees in the area. '
Councilman Johnson: That's Todd Hoffman's cousin and he works for Minnesota
Valley Nursery as a nurseryman and so he's experienced. He says it's the pine
bark beetle. It affects diseased trees that are already weakened such as winter
kill or winter weakened trees so if you have a real good healthy tree, the pine
bark beetle can't hurt you. But right now if you look at the pines in this town
from all the winter damage we have, a lot of our trees are very susceptible to
this type of deal. And newly planted trees are also weakened and susceptible.
Councilwoman Dimler: I would like-the City to do something. Either make the '
developer take them down or if the City has to do something because they are
•
45
1
City .Council. Meeting - May 14, 1990
11 infested with this pine beetle, you know we should go ahead and do something.
It's been long enough.
Councilman Johnson: Yeah, the forester may be able to force it to be taken down
too. I'm not sure what the State laws on the pine beetle is.
' Mayor Chmiel: Tom?
Councilman Workman: In relationship to that neighborhood, there's a light pole
that's been struck or something.
' Mayor Chmiel: Just leaning a tad.
' Councilman Workman: Well it's about like that. You can probably like a cigar
from it or something. But if you go down and what I want to bring up is kind of
a redundancy and I'm kind of wondering about our street signs. We have kind of
' two motifs now. We have the old brown metal one and we have the wood posted
ones. The beveled. On West 79th Street we have both. We have a beveled one on
one side of the road and a metal one on the other. It's redundant and you'd
figure when they put that beveled one because I think that's the last one they
' put out, that they'd take that other one across the street and sell it or
something but I don't know. We have situations like that and it just seems like
it doesn't belong there and somebody's just overlooked it. But we've got it on
' either corner and we've probably got other situations like that. One other
thing. As I come off of Kerber Blvd. and Pontiac Lane, there's a street sign
there but it just says Pontiac. Now I live on Pontiac Circle and it just says
Pontiac there so people kind of look for Pontiac Lane and it just says Pontiac.
' Can we get a Pontiac Lane sign?
Councilwoman Dimler: Are you saying that people can't find your home?
' Gary Warren: We'll take a look. It may have been platted as just Pontiac in
which case technically it should have a name change. I'll take a look at it.
Councilman Workman: I think all the other street signs down the road there are
Pontiac Lane.
' Mayor Chmiel: Okay, is that it? I just wanted to take a little time for a
letter on Frontier Trail. The owner says, a good letter that you've written to
all the residents within Frontier Trail to make them aware as to the pre-
construction meeting that's going to take place and also when the construction
is going to take place which would be about May 15th. That is tomorrow. With
all this rain I don't think they're going to be doing much of anything. Who
' knows but I thought it was a good letter that you sent out making them fully
aware as to what was happening and who to call if there are problems and how to
alleviate the given concerns that might be there. Other than that, that
concludes what we have and I'll make a motion for adjournment.
' Roger Knutson: One moment. Ordinance Summary. An ordinance amending Chapter 7
and Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code pertaining to excavating, mining,
' filling and grading. An ordinance amendment establishing the revised and
comprehensive standards and procedures for regulating all grading, mining,
excavating, and filling activities from the City. Such activity involving more
t46
•
1
City Council Meeting - May 14, 1990 1
than 50 cubic yards of material but less 1,000 cubic yards may be approved
adminstratively. Such activity involving 1,000 cubic yards or more requires an
interim use permit. Certain exceptions for permit requirements are specified.
All existing operations occurring without a permit are required to obtain one
within 6 months from the date of the adoption. Operations are currently. ..to
permit must come into compliance at the time their permits are renewed. This
ordinance is in full effect commencing on date of publication of this summary. '
Mayor Chmiel: Good. It's good we're only going to be charged for about 15
minutes.
Councilman Johnson: I move approval of the ordinance.
Councilman Workman:_ I second it.
Councilman Johnson moved, Councilman Workman seconded to approve the Ordinance
Synopsis for publication purposes of the Chapter 7 and Chapter 20 as written by
Roger Knutson. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilwoman Dialer seconded to adjourn the meeting. All
voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 10:30 p.m..
Submitted by Don Ashworth
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
•
1
1
47 '
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
SPECIAL JOINT MEETING
MAY 7, 1990
Mayor Chmiel called the meeting to order .
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Chmiel , Councilwoman Dimler , Councilman
Workman , and Councilman Johnson
' COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: Councilman Boyt
HRA MEMBERS PRESENT: Jim Bohn , Charlie Robbins and Clark Horn
HRA MEMBERS ABSENT: Cliff Whitehill
STAFF PRESENT: Don Ashworth , Executive Director/City Mananger , Todd
Gerhardt , Asst . Executive Director/Asst . City Manager , Gary Warren , City
Engineer and Fred Hoisington , Consultant
Mayor Chmiel welcomed the public to the Public Hearing of the Housing and
Redevelopment Authority and Chanhassen City Council .
' Don Ashworth outlined the activites that the Housing and
Redevelopment Authority has been involved with in regards to the
redevelopment of the downtown and gave an outlined of the agenda for the
' evening 's meeting .
Fred Hoisington showed a slide presentation of the downtown area prior to
and during it 's redevelopment .
Don Ashworth then explained the Tax Increment Financing and how it relates
to the redevelopment of downtown . The following is the verbatim question
and answers from the public , Council and HRA members:
Councilwoman Dimler : Don , could you tell me who makes the decision which
project is feasible and which one isn 't and what criteria do you use to
make that decision?
' Don Ashworth: The underlying decision comes as a part of the redevelopment
plan itself . And the HRA then is an implementing body . As I see tonight 's
meeting , it is really one of the City Council saying that there 's been some
' question in the past as to who is making this decision and who isn 't and a
decision that the Council wants to take a more active role to insure that
decisions such as the bank are either made by the Council or at least in a
joint fashion with the HRA . Did I answer the question?
Councilwoman Dimler : What criteria did you use to say the Hanson project
would not be feasible on this site and the bank would?
' Don Ashworth: The Hanson project was a little more involved than Mary Ann
had discussed . They in addition to needing the entire piece of ground ,
which they at one time had hoped to either condominiumize or to be able to
lease a portion of a larger structure out to others and then they would
have one part of the property themselves . Well as financing went along ,
11
City Council/HRA Joint Meeting
May 7 , 1990 - Page 2
they were not able to really put together that larger facility and look to
a much smaller structure in that process but still wanted the Housing and
Redevelopment Authority to provide the entire piece of land . In addition ,
as a part of their own financial analysis , it appeared as though they
needed an additional , and if I remember correctly it was like $70 ,000 .00 or
$80 ,000 .00 from the HRA in addition to what had been agreed to date to make
that project work for them . At that point in time the HRA said this simply
does not make any financial sense .
' Councilwoman Dimler : Did we not give them , the bank the land?
Don Ashworth: Eventually the property , at that point in time , I 'm trying
to remember . Anyway , the decision by the HRA , the HRA had acquired all of
' the parcels down there which included Lots 8 , 7 , 6 and 5 and the decision
was made that we should look to one larger development for the entire
parcel rather than trying to break the thing up . As it turned out , the
' three developers who came before the HRA , two out of the three each wanted
to break the parcel and have two separate developments on them but they
were going to coordinate that development to insure that it would be
aesthetically and planning wise compatible .
Councilwoman Dimler : I guess the reason I 'm raising these questions is
because one of the major concerns that I have is that we treat the
applicants equally and fairly . And that we don 't do something for one that
we wouldn 't do for the other .
Mayor Chmiel : Okay . Yes , sir . Please state your name and your address .
Bill Jacobson: I 'm Bill Jacobson . I 'm one of the owners of the West
Village Townhouses across the street and to the north . I 'd be interested
in knowing what the status is of the remainder of West Village Heights .
I know what the overall plan was to be and I haven 't heard anything about
that for the last year or so .
Don Ashworth: You 're talking about the development to the west of yours
which would be .
Bill Jacobson: And south all the way down to 78th Street . The whole West
Village Heights area .
Don Ashworth: Aren 't you also talking about , who 's the other developer?
Gary Warren: Immediately to the west is Cenvesco with Oak View Heights .
' Don Ashworth: Okay . Cenvesco is a residential development . They 've been
back 'and forth to the Planning Commission . Most of the plans that they
have brought forward have had a number of problems with those and the
Planning Commission , Council , I don 't think the HRA really has been that
involved with them but have been very concerned with the density that those
facilities have had associated with that development . That 's Dean Johnson .
Mayor Chmiel : Do you happen to have a map showing some of these areas that
you 're talking about so people might be a little more .
I
II
City Council/HRA Joint Meeting
May 7 , 1990 - Page 3
I
Don Ashworth: Fred , do we have anything? I know we have the area but I
don 't know if we have any buildings .
Fred Hoisington: It 's up in this area north of West 78th Street and west
of Kerber .
Don Ashworth: Anyway , the property is still planned for higher density
residential on the north half of the parcel of which Mr . Jacobson has
developed the most eastern portion . To the south of that has been proposed.
as commercial . I thought I had seen Charlie James . I don 't know if you
wish to speak to that issue or not . Mr . James owned all of the parcel
prior to the time that he sold the northeast portion to Mr . Jacobson and
the northwest portion to Cenvesco .
Charlie James: Well basically we 've been in a catch-21 out at our end of
town too . We had a development contract with the City that called for West'
78th Street to be put in last year and we graded in preparation for that
and it didn 't happen . It 's probably just as well given the uncertainty
right now but we 're also part of this Target scenario , however that may
shake out . It was my observation when we first came in , zoned the land ,
that there was no place in the downtown of Chanhassen that was large enough
for the type of facilities that most retailers are building today and as a '
consequence we platted the property in exact conformance with the
comprehensive plan and with what the City said at that time that they
wanted to see on that parcel and because of the relocation , the proposed
relocation of West 78th Street that was going to be needed with the TH 5 I
project , we ended up with the deepest portion of our property at the east
end . So how that plat was determined in the beginning and how we came up
with a rather unusual shape for that lot was that we laid out an 85 ,000
square foot discount store and a 33 ,000 square foot supermarket and some
shops inbetween and had a site plan that would work and then we sort of
drew the plat lines around it so we 've been sort of sitting in the
background for a number of years and our company is exclusively retail
developers and most everything we do involves grocery store or discount
stores . We did 7 of them last year in 3 different states . So we were just
content to sit back and wait for the situation to ripen . I had no idea , we/
were contacted by the people at Target as well and there was a third party
that sort of injected themselves into the situation and it was proposing
that the City would condemn portions of my property and Mr . Burdick 's
property and some other people's property . It came as a shock to me
because we felt that we had a site that was zoned and big enough and ready
to go on the other side of the street and we have submitted 3 drawings to
Target showing them in fact that their project will fit on our property .
We had suggested to them that they allow the Market Square project to go
ahead in it 's present form and I 've most recently talked to John Cranky at
Super Value who I know personally as well as in a business capacity and
he 's the retail advisor , as I understand it from Mr . Cooper and he tells mell
that there 's no way Target 's going to build a Cub store out here . That
they 're going to build a Cub store right across the street from the Target
in Eden Prairie . Just to the north of Eden Prairie Center there and in the
foreseeable future there isn't going to be a Target store here so we still
are hopeful that when the dust settles on this whole thing , we think that
11
City Council/HRA Joint Meeting
May 7 , 1990 - Page 4
the best scenario would be for Target to go on the 13 acre tract that we
have that 's zoned and ready to go and it would probably require less from
the City in tax increment financing to make that a reality than assembling
' this big tract of land on the other side of the street and putting in all
the infrastructure and everything that would be required for that . So I 'd
said they jury is still out on this whole thing . I too have been down to
' see Target and know some of the people down there and I think maybe one of
the reasons that they haven 't been forth coming lately is I think they 're
in the process of reconsidering this whole situation here . So as far as
' out little strip center out on the west there , just an update on that .
We 'd still like to build that project . Again , I was under the impression
that if Target went in that there 'd be additional right-of-way required out
there to handle the traffic and that that would once again force us into
perhaps a replat out there but having gone through two very unpleasant and
very painful situations in Inver Grove Heights and Eagan where we had some
major highway improvement going on simultaneous with two strip centers that
we did , we 've vowed we 'd never do that again so I guess we want to see
what 's going to happen with West 78th Street and what 's going to happen
with Target and then we fully intend to proceed with the projects here in
' Chanhassen .
Mayor Chmiel : Thank you .
' Charlie Robbins: Charlie , do you really think Target 's serious to be here?
Do you think they 're serious about coming here?
' Charlie James: Yes I do . This is one of 10 stores that they 're working on
in the Twin Cities that 's sort of , I don 't agree with it but I think that
they 're serious about it . We 've done a number of stores . Last year I did
3 stores for Wal-Mart which we developed and leased to them and we have a
long standing relationship with them and I 've talked to them about coming
into Chanhassen here and I think that 's Target 's biggest fear . I think
it 's this mentality of like the pioneers like circling the wagons when the
' indians are attacking and so what Target is doing is they 're circling the
Twin Cities with 10 stores in the outer rings and they 're going to go
to Plymouth and Cottage Grove and Woodbury and Chanhassen and what were
' some of the other ones . Well they 're under construction in Shoreview ,
White Bear Lake and this is all part of a big strategy to prevent losing
market shares to Wal-Mart . So I think that they dohave some interest out
in this area because I think they perceive that they 're vulnerable . If you
' go into the Eden Prairie Center now , you'll see everybody 's in there from
Young America and Cologne and all those towns out that way . They 're in the
Target in there and I think this would be a stopper and I think the two can
' co-exist . As Eden Prairie continues to grow , I think that Target store
will serve that market just as they had the store in Bloomington and then
they built the Southdale store very close to that . So I think in the long
' range this would be a good location for Target and I think it 'd be good for
Chanhassen to insure the long term viability of all the businesses in
Chanhassen to have that sort of a draw because as someone here said
earlier , they tend to draw from many more miles than some of the other
businesses .
Mayor Chmiel : Good . Thank you .
City Council/HRA Joint Meeting
May 7 , 1990 - Page 5
Jim Bohn: Don , I 've been on the HRA for 10 years and the HRA has never
been involved with the realignment of 78th Street . When it gets past II Kerber Blvd . . I 've never heard about his project with that discount store
or grocery store in there .
Councilman Workman: Mr . James has information from Target and I think Gary'
Cooper has information from Target and Brad does and everybody else does
and yet this board shows up and the Mayor show at 8:00 on a Friday morning .
I would say they 're not too serious and they 'd better start talking to us II
too and letting us know because circling their wagons or whatever , they 're
not talking to a player in this thing that want to see something happen for
Bernie Hanson 's sake and everything else . I 'm not going to worry myself I
with Target 's market share but I am going to worry myself with how this
downtown is going to pan out for the people we do have here . For somebody
to say they 're going to show up for a meeting with me at 8:00 a .m . when
I have better things to do and they don 't show up , I think they 'd better
get a new tactic .
Mayor Chmiel : Anyone else? '
Resident: I heard the same thing . If Target don't go in here , Wal-Mart
Mayor Chmiel : That 's very much of a potential and I think that 's why
Target is trying to locate as many facilities within the metro area as they I
possibly can to keep them out . That 's just my own view of it . Don , you
were going to say something?
Don Ashworth: Well just in response to Commissioner Bohn 's point . That ill
that Mr . James did get approval for a site plan for a convenience center .
That did not come back to the HRA to the best of my knowledge . Mr . James
was interested in participating in the incentive program as it deals with
the reduction of special assessments but those really have never come into
place . As he notes 78th Street did not go forward . The plan for the
development has been put on hold . That 's the only reason it never went
back to the HRA . '
Mayor Chmiel : Okay . Thank you .
Craig Harrington: Craig Harrington . I 'm a resident of Chanhassen and just"
going to make this kind of brief . First of all I appreciated the slide
presentation . I thought it was really interesting and really see the kind ,
of progress that 's been made in Chanhassen . Also , I appreciate this
opportunity to express my views . Also see a lot of positive things
happening in Chanhassen as far as with the Council and the HRA has been
doing . Not all things I agree with but I think the general scope of things'
are headed in the right direction . The only thing that I wanted to bring
up to the Council today as well as to the HRA is that I would like to see ,
and I don 't know how exactly you go about this but I 'd like to see the
possibility of having the HRA being an elected body . How that 's exactly
accomplished but I 'd like to see something that is where members of the HRA
are directly responsible to or accountable to the public in some sort of
City Council/HRA Joint Meeting
May 7 , 1990 - Page 6
way . I think Don's done a very good job and is very knowledgeable on these
things . Of course he 's on staff here at the City . Always will have his
input whether he wants to run for election , I don 't know but I think and I
don 't know if the City Council exactly wants to take on this extra burden
either but that 's my view and my opinion and I just wanted to thank you for
the opportunity to express it .
' Mayor Chmiel : Thank you very much . Yeah Tom .
Councilman Workman: I brought up the point originally to look into the
option of , and I 'll back up even further because I 'm also a member of the
HRA and member of the City Council which makes me kind of a unique and
somewhat crazy person I guess . And I appreciate being on both because I 'm
' just nosy enough to want to know everything that 's going on but you receive
a lot of concerns in the City about what 's going on . Target 's a good
example of should we have it or shouldn 't we have it and we have a memo
' before us tonight from some citizens who say they don't want it . I 've
heard a lot of people that say they really want it but generally what , and
the reason I brought up should the City Council also be the HRA or should
they be elected was because the HRA sort of operates , their meetings are by
no means a secret from anybody but people don 't get real excited about
what 's going on generally . It 's fairly technical information and it 's
complicated and it probably impacts things in downtown more than the City
' Council . But I brought up whether or not that accountability should be
built in there somehow . It 's my understanding that an HRA really can 't be
an elected body by State Statute . But the point I want to clear up is , I
' brought this point up and the newspapers did a good job of talking about it
but I think what they said was , is that I think we should have the City
Council become the HRA , My point was , we should look at that possibility
' as one possibility and not the possibility . I think I never intended to
tell the folks who have served on the HRA now and in the past that they 're
doing a miserable job and I 'd like to see them all jump in the lake or
something because they 've done a lot of work and put in a lot of time and I
' think that minor variation on what I said maybe gave some people the
indication that 's how I felt and it wasn 't . I want to clear that up .
' Mayor Chmiel : Okay . Thank you Tom . Yes sir .
Don McCarvil : Good evening Mr . Mayor and Council members and HRA . I 'm
Don McCarvil from Country Cleaning here in town . I also appreciate the
' opportunity to come and speak briefly about what in my case is a very small
issue but I have noticed as I started , well even last week I went to a
meeting . The thing I did notice is that there aren 't many of us around
' that were here when this all started . I guess that 's one of the points
that I 'd like to make . Of the businesses that were on main street 15 years
ago , Bernie was there , there aren 't many of us left . Now he 's having
problems with his situation and I 've kind of heard about it and I don 't
know how he can solve it . My problem is just a rather insignificant one
but a number of years ago the City was looking to buy my property and
expand some of the buildings that are there now . They decided not to go
ahead with it because of the cost of the land and the building . At that
same time of course I thought they were going ahead and had bought another
piece of property in town but have decided to settle in where I was and I 'd
City Council/HRA Joint Meeting
May 7 , 1990 - Page 7 1
have to wait and see what happened in town. But now the development is
going to be taking some of my property where it 's at and I guess that was ,
I don 't know , I can 't say it 's a complaint because it doesn't do any good I
but when the City is taking property , they 're going to take it either way .
You can complain or talk about it or whatever but they are still going to
go ahead and take the property . But as I originally started out to say
then , there was a number of us that were on the street originally years ago'
and there aren 't many of us left and they 're starting to chip away at the
last of us . I guess that 's really all I have to say . I do have the plats
that are particular to my particular situation . I had to have my lawyer
request them from the lawyer that 's working on it this morning because I
did not have those in my hands so I 'd even know what I was talking about
but if anybody would be interested I 'd be glad to discuss that with them .
Mayor Chmiel : Good . Thank you Don . Jim , I think you had your hand up .
Jim Burdick: I just wanted to bring up a couple of points . I guess first I
of all I 'd better say good evening and glad to be here . I pretty well
agree with what Charlie James has said . And as far as Target , whether it 's
largely on my property and on Charlie James ' , either way is okay with me .
I 'll cooperate if they want to be on the south side of 78th Street but
quite frankly I 'd just as soon have them , if they come on the north side .
And quite frankly I 'd just as soon as Wal-Mart instead of Target too . And
what 's been holding it up down there , I 've been before this governing body II
2 ,3 and 4 years ago with . . .very interested but what 's holding up from , well •
let 's say the lonsome pine tree on 78th Street on west is moving 78th
Street . First it was the fear of the unknown and then it was fear of it
being torn up so people couldn 't get in and now it 's TH 5 moving so slowly . '
All of you have helped . All of you have encouraged TH 5 to be built for
the past 10 years just like I have and nearly everyone else here . But ,
that 's the big stumbling block down there . We had somebody quite hot a
couple of years ago and when the partners said well , what 's going to happen
to TH 5 . . .
( There was a tape change during Mr . Burdick 's comments . )
Mayor Chmiel : Al? Would you like to come up? Maybe you 'd like to take a
few of those things down so he can get close to the mic .
Al Klingelhutz: I 'm Al Klingelhutz and I 'm a Carver County Commissioner .
I 'm the liason person for the Carver County Library system and your fort I
project really stirred some interest in me Don . It looked to me like , and
I really appreciate the fact that Chanhassen gave more space for the
library . The State says we 're supposed to have so many square feet per
person in the municaplity of library space and we 're just a bit over half
that space now that the State does recommend . I think we 're at .7 per
person , square feet and the State is recommending 3 square feet per person . "
I I very much like the idea of building a separate library building and I
think the Town Square area is an ideal spot for it . I know that it 's going
to take a lot of dollars to build it . I 'm kind of thinking of Chaska
building a new community center out of tax increment funds which will II normally come out of the general revenue , tax obligation bonds. I really
believe that what 's been happening in Chanhassen , many of our areas are in
City Council/HRA Joint Meeting
May 7 , 1990 - Page 8
the tax increment district . A lot of our tax base is in there now . That
something should be done to help the general population to alleviate some
' of the taxes that are going to have to come when the library building is
going to have to be built by the City of Chanhassen if they want to keep on
educating their children and keeping people and the residents of Chanhassen
well informed with what a library can do . Thank you .
Mayor Chmiel : Maybe we can get some money from the County .
' Al Klingelhutz: The County does staff the libraries in all the
municipalities in Carver County and that is Carver County funds . We do
supply the books and we do most of the interior work in the libraries as
' far as shelving and things like that .
Mayor Chmiel : Good . Thanks . Anyone else? Anyone else have any
comments? Jan .
' Jan Lash: Hi . My name is Jan Lash and I live at 6850 Utica Lane . I 'm not
a developer and I don 't own a big chunk of commercial property in town and
' I 'm not an architect and I 'm not a designer . I 'm just a lowly citizen who
moved here about 13 years ago into what architects and designers may have
thought looked like kind of a seedy little town with a bunch of funky
little buildings but I thought it was cute and quaint and it attracted me
and my husband and I said they 're going to have to take us out of here on
gernies . Never in my wildest dreams did I envision some of the changes
that have happened in this town and I certainly never envisioned a Target
' or a Wal-Mart moving up the street from my home . I was born and raised in
Minneapolis and I moved out to Chanhassen to get away from the hussle and
the bussle of the big city . I 'm very distraught to think that this is now
' moving into this town and I realize we cannot stop progress and there will
be changes but I think that we need to stop and give serious consideration
to the residents who have lived here a long time . What attracted us
originally and the businesses that were here and provided us with the
' service that they did such as Pauly 's , Bernie , Chuck the phamacists , the
dry cleaners . They basically provided us with the services that we needed
close to home and I feel real sorry for a lot of them now because I think
they 're basically being forced out of business . And I 've heard several of
them speak tonight and that 's just confirming my fears . I 've seen Chuck
move from the Kenny 's area where he was into a much smaller space and now
' with the new Market Square thing coming in there 's going to be I think a
Snyder 's or some large drug store chain coming in and I just can 't imagine
how some of those small businesses are ever going to be able to survive . I
guess my heart goes out to them and to the residents who have been here and
why we moved here . I don't have a problem with tax increment financing . I
think that 's great to lure industry and business to town . We need that to
help our tax base . What I 'm having a problem with is how the money that
' the HRA is getting is being spent . I agree with a couple other comments
that I think there needs to be some changes or some options available . I
don 't know that I specifically favor the City Council being the HRA . I
think that seems like it 's an awful lot of power to a few people but if the
' HRA could be an elected body or if they were an appointed body who did not
have the final say but was similar to the other commissions to the City and
then the City Council would have the final say , I think there would be more
II
City Council/HRA Joint Meeting
May 7 , 1990 - Page 9
accountability as to how the funds are spent . And I guess my question , I II
should have said this before we moved on to the Pauly 's site or number 6 .
Why did the City acquire Pauly 's and the Pony?
Don Ashworth: Both of those acquisitions occurred, as we were going
through the condemnation process for the acquisition . . .the board , the one
that was way on the bottom . Really two separate issues but the acquisition,
for the Pony property . This property here actually went all the way on
down almost to the railroad tracks so as a part of this road construction ,
the City ended up acquiring most of the parcels . The property owner as we
went through that condemnation really made it clear that he would , the bar
business was not really what he was interested in staying into . He was
looking into different endeavors and is there a way through that
condemnation that the City could actually carry out the acquisition of the I
entire business . Which is what we did . So I mean it was really by his own
choice . His own request back over to the City to carry on that
acquisition . '
Jan Lash: Is this the Pony?
Don Ashworth: Right . '
Jan Lash: But not Pauly 's . '
Don Ashworth: Not Pauly 's . Pauly 's was a different situation in that as a
part of that acquisition , and again it goes back through the whole court
process but Mr . Pauly felt very strong that as a part of this overall I
acquisition or the redevelopment process that the City was going through
that there would be a loss of business payment associated for his
particular business . More particularly , the liquor store operations and
that entire acquisition is really premised on a difference of opinion
between the City and Mr . Pauly as to whether or not relocation or loss of
business payments would be made as a part of the final . . . Are you
following this? So in other words , here is the parcel itself . That parcel
also and down into this area does not go as deep as the other one but the
City did have to acquire a portion of his property . In going through the
court process , the position that was presented was that the City owned
Mr . Pauly more than just the value of the land in the rear . The City couldll
also be required to make a payment for loss of business associated with the
liquor store . The Court basically ruled in the City 's favor saying that
the City was not required and the court would not consider loss of business'
payments as part of any type of a settlement . At that point in time
Mr . Pauly came back to the City saying is there a way that we can take and
work out an arrangement whereby the City would purchase this property but II
allow him to stay in there for upwards of a 4 year period of time . And so
again . . .really is a decision by the owner Mr . Pauly to have the City carry
that out . I should temper that with the fact that his number one
preference would have been simply to be able to receive a loss of business I
payment but again the Court did not rule in that direction .
Councilman Workman: Don if I could maybe , I 'm not sure if your answered
Jan 's question quite the way she wanted . But there was the movement of the
road . We moved the old City Hall in the middle of Frontier Trail and we
II
City Council/HRA Joint Meeting
May 7 , 1990 - Page 10
did an awful lot of other things . Maybe what she 's trying to get at is why
did , and you were pointing at the Pony building I believe .
Don Ashworth: I was trying to point at the Pauly 's .
Councilman Workman: Okay , why like any other situation , did we have to go
after him and how did that all pan out that he would move? Was it a domino
affect? We ended up at the Pony and we took some of the Pony property
because of the new TH 101/West 78th . It kind of all didn 't fit in the plan
or why isn 't Pauly 's still in business or going to still be in business?
Don Ashworth: Well , maybe if I begin again . The initial plan as approved
by the Council , the HRA , did not require the taking of those 3 buildings .
' The 3 buildings could have stayed . The bars could have stayed in place .
As we went into the actual acquisition itself , the Pony 's is basically the
one that came back to the City saying our business is down, and part of
' that they were saying because of the relocated streets , we 've taken away
parking and other types of things but anyway we would like the City , HRA to
purchase the property . Mr . Pauly was really in the same type of a
' position . Mr . Pauly felt that with the changed street conditions , that his
ability to operate and off store liquor store was very much impaired by the
new road configuration , etc . . And again , that is where he had been looking
to a loss of business payment . As the court process went through and it
' basically came out that that would not be a part of any final settlement ,
Mr . Pauly came back basically with the same type of request . Well what can
you do in terms of a total acquisition of our property .
Jan Lash: So basically what it boils down to is , I mean this is what I
thought originally and when I cut through all of that it sounds like the
City basically ran them out of business . And they were trying to cut a
' deal to get some money so they can get out and have some money instead of
being able to keep their business . I mean if it goes back to the routing
of the road , why does the road have to be routed so that it disrupts the
' business of the old time businesses? I guess what I 'm saying is when these
plans are made out , you can 't always just look at what looks nice and what
the architects think is going to be a beautiful project in the end . I
' think there needs to be consideration made to the businesses that are
already in town that have kind of served us . Let 's make it nice yeah for
new businesses to come in but who 's going to want to come in if they think
10 years down the road the City 's going to run them out of business or 50
' years down the road , if we want to talk about Pauly 's . They 've been here ,
and I 'm not speaking for Pauly 's . They didn't hire me to come up here or
anything but it 's the one that we 're talking about right now and basically
it 's just kind of summing up my whole feeling about what 's going on
downtown and I think what it takes is a lot of these kind of things to
catch people 's attention and I think the redevelopment of downtown ,
' specifically main street , has caught the attention of a lot of people and
I 'm glad to see that these meetings are open to the public so we will have
some input into these decisions and then there maybe won 't be so. many sour
grapes after it 's already all done . Thank you .
Councilwoman Dimler : Mr . Mayor , may I make a comment?
City Council/HRA Joint Meeting
May 7 , 1990 - Page 11
Mayor Chmiel : Yes , go ahead Ursula .
Councilwoman Dimler : I 've heard it here tonight and Jan mentioned it too .
Twice it 's been brought up about the Council becoming the HRA and I
guess I 'd like to just make a clarification on that . Jan mentioned that
that gives one body a lot of power and I guess I 'd like to say it gives one
body a lot of service . I think all us feel here that we don't necessarily II
want to be in a position of power but we are serving the public and so for
that reason too , I 'm not real sure whether I want to give that extra
service . I 'm not speaking in favor of that but the point is that somebody
has to be accountable and the Council ultimately is accountable anyway . So
basically what 's happening is that we're accountable for decisions that
we 're not making . We do have some input but we aren 't choosing which
businesses are being approved or seem to be feasible . We 're not in on that'
process . All we get to do is review the site plans and those types of
things so I guess just to clarify that it 's a lot of service and also that
we are ultimately responsible anyway . '
Clark Horn: Can I comment Don?
Mayor Chmiel : Sure , go ahead Clark .
Clark Horn: I 'd like to respond to a couple of Jan 's statements . First of
all , before we went through this downtown project we held meetings with all
of the downtown businesses . We had a series of get togethers with them
where we reviewed plans . The ultimate plan was the result of 3 or 4 public
meetings with the business community . There was never any statement made I
during any of those sessions that this plan would put anybody out of
business . This plan was made as a result of that . Now if some of the
economic realities of developing anything or that you get a higher value to
your property and the necessity of part of that is if your business doesn 't'
grow , it 's very difficult to stay the same size you were because your
square footage gets much higher in that kind of a situation . But those
hearings were held . Actually we didn't call them hearings , we called them I
get togethers and information gathering sessions with the business
community happened before this plan was approved . The other thing on
accountability is the HRA is accountable to the City Council just like any I
of the other commissions . The HRA is appointed by the City Council . We
serve at the City Council 's request . I think whether you have an HRA as a
separate body is something that each City can decide and I was on the
Council at the time and I was also the HRA member similar to what Tom is
now and that was always a question that came up . Should the HRA and the
Council be the same and there are pros and cons to doing that . It 's still
a question in my mind . I haven't formed an opinion as to what works best . I
As Ursula said , there are a lot of extra things you have to do if you 're
going to do both jobs and either job is tough enough. To give somebody
both jobs is kind of tough and Tom I think can attest to that and I can
attest to that . Pat Swenson was on the Council and the HRA . The important '
thing is is that there is Council representation on the HRA and we had a
gap , a lapse in time where we didn 't have a Council person on the HRA and I '
think that 's wrong . There always has to be somebody on there . I was
really happy to see Tom come on and I think he 's done a good job
representing the Council to the HRA and the HRA to the Council .
City Council/HRA Joint Meeting
11 May 7 , 1990 - Page 12
Jan Lash: But you guys ultimately have the power to allocate funds as
' opposed to other appointed commissions . They just make recommendations to
the Council .
Clark Horn: We review programs . When it comes to issuing bonds and
everything , that all has to come from the Council . We cannot issue bonds .
Mayor Chmiel : Okay . Any further discussion?
' Don McCarvil : I 'd like to add just a little insight into this what . . . A
little further insight into a little bit of the history . Yes , there were a
number of meetings back then and we were shown what was being done . There
wasn 't a lot of input on the businesses part but we were shown a number of
plans and we did go to a number of those meetings . None of those plans
' ever transpired anyway . Those plats that we saw 10 years ago didn 't happen
anyway so eventually a lot of us stopped coming to the meetings because
whatever we saw didn 't happen .
' Mayor Chmiel : Thanks . Hopefully that 's a good point for everybody to take
note of because of these hearings , is that where it seems like it might
even discourage people to stay away . Keep showing up . The input 's needed .
These chairs have to be full in order for us to get direction as to what
you 're really looking for . If we don 't have the people 's input , we move on
our own but I like to get that input as much as we possibly can . I think
' that 's one of the reasons that we 've had this particular meeting and we
will have additional meetings as we progress through the downtown
development and we welcome . I know I do and the rest of the Council does ,
welcome your input to what 's being proposed and what 's being discussed . So
' with that , if there is no one else that would like to say something . Todd ,
did you want to say something?
' Todd Gerhardt: Todd Gerhardt , Assistant City Manager . As one of my roles
for staff I had to work with the existing businesses in town before the
redevelopment was to occur and I 'd just like to name off a few of those
businesses that still exist in town and I think we 've done a very good job
' in keeping those businesses . You 've got the bait shop that has moved down
onto West 79th Street . I 'm just going to work my way down West 78th and
down towards the east . You 've got Staush , the boat repair , fiberglass
repair . He is down on West 79th Street . You have Scotty 's Auto Repair who
was next to Staush . He is also down on West 79th Street . You have
Hendrickson Dry Wall who built a brand new building in the industrial park .
' Took advantage of the HRA 's program there . Working with Bernie and I 'm
trying to think of all the people . Hooked on Classics moved back behind
the Frontier Lumber , old building . And Chan Automotive is in the
industrial park . Working with the two businesses in the Frontier Belle ,
' Southwest Music is trying to find space and Frontier Belle Beauty Salon is
trying to make a decision on do they want to work part time or full time
and we 've looked at alternative spaces in town for them also . I just
' wanted to make sure everybody knew that businesses haven 't left the
community and that some are still here . Most of them are here .
II
City Council/HRA Joint Meeting
May 7 , 1990 - Page 13 1
Mayor Chmiel : Good . Thanks . If there are no further discussions on this '
as I say I want to thank you for coming out and we really appreciate your
input . Hopefully this will give us some direction as to what to look for
and to see what we can move on to accommodate some of the people within the
community . So again , thank you very much . Appreciate your input .
Councilman Johnson: Don , on area 6 is there anything that staff needs at I
this time? What our feelings are on area 6 and whatever? I kind of agree
with Al a little bit there personally on area 6 . I 'd like to see the
library and my other thought , which everybody keeps hearing from me is the I
senior center . That seems like a natural thing to go together there is to
put this senior center and some community rooms , meeting rooms . Some kind
of community activies there along with the library . If we can figure out I
how to utilize TIF to do that . That 'd be a great utilization .
Mayor Chmiel : I think that 's something we have to look at because of the
cost aspect as to what we 're buying and what we 're purchasing and to see
what is best situated 'for there and I don 't know if we 're in a position at
this particular time to even come up with any recommendations or I
suggestions . I think this has to be looked at a little more so than what
we 've done just this evening .
Councilman Johnson: Absolutely but that 's one of the options that I favor I
and I know that that 's a money loser in the way it goes we 'd have to draw
on tax increment from some other part of town .
Mayor Chmiel : You need spaces for senior citizens too , I agree . You bet . I
Councilman Johnson: As you get closer , I 'm sure .
Mayor Chmiel : Oh , I 'm getting there . I 'm there already .
Councilman Johnson: Did you return your senior citizen survey? '
Resident: Don 't forget the wheelchair and the handicapped people . They
have to have access . I 'm thinking of the apartment building behind us .
They want 50% senior citizens . Hey , they have to have easy access to that . '
I am 100% in favor of a library . I think it 's great .
Elroy Williams: Parking has to be 2 feet wider than a regular one . And
I just forgot one building . The old City Hall , they have no ramp . Two
steps .
Councilman Workman: I guess the reason I guess I 'd like this process to bel
open the way we have it here tonight , is because of the question and I 'm
not sure that we still have answered sort of this question . I think I know I
the answer and I 'll keep it to myself but for members of the community and
why we need to have a public hearing in regards to basically the downtown
situation is why did we have to do it? Or why did we do it or why are we
going to continue to do it and how far as we going to do it and that 's
where the public opinion kind of sways in between we should never have
started and we should keep going to Target . So we have such a vast array
City Council/HRA Joint Meeting
May 7 , 1990 - Page 14
of opinions from people who , I grew up in the community just to the
southwest and I remember when , I think you could tie a horse up downtown
and there was a dirt road going through there and I don 't think they made
U Polaris yet but I always remember that , the feeling always was , I didn 't
even know what a City Manager was but I knew that they wouldn 't , that they
weren 't allowing this development up here . There was kind of a lock out
1 and a freeze out on this development and now it 's kind of coming and it 's
starting to come and we got a hot shot city manager and he 's got a
remarkable mind for doing a lot of this stuff and Don can take a lot of
' credit and he takes a lot of heat for doing what he 's done . But I think
these public hearings are good for deciding , helping the Council and the
HRA decide how much farther we should go . I don 't think anybody agrees
that we should go back to where we were 10 years ago with some leaky gas
' stations and other but the question of why do we need to increase the
valuations and make our downtown a solid downtown and a good looking place
and everything else with amenities and other factors , but rather a downtown
' that the community can be proud of because they can become very negative
feelings towards condemnations and things that were . . . Polaris is older
than me I guess but anyway . And one of the reasons why I wanted this
' public hearing was because people get a little frustrated with an old
business getting thrown out of town and the perceptions of how that looks
and road expansions and traffic and how 's it going to affect my
neighborhood and everything else and these are growing pains that people
' want to have a little bit more to do with the decisions so that they can be
proud of the community that none of us are leaving . That we 're all staying
here . We can 't leave and we signed that agreement when we bought our
' house . And so you want to be proud of it . Everywhere I go I pitch the
City . I 'm always saying come on and build a house out in Chanhassen or a
business or something and so that everybody can be proud of it , everybody
should be allowed to help in a little better fashion to make the decisions
and get a little piece and we can 't please everybody obviously but so that
we don 't get the old part of town nervous about what 's going on with what
the new people in town want to do as a city and a community . As I drove by
' the other night , that building which we were all so confounded about . How
did that building get so darn close to the road . They painted the thing .
It 's lit up . It looked magnificent . I couldn 't believe it . I mean much
better than I had been driving by it so maybe things are taking shape and
we 're not moving that building but we have to make sure that people are
comfortable with it .
' Elroy Williams: We have a Catholic school with no signs at an
intersection . No stop signs down at what is it , 76th Street or Chan View .
Don 't the kids deserve a stop sign of some kind at a busy intersection?
Mayor Chmiel : I agree . I agree with that position .
' Elroy Williams: They have one up at the public school .
Mayor Chmiel : Yeah , the highway department I think has jurisdiction on TH
101 there .
Elroy Williams: Yeah , but we had 4 of them before . Now we 've got nothing .
We ain 't even got one down where the kids cross . That don 't make sense . I
II
City Council/HRA Joint Meeting
May 7 , 1990 - Page 15
wouldn 't even cross up to go over to Pauly 's with a wheelchair . No way .
Councilman Johnson: We have taken some action in that we've asked the
State to reroute TH 101 so it does not run past a grade school and two
churches and our business center here . To take it down to TH 5 and then
down to Market and reroute it and straighten it out a little bit on the I
south side . That 's taking a few years to occur but once that does occur ,
the City will then again have the authority to put our own stop signs in
there because it will no longer be a State highway . We 're pushing hard for
that . We tried to get the State to put in stop signs and they told us they'
wouldn 't . They couldn 't justify it for their rules . It being a State
highway and ours only being a Catholic School . But there will be . We have
done some changes to the economic development districts out there in order I
to get the money to redo the Dakota Avenue intersection so that TH 101 can
go down to TH 5 . . .
( The tape ran out at this point in the meeting . ) Mayor Chmiel adjourned 1
the meeting .
Submitted by Don Ashworth
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim '
•
1
I
II
i::
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING UNEDITED
MAY 16, 1990 •
f Chairman Conrad called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m. .
ill
MEMBERS PRESENT: Steve Emmings , Annette Elison, Ladd Conrad, Brian Batzli ,
Jim Wildermuth and Joan Ahrens
MEMBERS ABSENT: Tim Erhart
II STAFF PRESENT: Paul Krauss, Planning Director; Jo Ann Olsen, Senior
Planner; and Sharmin Al-Jaff, Planner One.
PUBLIC HEARING:
51 CONSIDER APPLICATION OF THOMAS KORDONOWY FOR A WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT TO
CREATE A POND IN A CLASS B WETLAND ON PROPERTY ZONED RR, RURAL RESIDENTIAL
AND LOCATED SOUTH OF TANADOONA DRIVE, WEST OF DOGWOOD'ROAD.
IPublic Present:
IName Address
Tom Kordonowy Applicant
II Martin Jones Dogwood Road
Sharmin Al-Jaff presented the staff report on this item .
IIConrad: Just a quick question before we open it up to the public . Why is
the water quality going to improve based on the dredging? What is it
' that 's causing the quality to improve that will flow into Lake Minnewashta?
Al-Jaff: It is in the report . The bottom of the pond will not be level
and. . .
IConrad: Act as a sedimentation basin?
I Krauss: Well you 're getting both sedimentation plus for wetland vegetation
helps to filter as well . We're working. . .especially since apart from the
house Mr . Kordonowy will be developing.
IConrad: Okay. We'll open it up for public comments. If the applicant is
here . If he has anything to say.
II Tom Kordonowy: Good evening Mr . Chairman, members of the Planning
Commission. My name is Tom Kordonowy and requesting this ponding area
really for our enjoyment but beyond that we think that it's an enhancement
Il to the area . Creation of the open water should probably have nesting for
friendly critters and we think would be kind of a nice addition to the area
so that 's my only comment . Read the staff report and in concurrence with
` ' it . We 've tried to work closely with staff in designing the pond to
conform to the requirements of the ordinance as well as I say, improve the
area . I 'd be happy to answer any questions you may have.
IIConrad: We may have some later . Thanks Tom. Any other public comments?
II
,
Planning Commission Meeting
May 16 , 1990 - Page 2
' Martin Jones: I 'm Martin Jones . Mr . Kordonowy will become a neighbor of
mine . Everything that he has done so far has been excellent . I can 't say
no to anything he has done so far . At this point I 'll say go ahead with
this . It looks great .
Conrad: Thank you . Anything else? Any other comments? Is there a motion
' to close the public hearing?
Batzli moved, Wildermuth seconded to close the public hearing. All voted
in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
Conrad: Steve , comments?
' Emmings: No . It looks like this was designed very carefully with all the
considerations that I can see taken into account and I support the staff 's
recommendations .
' Ellson: I think it looks great . I 'm glad to see someone being proactive
in the right direction for a change but I do have a question in regards to
once this is in place . Then it would be guarded and let 's say he sold the
' land or whatever , as a pond now . The wetland contains the pond and then
the pond can no longer be altered and everything like that? Would that be
true? You know what I 'm saying? Once you dig it as a pond and turned it
' into one and then maybe if it passes hands or whatever and someone doesn 't
want a pond there anymore , because he altered the wetland and it was
permitted , now nobody else could take away the pond because that would now
be altering it again .
IIKrauss: Well it is classified as a wetland and I 've got to believe this
would take on Class A wetland characteristics which would make it even
tougher to alter . We also require plans . . .at Hennepin County . In fact
we 're getting our ordinance to . . .so future property owners would be on
notice that this is a condition of approval .
' Ellson : Yeah , I assume that they 'd have to come in for a wetland
alteration permit but I 'm saying would we allow them to go back? Once
you 've got it improved you 'd hope that you now have to stay at the level of
II improvement and you can never have to go back and things like that . I
guess we don 't ever have a total guarantee it doesn 't sound like but I like
the fact that it 's being improved and I 'd just like to say okay , now that
it 's improved , no holds bar . We can 't go back anymore on it no matter who
takes it over after that .
' Martin Jones: Can I make one comment? You said it 's been improved . Yes ,
it will be . If it would go back to the original , that ain 't all bad so I
don 't think you 're going to have a loss either way . If Mr . Kordonowy
decides to sell , it would go back to the original , it would not be bad .
It 's better this way but it won 't be bad the other way .
Ellson: Those are just the only things I thought about .
Batzli : It looks like the applicant has worked well with staff and it
looks like a good plan .
1
I
Planning Commission Meeting
May 16 , 1990 - Page 3 I
Wildermuth: I like the plan . I just have one question . How does the
water currently flow under Tanadoona Drive? Is there a culvert?
Martin Jones: I can answer that . There 's a 12 inch culvert underneath the,
road that 's just at the curve where Tanadoona turns into Dogwood . There 's
a 12 inch culvert going there and that 's been in place for the last I 'd say
6 or 7 years since the new culvert . 1
Wildermuth: Do we think the pond would alter that in any way Paul?
Krauss: No . The pond 's not going to release water any faster than it . . . I
Wildermuth: Because of where the installation of the , where is it? A pipe
with metal aprons at the exit of the pond . Okay . That 's all I 've have .
Ahrens: I think it 's a good plan too but there a number of conditions that
are very specific and I just had a question . Does the City find it I
difficult to monitor all the conditions that are set up with the approval
of this permit? I mean they can 't dredge during certain times and they
have to locate the dredging material in a certain place and how do you knoll
that 's going on?
Krauss: Frankly it 's difficult because unlike a home or a building , you '
don't have a building permit that trips the process . What we do is we
depend on the applicant to notify us that work 's been started and we go out
and monitor that from time to time . We . . .staff to do that . We do make the
attempt to follow up as best we can . In the future I 'd like , and by the
way the grading ordinance passed at the City Council Monday night and I
think that we can use that to require , in fact you may want to add a
condition that they obtain a grading permit prior to starting the work from"
the engineer 's department so we have a definitive permit so we know when
they are grading .
Conrad: I have no comments . It looks like a good application . I like it II
when we improve a wetland and the residents get what they want . I think
that 's just a good win-win situation . Is there a motion?
Ellson: I 'll move the Planning Commission recommend approval of Wetland '
Alteration Permit #90-3 as shown on plans dated April 16 , 1990 with the
following two conditions and one condition also added . And the third
condition should read that the applicant is to obtain a grading permit
prior to start .
Wildermuth: Second . t
Ellson moved, Wildermuth seconded that the Planning Commission recommend
approval of Wetland Alteration Permit #90-3 as shown on plans dated April
16, 1990 with the following conditions:
1 . The proposed ponding area conforms to the Fish and Wildlife guideline
standards for ponds .
Planning Commission Meeting
May 16 , 1990 - Page 4
' 2 . The applicant provide Type III erosion control along the westerly edge
of the fill area between the proposed fill area and the Class B wetland
and the fill area be revegetated with natural vegetation within six
' months of completion of the pond .
3 . The applicant shall obtain a grading permit prior to beginning work on
the wetland .
' All voted in favor and the motion carried.
PUBLIC HEARING:
PRELIMINARY PLAT OF 3.2 ACRES INTO 2 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS ON PROPERTY ZONED
' RSF AND LOCATED AT 365 PLEASANT VIEW ROAD, ROBERT SATHRE.
Sharmin Al-Jaff presented the staff report . Chairman Conrad called the
public hearing to order .
I -Conrad: Maybe we 'll open it up with the applicant . Bob , any comments on
the staff report?
' Bob Sathre: Not really . There 's nothing different other than the exchange
that was not considered with the vacating of Baldur Avenue .
Conrad: That cleans it up pretty easily . Any other comments?
Batzli moved, Ellson seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in
favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
Ahrens: I guess it makes sense to have the property located west of the
driveway . Become part of Lot 3 , that 's right . Is that the proposal?
Rather than have it divide Lot 1 . I guess it makes more sense for the
. proposed drive on Lot 1 also . I had a question why that wasn 't connected
onto the other private drive . Since there was some concern that the
proposed drive on Lot 1 not be located too close to Horseshoe Curve but
it 's almost right on top of the other private drive . Is that how , I mean
that 's the way it looks to me .
IKrauss: They 're still separated by , I don 't remember the exact distance
but we can scale that off , but there 's a grade change there . I think if
you 're going with the first report we said that we would prefer to have a
single curb cut and we would have recommended it if we thought it was
realistic to do but because of the grade change we didn 't think it was so
we just added a condition that the driveway to the new home has to be as
far east as possible .
Ahrens: As far east from what? From the other existing driveway?
IAl-Jaff: The engineering department said that if there is a distance of
100 feet , that allows enough visibility and there is a distance of 100
feet .
11 Ahrens: Between the two driveways?
f
Planning Commission Meeting
May 16 , 1990 - Page 5 I
Al-gaff: Not the two driveways but their main concern was Horseshoe Curve . '
Krauss: The main concern was sight distance as you come around the curve ,
that this driveway not be introduced right over here . The desire was to
get it up that way but as I read the report , I see we used to have a
condition in for that and I don't read it in this version . It would be
warranted to consider it with the condition that states that the location I
for the driveway shall be no further west than is illustrated on the
survey .
Ahrens: I agree . I don 't quite understand the land exchange . Maybe you
could point to that on the map .
Krauss: If I understand it , we had this Baldur Avenue in here that was
quite confusing because part of it was actual right-of-way and part of it
was an easement . This part of it then was right-of-way . This area down to
here would be vacated . What we didn 't vacate is the easement that we have I
on this side of it . What we 're proposing to do is the City would vacate
this . The vacated land which was a part of this parcel will be traded to
this parcel .
Ahrens: The vacated portion of Baldur Avenue?
Krauss: Right , would become part of this lot . '
Ahrens: But it originally was part of Lot 1?
Krauss : Right . Because of that funny tail that was on that lot . And then'
what they 're doing is they 're swapping a little bit of property right in
here .
Ahrens: Oh , so that 's the reason this , okay . In the staff report under
easements on page 4 , you state that the City is requesting an easement over
the existing driveway . I assume that 's the existing driveway located on
Lot 3?
Krauss: Lot 3 , correct . As you recall , there was some confusion about II that . We believed we had an easement over it and one easement was drafted
up but as near as we can tell was never filed and we wanted to correct that
omission . We 've been using it to make this . . . II Ahrens: Number one , under your conditions . The driveway access to Lot 3 ,
Block 1 shall be placed in the chain of title of the Lot 1 , Block 1?
Krauss: Right . That condition would not be needed if the Baldur , the neck'
. . .proposal .
Ahrens: But if they don 't alter it though , it should be that the easement II
should be placed in the title of both lots . I mean just technical . You
just have to do it for both lots , that 's all . You just can 't do it for one
and not the other . That 's all I have . I
I
Planning Commission Meeting
11 May 16, 1990 - Page 6
IWildermuth: One more time Paul , why can 't the street access to Pleasant
View for Lot 1 connect with the City easement? It looks like there 's a
drop of about 16 feet according to the topo map and about 60 to 70 feet .
' That doesn 't seem out of line .
Krauss: Well we went out to the site with our engineer technician and I
' don 't know if it actually looks worse than it is . . .but the grade is fairly
substantial and you'd wind up with a driveway that was probably in excess
of 10% which is not impossible but with weather conditions , it could be
' difficult .
Wildermuth: Right . Okay . So that 's basically the reasoning? Because
with all the vegetation there , it looks like to come directly out to the
' street it 's going to involve removing as much vegetation one way as the
other .
' Krauss: Right .
Wildermuth: And by connecting with the easement roadway , it eliminated one
curb cut which would be pretty desireable .
Krauss: Except that you probably would not run the driveway straight to
the east . You 'd want to roll down the hill and . . .concrete apron there , by
that time you 've caused about as much damage to get to that point .
Wildermuth : I don 't know , it still looks like you could come off to within
' about 30 or 40 feet of the road and still cut down on some of the grade .
Minimize the grade which would be less than the 16 feet if you went
directly from the current turn around shown on the map over to the City
' easement road .
Krauss: Well I don 't want to give you the impression that we would be
opposed to that . I mean that was our initial goal with it . If you 're
' comfortable with wording a condition that encourages us to do that but
leaves it , defers it to the engineering department to go out and take
another look at it , I 'd be more than happy to have them do that .
Wildermuth: I guess that 's what I would favor . Thank you .
Batzli : Can you point to the map up there and tell me which one is Lot 1 ,
Lot 2 and Lot 3?
Al-Jaff: Lot 1 . Lot 2 . Lot 3 .
' Batzli : Lot 3 is the one with the existing house? Okay . In condition 1
where it says the driveway access to Lot 2 shall be located to the far
' easterly edge . Did we just decide Lot 2 is the one that borders on Baldur
Avenue?
Al-Jaff: On Lot 2 and Lot 3 .
Krauss: Lot 2 is the one that borders on Baldur .
Planning Commission Meeting
May 16 , 1990 - Page 7
Batzli : Are we requiring in condition 1 that their driveway access to Lot I
2 is moved somehow?
Wildermuth: We aren 't talking about Lot 2 at all . '
Krauss: Oh I see what you 're saying .
Batzli : So that should be Lot 3 in condition 1?
Krauss: Yeah , the surveyer when he put the numbers on the map had a search!!
and find game . The numbers are on there . They 're in the corner . Lot 3 is
the one with the existing home down by the lake . Lot 2 is the one over by
Baldur . Lot 1 is the new lot that will be made available through
development . We need to change the conditions to reflect that . Condition I
1 should be access to Lot 3 . That 's right .
Batzli : Driveway access to Lot 3?
1
Krauss: Right .
Batzli : Shall be located to the far easterly edge of Lot .
Krauss: No . That 's the new condition that we 're suggesting . That 's I
driveway access to Lot 2 . No I 'm sorry , Lot 1 needs to be located as far
on the property .
Emmings: Another way to word that one would be just that maybe prior to
constructing the driveway on Lot 1 , they should get approval for it 's
location from the City Engineer . That 's what I thought and just avoid all
these . ,
Batzli : Yeah , okay . Is there , I seem to remember it seems like years ago
now talking about what the appropriate separation for private drives onto al
collector . Is there some sort of an ordinance in the City about the
minimum distance between driveways?
Krauss: No , not for residential use . '
Batzli : Not for residential?
Krauss: What we 've done is and there are separation distances from ,
intersections on collectors of 150 feet and the engineer 's come up- with
spacing requirements on Park Drive for industrial use but for residences ,
no we don 't have one .
Batzli : Okay . I think it might make more sense for the easements required
that we reflect in the conditions who the easement is for the benefit of . II
In condition 2 for example , sanitary sewer easement would run to the
benefit of the city . And what was the , do you still want an additional
condition regarding the location of that drive if you change condition 1?
We talked earlier about there was a previous condition about locating the
driveway . Does that go away then once you change?
I
Planning Commission Meeting
May 16 , 1990 - Page 8
Krauss: No .
Batzli : Condition 1 is reflected?
Krauss: No , you still have to construct that new driveway for Lot 1 . You
want that to be as far east as possible .
' Batzli : But if you changed it to what Steve proposed , that the driveway
access to Lot 1 must be approved by the city , isn 't that all taken care of
with the one condition? Okay . I don 't have anything else .
' Ellson: I thought I understood it until people starting making all the
changes and got me a little confused . I saw this as we had tabled it or
' whatever to do a little more housecleaning to make sure everything was in
order and all the things were in place and I guess with the changes that
we 've made to some of the wording here , I feel comfortable that what we
wanted to have changed before was changed . The only thing I 'm
uncomfortable with is they want to do some change here that we 're not
really seeing and they wanted to make that one a neck lot and sometimes I 'm
a little squeemish about approving something and then it goes on and it
maybe isn 't what I expected in my head . So the request that we don 't see
here is basically to take that drive and everything that 's west of that and
make it part of the lot on top there?
' l-Jaff: Lot 3 .
Ellson: Lot 3 . Good .
Krauss: If they think there 's any problem with it and I can 't foresee
there are any variances . . .we can certainly bring it back to you .
Ellson: Yeah , in general I don 't have a problem with it and I just started
to get more confused as it came down the row so I 'll go back to the way I
' started . Yes , it looks like we cleaned up everything we wanted to have
cleaned up . Go ahead Steve .
Emmings: Where will the line be? There will be the new lot line on Lot 1 .
I Oh , you 're going to move it back too? And then just follow the edge of the
drive? Okay . In general I wouldn 't be in favor of approving something .
We 're approving a plat here and it 's not the way the plat 's going to look
' and I 'm a little uncomfortable with that as a general principle . If that 's
the way it comes in , I 'd be comfortable with that and I don 't think we
should hold it up for that reason but if it 's anything other than you 've
just drawn on there , then I 'd want to see it again . Otherwise , it looks
reasonable to me .
Conrad: I have no additional comments . Looks fine to me as long as it 's
as represented on the overhead . Any other comments?
Emmings: I 'd like to ask Jim , I didn 't understand the condition that Jim
wants . I didn 't follow that .
Planning Commission Meeting
May 16 , 1990 - Page 9
Wildermuth: Well that would be that the driveway for Lot 1 be tied into
the City access for the lift station .
Emmings: You mean the other driveway? ,
Wildermuth: Yeah . The existing driveway . I 'd like the engineer to take
another look at that .
Conrad: You may want to make a motion .
Wildermuth: Alright . I move that the Planning Commission approve
Subdivision #89-20 as shown on the plat dated April 16 , 1990 subject to the
following conditions 1 thru 4 with the addition of a fifth condition .
Requesting that the City Engineer review the possibility of tying the
driveway for the housepad in Lot 1 to the city 's easement drive . Are there
any other friendly amendments?
Conrad: Well let 's get the , is there a second? '
Ahrens: Second .
Batzli : I 'm sorry , did you add condition 6 , 7 and 8? You added 5 right . 11
Isn 't there a 6 , 7 and 8 somewhere? Am I looking at the wrong thing?
Conrad: You 're looking at January 3rd stuff .
Batzli : Okay , what happened to . Oh , they did move that over . The one •
that we were talking about was condition 1 and I don 't know what we need toll
do with that .
Wildermuth: Condition 1 changed from the previous submission to this I
submission . Condition 1 talked about Lot 2 . But we are talking about Lot
3 .
Batzli : Correct . No I agree but if they do what they 're talking about '
there then the access and easement isn't required and that 's my concern is
that what we 're approving isn 't what they 're going to do according to your '
motion.
Wildermuth: Well there 's still an easement required .
Batzli : Not if they do that .
Wildermuth: But it would be for Lot 3 . '
Batzli : No , because the driveway would be located entirely on the flag
coming down Lot 1 .
Wildermuth: Right but the City will still need some legal means of
accessing the lift station along that drive right?
Krauss: That 's in condition 2 .
Planning Commission ng G mission Meeting
May 16 , 1990 - Page 10
' Ahrens: You won 't need a driveway access .
Emmings: There are a whole bunch of things that have changed in 1 and 2
' and maybe just as a suggestion , well .
Wildermuth: Well there really is no need for 1 then if the change is made .
Batzli : Well 1 could be changed to reflect that they 're going to attempt
to , well you 've already indicated that they 're going to try to get it off
of the turn around . Tie that into the existing gravel drive . If they
' can 't do that , there was a proposal that they locate it as far east or west
on that map , whichever way it is , east as possible and that would be
submitted to the City for approval .
Ahrens: They will still need an easement . There will be a need for an
easement if they tie into the Lot 3 lot .
' Emmings: See , there 's a lot of things up in the air . And if you go
through the ones that need easements to it , in number 2( a ) , the existing
sanitary sewer easement says it 's over Lots 1 and 2 but it 's over Lots 3
and 2 . And ( b ) , driveway access and utility easement over Lot 1 , Block 1 ,
that 's the same thing again . You don 't need that one at all . And ( c ) , the
utility easement over the sanitary sewer along Lotus Lake , that seems to
' me , who 's that running in favor of? The City? For what utility?
Krauss: We have a sewer line .
' Emmings: Well I know but that 's , what 's (a ) then?
Batzli : Well that was access into the lift station or whatever . That was
' I think the intent of that .
Krauss: No , I see what you 're saying .
Emmings : No , ( a ) is the sewer itself .
Ahrens: It says easements required , ( a ) reflect existing sanitary sewer
easement .
Batzli : Perhaps ( c ) is intended then to access the other driveway?
' Emmings: It says the sewer along Lotus Lake . That 's the one that goes
across 3 and 2 and what used to be Baldur Avenue .
' Wildermuth: How big a problem is this going to be if we table it and allow
it to be cleaned thoroughly?
' Emmings: The problem is they don 't know what they 're going to do with the
driveways and it 's hard to figure out what to put in for language in order
to let it go onto the City Council . Again , they put us in a position of
I not knowing what they 're doing and it 's hard to figure it out for them . So
maybe they should bring it back . I don't know . I hate to hang it up . It
seems like .
Planning Commission Meeting
May 16 , 1990 - Page 11 1
Conrad: It should be out of our hands .
Emmings: Once it 's cleaned up I know we 're going to approve it so why fool
around with it but I don 't know how to do it because we don 't know what
they 're going to do . We don 't know how the driveways are going to be
connected if they are .
Stuart Horn: One of the issues that came up as kind of a surprise is that II
the couple who has purchased what we are calling Lot 1 now , they 're working
on a mortgage and the problem with mortgages is that there 's a question
about having easements for other private parties . There are liability
problems . There 's maintenance problems . The mortgage companies are a
little nervous about the idea of sharing a driveway . It 's legal but the
couple said they would give up the property that would be kind of northeast
of the driveway in order to resolve that problem and that 's why the ,
alignment . I think your thought about having the City Engineer look at
that would be very good . I 'm working on designing the house for that site
and the driveway I think would be kind of dangerous if it were connected up'
at the point where the other driveway comes in . If you 're looking over
your left shoulder trying to watch for traffic behind you coming down
Pleasant View , I think the visibility there I think is not real good at the'
existing driveway . It 's actually much better for parties on the public
road and on the driveway . If there were a fire , the public safety
officer . . . because on paper it looks real easy to connect them up or move
them further east or kind of northeasterly there but if you get out and
actually walk the land , you 're talking I think a dangerous slippery
driveway and not much visibility to seeing who 's coming and going either
for the people on the public road or the people on the private drive . I
think it wouldn 't work that well if that 's . . .
Wildermuth: That 's why we want the City Engineer to take a look at it .
Emmings: I guess as a suggestion , maybe what we should do is approve this
as if the lot lines are changed the way they said they were and as if it 's
going to have it 's own driveway out to the street . Given that approval and
if they want to change that later or if it needs to be changed later , then
we 'll have to worry about whether it has to come back or not . We ' ll let
the staff decide if they have to come back . If we approve it with it 's own
driveway , that doesn 't satisfy Jim's concern but if we approve it with it 's
own driveway . If it turns out that the City Engineer determines it can 't
have it 's own driveway , they could come back . That way there 's only a
50-50 chance they 'd have to come back . I don 't know if that 's better or
not . Otherwise , they ought to work all this out and bring it back .
Conrad: Yeah , it 's real sloppy right now . Paul , what do you think?
Krauss : You know there 's a fair amount of confusion with this . It 'd be
nice if all of this got straighten out . On the other hand , I think the
problems are relatively simple once we know how it will end up .
Conrad: We can 't make a motion though .
Krauss: I understand your difficulty .
•
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting
May 16 , 1990 - Page 12
Conrad: Bob , what are your concerns? You want to push this through and
get it out of here under some time constraints?
Stuart Horn: We have construction we 'd like to start on the house .
Conrad: Soon .
Stuart Horn: It 's getting to be a problem because of the time . . .
Conrad: So you 'd rather have us move on it right now?
Bob Sathre: If you could and whatever stipulations you want to make as far
as having the public safety and the engineering people place the driveway .
Conrad: Jim , do you want to withdraw your motion?
Wildermuth : I 'll withdraw the motion .
' Conrad: Is there another motion?
' Emmings : Yeah , I 'm going to move that the Planning Commission recommend
approval of Subdivision #89-20 as shown on the plat dated April 16 , 1990
subject to the following conditions . Number 1 , a new plat will be
submitted showing the changes in the configuration of Lot 1 that were
represented to us at the meeting would be the new lot lines of that lot .
The second , what was condition 1 will be striken completely . Condition 2 ,
easements required . ( a ) will say that it will reflect the existing
' sanitary sewer easements over Lots 2 and 3 instead of 1 and 2 . It will say
2 and 3 . Block 1 and Baldur Avenue . And what 's down there as ( b ) will be
striken and what 's down there as ( c ) . No , strike what 's down there as ( c ) .
' We 'll put in a new ( b ) that says that we 've got to get the easement
recorded that gives the City the right over the driveway that services Lot
3 , Block 1 . The easement that runs in favor of the City to get access to
the lift station . Then 3 will stay as is . 4 will stay as is . 5 will say
' that the driveway location for Lot 1 must be approved by the City Engineer
prior to any construction of that driveway . I think that 's it .
Batzli : Second .
Conrad: Discussion? Are you taken care of Jim?
' Wildermuth: I think so .
Emmings moved, Batzli seconded that the Planning Commission recommend
approval of Subdivision #89-20 as shown on the plat dated April 16, 1990
subject to the following conditions:
' 1 . A new plat will be submitted showing the changes in the configuration
of Lot 1 that were represented at the meeting with the new lot lines .
2 . Easements required:
Planning Commission Meeting
May 16 , 1990 - Page 13
a . Reflect the existing sanitary sewer easements over Lots 2 and 3 ,
Block 1 and Baldur Avenue .
b . The applicant shall record an easement that runs in favor of the I
City over the driveway that services Lot 3 , Block 1 for access to
the lift station .
3 . Park and trail dedication fees will be required in lieu of land
dedication .
4 . A tree preservation plan must be submitted prior to issuance of a
building permit . The plan should illustrate how the driveway and home
placement and construction will minimize tree loss . The plan must be
approved by staff . Preservation areas shall be adequately marked by a I
snow fence prior to construction to avoid damage . Clear cutting of
trees 4 " in caliper or larger is prohibited .
5 . The driveway location for Lot 1 must be approved by the City Engineer
prior to any construction of that driveway .
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
PUBLIC HEARING:
ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO AMEND SECTION 20-92 REGARDING CERTIFICATES OF
OCCUPANCY BY ADDING PROVISIONS FOR LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS.
Paul Krauss presented the staff report on this item . Chairman Conrad
called the public hearing to order .
Resident: I 've got one question . Can you explain exactly what the
requirements are for a boulevard tree? How close to the street and all
that stuff?
Krauss: We require that it be , will deciduous but deciduous or coniferous I
tree . 2 1/2 inches in diameter for deciduous , 6 foot in height for
coniferous . It has to be in the front yard area . It can't be in the
right-of-way boulevard so any part of that property is acceptable and if
there 's existing natural trees there , that requirement is waived .
Resident : It doesn 't have to be within so many feet of the street? ,
Krauss: No .
Resident: It 's not a boulevard tree . . . t
Conrad: Any other comments?
Emmings moved, Batzli seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in I
favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
Ahrens: I have one comment . I think we should make the developer '
guarantee the tree for a year . Really . I mean so what if they put a tree
1
Planning Commission Meeting
May 16 , 1990 - Page 14
11
' and it 's dead and it doesn 't last? -
Emmings: A good example is right out here on Kerber Blvd . . There 's a row
' of pine trees up there along there and they 're all dead .
Krauss: You know we 've tried to enforce it in different ways . Having the
developer do it up front causes a lot of problems . Because the lot 's not
developed yet , likely the tree will get killed when they build the house
and there's nobody there to maintain it . Requiring installation when the
home is built and the developer may be long gone at that time and the lot
' sold several times . Usually means that there 's a property owner who takes
some pride in the property that they just bought and will try to keep that
tree alive . It 's not a perfect system but at least we 're getting those
improvements or trying to .
' Ahrens: That 's assuming that the developer puts in a healthy tree to begin
with .
' Krauss: Right .
Ahrens: I think a lot of times that 's not true . Just a suggestion .
Conrad : I assume the public hearing 's closed . Joan , your comments? Based
on what 's in front of us tonight , do you want to make any changes to what
you 've seen here? Do you want to look into this guarantee further at some
other time?
' Ahrens: Do any other cities have anything like this where they guarantee
or that they have the developer guarantee that the trees live for a certain
period of time?
Krauss: Well we in fact do that with our new landscaping bond or letter of
credit . The trees in landscaping have to survive for a full growing season
past the date of installation . Frankly again you come up against a tough
' one to administer . We can go out there and inspect the thing to make sure
it 's installed when we give them back their money or when we sign off on
the building permit . Then going back out there a year later to make sure
' it was done properly is a second trip and then you 're dealing with the
homeowner and not the developer . Escrow accounts get rather unweildy . The
answer is we can but it 's difficult .
Conrad: That 's a tough one .
Wildermuth: Let 's see how this works for a while .
Conrad : Jim , anything on this? Brian anything here?
Batzli : Well I had a question . I didn 't look in the code book . Does this
just apply then to people who enter into development contracts?
Krauss: Exactly Commissioner Batzli . What we do and development contracts
are worded , I mean for every development contract they 've been different up
until about s3-4 years ago . The development contract which is recorded
I
Planning Commission Meeting
May 16 , 1990 - Page 15
against the property will have a condition and it 's being written into all II
of them today that states that the property owner , future property owners
are obligated to install the tree and seed and sod . That condition , the
development contract is filed against the property so anybody that does a II
title search in the future is going to be made aware of it . Then what we
do is when we enforce it at the time the building permit 's .pulled which
might be 5 years or 5 months after the plat is filed . '
Batzli : I think it 's a great idea .
Elison: I like it too . Better late than never .
Emmings: It looks fine to me . The question raised in my mind is do we
have any different standards for double frontage lots than we do for single'
frontage lots?
Krauss: I don 't think we do .
Conrad: I have no comments .
Resident : When I lived in Richfield, the City installed and maintained the
boulevard trees . Trimmed and replaced them when they died . It was a real
boulevard tree right next to the street .
Krauss: Yeah , Minneapolis did that too but the tree in that case is
between the sidewalk and the street .
Conrad: A little bit different . Anything else? Is there a motion? '
Batzli : I move that the Planning Commission recommends approval of the
amendment to the Zoning Ordinance Section 20-92 pertaining to landscaping 1
requirements prior to issuance of certificates of occupancy for single
family dwellings as set forth in the staff report dated May 9th .
Wildermuth: Second .
Batzli moved, Wildermuth seconded that the Planning Commission recommend
approval of the amendment to the Zoning Ordinance, Section 20-92 pertaining'
to landscaping requirements prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy
for single family dwellings. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Emmings moved , Elison seconded to approve the Minutes
of the Planning Commission meeting dated May 2, 1990 amended as follows: II Steve Emmings stated that the word "ban" should be changed to "band" when
referring to the sign bands. Brian Batzli changed condition 13 of the
motion on page 28 to read , "application and receipt" rather than
"application or receipt" . All voted in favor of the Minutes as amended and'
the motion carried .
I
11
'
Planning Commission Meeting
May 16 , 1990 - Page 16
CITY COUNCIL UPDATE.:
Krauss: The meeting on Monday night was the first City Council meeting
' since you last met so there wasn 't any time to write anything into the
report . The schedule got jumbled up . It 's a good excuse . The most
significant thing that happened Monday night I believe is the fact that the
' grading and mining ordinance was approved . We 're going to be pubhlishing
that next week and we will start to operate under it as soon as possible .
We also prior to the City Council meeting held a joint meeting with the
' Board of Adjustments to discuss the variance ordinance and I think the
dialogue was a good one between the City Council and the Board and
basically that ordinance will go forward to the City Council now with a
couple of minor changes and I don 't recall exactly what they are but I 'll
' give you that information next time . That strikes me as the most salient
points of what happened on Monday .
' Ahrens : Any word from Moon Valley?
Krauss : Moon Valley was absent from the meeting so I don 't know if they
' resigned to it at this point or what their feeling is .
Batzli : Maybe they don 't want to lend an air of legitimacy to the
ordinance .
' Krauss : That could be . As soon as the ordinance is published however ,
we 're going to send them a registered letter saying the clock is ticking .
You have 6 months to get a permit .
ONGOING ITEMS:
IIConrad: Any comments about the status of our work agenda? Open
issues? Anybody care?
IBatzli : Did we add Bluff preservation to this or should that just kind of
be lumped in with rezoning BF district? I guess it 's a potential new
zoning district ordinance .
Conrad: It 's a good question Brian . Have we updated? It says revised May
9th . Have we put any new work items in here Paul? Based on last week 's
I meeting , I thought we had several that we were going to tackle but I can 't
remember what they are .
I Krauss: Well we did change a couple things . What exactly we changed .
Number 2 under zoning code amendments with the BF district , we added that
we were going to prepare a new zoning district for your review . I don 't
have a time frame for that but we ' ll do it as soon as time permits .
Emmings: Did you hear Brian 's question . He asked about the bluff
protection ordinance .
IKrauss: Oh , as a separate item?
1
Planning Commission Meeting
May 16 , 1990 - Page 17 I
Batzli : Yeah . '
Krauss: Sure . That 's fine .
Conrad: We talked about another issue and that was the junkyard down '
there . Is that a separate subject?
Krauss: Well to the extent that the junkyard 's not in the BE district now . '
It 's sort of a separate subject that should be researched . We can put that
down . I 'd like to work with Roger on that .
Conrad: Okay . Another one that we talked about and I don't know if it 's I
our issue right now but we talked about storm water management and I know
you 've got a contrat to do some things . Do I assume that we have no role? I
Krauss: Well Chairman Conrad , at this point in time there 's no work
actually proceeding on storm water management or wetland ordinances or
water quality . What we 've been doing is working with the City Council on
exploring the possibility of a storm water utility district which would be
used if it 's approved , to generate funds to do those plans at such time as
those , right now we 're just doing the financing mechanism . At such time as'
those plans are actually underway , I 'm sure we 'll be working with you
intensively on them .
Conrad: Anybody feel a need to put that on the work program or should we I
just let it ride until it 's financing? Anything else that we can remember
from last week or two weeks ago? Okay .
ADMINSTRATIVE APPROVALS:
Conrad: Are there any adminstrative approvals? '
Krauss: Actually there 's one that we declined to approve adminstratively
and will be bringing to the City Council . Kind of an interesting point to I
digress on a little bit . The Press is looking to comply with some PCA
regulations and to do that they need some sort of an afterburner deal , a
roof mounted system that 's quite large . The burner unit itself is about 40
feet long and 14 or 15 feet high and there 's a mass of duct work that would "
have to go up on the roof and there 's also a 50 foot high chimney that
they 're looking at . And this is the initial proposal . We 're very concerned
with what it might look like . We want to work with them to make sure the
air is as clean as possible but in the interest of expediting their need to I
respond to the PCA , we 're probably going to try to bring that before the
City Council at their next meeting . They 're under a deadline from the PCA I
for June 6th I think to bring the thing into compliance .
Emmings: What are they putting into the air that this system will take
out? Do you know? '
Krauss: I don 't know . It has something to do with the presses . These are
exhaust systems for the presses . They 're now vented out and what this is
going to do is burn up whatever they 're venting out . Exactly what it is I
don 't know . I gave the report to Jay Johnson . He 's the person I know that
I
Planning Commission Meeting
May 16 , 1990 - Page 18
can read that and he thought they were on line and doing something
environmentally sound .
Eric Rivkin: I can shed some light on this . I asked the Pollution Control
Agency what was going on and they told me that the Press was cited for too
much opacity in their smoke . It 's not a visual problem . I asked them , ,
well does opacity really mean it just looks bad and he said To , it means it
contains contaminants that are not acceptable . So what are they going to
do about it? Well he said they 're supposed to put in some scrubbers in
' June . What these pipes are smoking out here is solids , heavy metals that
are cancer causing , into the air and they 're going to , they come off the
heat , the press that dries and this water vapor that you see the white
smoke contains all these contaminants . If they put the scrubbers in , the
' opacity will go away along with the contaminants so the PCA measures it in
terms of how it looks but it 's really . . . I have some , I don 't know what
the Press is really doing about their schedule for this but it didn 't sound
' like the PCA was really spending the time to kind of keep on it to make
sure that they are staying on the problems . I think they said the local
authorities were supposed to be doing that .
Krauss: No , that 's not true and the PCA 's given them a June 6th deadline
to comply .
Eric Rivkin: They gave them a deadline?
Krauss: Yeah .
Eric Rivkin: Okay . He told me that those guys were , they 're understaffed
and they don 't have any time . . . .they just said the opacity was
unacceptable . They really don 't know what 's in the smoke but I was in the
Iprinting business for a while and it 's pretty bad stuff .
Krauss: No , it 's actually a furnace type unit as I understand it . I met
I with the engineers and we talked about an internal location and they were
afraid of locating it internally for fire hazards so I 'm going to meet with
them again on Friday to get some more definition on their plans but it 's
Isomething that we want to expedite .
Eric Rivkin: By products are supposed to be carbon dioxide and a few less
contaminents .
IResident : You don 't burn off heavy metals . You have to scrub them out
with urethane . . .
IIEllson: We ' ll find out soon enough won 't we .
Krauss: Well as you can see this is why we didn 't want to adminstratively
approve it .
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISCUSSION - REVISIONS TO LAND USE MAP, UPDATE ON SCHOOL
IDISTRICT PLANS AND TEXT ISSUES .
Paul Krauss presented the staff report on this item .
Planning Commission Meeting
May 16 , 1990 - Page 19
Conrad: Let 's go back . You covered a lot of stuff and I think where you II
might be very familiar with it , we 're probably not . Paul , start back ,
let 's go through these one at a time . I just want to see if we 've got
comments from the commission and maybe even the public here might not be a II
bad idea to hear what they 're having to say about some of these . Go
through your list . Start us off .
Krauss: With the land use? '
Conrad: Yeah . Land use . Or let 's start at Transportation . I think
that 's where you started wasn 't it?
Emmings: Natural features .
Krauss : Well natural features is in the text that you received .
Conrad: Okay , that 's good . You don 't need to talk to us about it . Any
comments on what the text was?
Wildermuth: I liked the revisions to it . To the text .
Conrad: I thought it was outstanding . I just think it 's really neat . You '
were going to say something negative weren 't you and I kind of beat you to
the punch . '
Emmings: No , I 've got some little things that I want to , I can talk to
Paul about separately because they 're basically stylistic but overall I II thought it was good . The one thing that I think is sort of substantative
is if a little bit trivial . I noticed in the natural features section we
say we 've got 9 lakes and then the land use section on page 7 it says we 've
got 7 lakes . I think within our own report we ought to be consistent and II
I 'm curious as to how many lakes we have .
Krauss: We will definitely , we 'll count them all .
Conrad: That 's really a good section . It really tells you what we 're for
and how we 're going to do it .
Ellson: Here I thought you guys were going to complain about how long it
was .
Conrad: It 's worthy of that length . I 'm real pleased with that . Whoever I
worked on that , I think they did a nice job . Next item on your laundry
list .
Krauss: Okay , getting into the land use . First one we talked about adding
g
the road network and the new roads that were added .
Conrad: So how do you want us to react to the road network this time? Is I
this , do you want reaction Paul? We haven 't really spent a lot of time
looking at it . '
Planning Commission Meeting
May 16 , 1990 - Page 20
Krauss: I guess Mr . Chairman we 've been , some of these roads have been on
previous plans . I asked Mark to include them on the Comp Plan itself so
that you could see how it fit together with the land use . We 'll be
' discussing the individual road segments and traffic loadings , etc . in
detail when the transportation elements discussed but if you have any
general comments , I 'd be happy to hear .
Conrad: Okay . Are there any general comments .
' Ellson: I like the road that he put in . I remember thinking at the same
time when the Shardlow 's gave a presentation that that was a good idea for
roads so I think that 's a good one to add .
Conrad: It looks like it .
Resident : The service road itself at TH 5 , why is that located so far away
' from TH 5 compared to the north road?
Krauss: The north of highway 5 is a service road . It 's always been shown
' as that . That makes development rather difficult . Basically you have a
dead strip and then you have the road . I guess it does provide a buffer
strip as well . On the south side , we look at the connecting points for
that road and they 're somewhat displaced from TH 5 . We come off of the
McGlynn 's site where McGlynn 's had a road platted and bringing that across
and if we 'd like in fact to connect it ultimately to this road going up to
TH 41 , it displaces the center line south . If you can 't have it right up
' against TH 5 , the next best thing is to split the difference so you have
enough room on either side .
Resident : How 's the land between Timberwood and that road zoned?
Krauss : It 's guided single family . It 's the same zip code as elsewhere in
the community . It didn't print dark enough but it is the same . . .
Emmings : I think that there 's an error on the land use map . They finally
have changed , if you look at Ches Mar and there 's that long strip there
' that 's indicated , it looks like it 's part of the long strip going down
towards the lake . It looks like it 's part of the Campfire camp . That
isn 't . That 's private ownership and it has a little boot that sticks out
to the north that connects it to the lake .
' Conrad: Yeah , there 's a flag that gives it access .
' Emmings: This is privately owned and it comes out like this . That 's
privately owned also .
' Krauss: We 'll correct it .
Ellson: I 've got a question too . If you look at Lake St . Joe just as an
example , there 's little tree symbols all around Lake St . Joe . What does
that mean?
Planning Commission Meeting
May 16 , 1990 - Page 21
Krauss: Maybe we need to clarify that as well . Theoretically the tree
symbol would mean park . Now I 'm aware that a lot of that is wetland .
Emmings: A lot of it 's in private ownership . '
Krauss : Well yes and we 've talked to a couple developers about it
recently . I 'll have to confirm that with the park board .
Emmings: But who decides to put trees around it? I 'm not sure where that
comes from?
Krauss: Well the trees , where the tree symbols occur where there 's not
currently a park , it implies there 's an intent to create a park there .
Emmings: Okay , that 's fine . '
Krauss: You know if you look on Lake Ann Park , there 's a 30 acre chunk of
ground that I think is owned by the church right now that 's being shown as II
a park expansion . Same thing down at Bandimere and we 're showing new park
acquisition by Rice Marsh Lake .
Emmings : You should look at this as what the City would look like in the II
year 2000 .
Krauss: Yes . '
Emmings: Or after .
Ellson: Or would like to look like .
Conrad: What were we just talking about? ,
Emmings : The trees .
Conrad: The trees yeah , but . '
Batzli : The corridors before that .
Conrad: Corridors .
Emmings: You mentioned Lake Ann Park . ,
Ellson: Lake St . Joe .
Conrad: Did we finish? '
Krauss: Do you want to go to the next one?
Conrad: Let 's go to •the next one . '
Krauss : Well the next one was the creation of an office designation and
employing it at a couple locations around Timberwood .
I
Planning Commission Meeting
May 16 , 1990 - Page 22
' Conrad: That was Ursula 's suggestion?
Krauss: Ursula suggested it and frankly it 's something that hasn 't been
done on previous Chanhassen plans but I 've done it elsewhere . I mean it's
not an uncommon practice .
Wildermuth: We did have an office institutional .
' Ellson: See I thought we had something also .
' Wildermuth: We had something that was called the OI designation .
Krauss: That 's still a zoning designation . St . Hubert 's is zoned that .
' Emmings: It 's just office though but we still have OI .
Wildermuth: Yeah . . .and if you locate a school somewhere around there ,
that 's what it will be . It will be the OI , office institutional .
Emmings: There 's no office institutional .
' Krauss: There 's a zoning district that 's office institutional .
Emmings : It 's not on the key .
Krauss: Well because this is a guide plan . It 's not a zoning map . That 's
something that needs to be made clear . The guide plan will not change the
underlying zoning . Where you have large tracts that are zoned rural
residential right now and if the guide plan shows it as low density , it 's
not going to change until the property owner makes a rezoning petition to
' the City and the City accepts that development plan .
Resident : Does office mean buildings like industrial things like The Press
could be built there?
Krauss: No , it means that office uses would be there and I think if we
haven 't defined it yet , what we would defer is that over 80% of the
' building has to be office .
Ahrens: Over 80%?
' Krauss: 80 .
Ellson: Or whatever we designated it .
Conrad: Are we all comfortable with the new district? Does anybody care?
' Ellson : Well what 's the reasoning behind it? It just seems like it 's less
threatening than industrial or whatever?
' Krauss: Well it is in a way . Zoning used to be a pyramidal thing . It was
based on a heirarchy of uses with the single family home at the top and
more and more intensive uses at the bottom with the idea that you segregate
Planning Commission Meeting
May 16 , 1990 - Page 23 1
everyone from the other one . That 's not the way the real world functions I
but office use is generally regarded as less intensive than industrial use .
You don 't have heavy trucks . You don't have shift work . The buildings are'
generally more attractive or hopefully they are . Traffic is often worse
but that 's an impact that you can deal with .
Wildermuth: Paul , how is the office designation going to differ from the I
old office institutional?
Krauss: Well Jo Ann , was the office institutional ever on the guide plan
map itself? It 's a zoning district so they 're different in that respect .
There was never a designation on our Comp Plan that said strictly office .
Conrad: There was a question or comment out there . Did I see a hand? '
Mary Harrington: Yeah . The comment a couple questions back when it came
down to the road . On the map it shows the service road like TH 7 has . . . II and I understand what Paul says . . .Why can 't they come off the north end of
the McGlynn 's road instead of the south end of it and have it back up to
the road and then come out like they do on the other side where it 's closer "
up? They 're not cutting off the area down there and leaving these tracts
or whatever it is up closer to the road . I realize that you 're trying to
promote certain locations and they couldn 't swing down once they made it
past Galpin , we 'd get a different loop across the front end . . .halfway II through and they connect back down to wherever the impact street is . Why
do we have to go cutting through the middle of it?
Krauss: Well theoretically any of those alignments is possible . Basically '
you want to connect the end points . Now what you want to do , ideally the
connection from McGlynn 's would be further south so you have continuity I
with Park Road . We can 't do that perfectly because of the way development
has occurred but ideally you don 't want to introduce all that traffic up to
TH 5 . You 'd like to persuade some of it to go south so you don 't want that
intersection all that close to TH 5 . As to where the road goes internally II
in there , frankly anything 's possible . You don't want it too curvalinear .
It is a collector street we 're anticipating . The more curvalinear it is ,
the less it will be used .
Mary Harrington: The one on the north is a collector street too?
Krauss: Yes . ,
Mary Harrington: Well , I realize that you don't want it to be super curvy
or anything but it still could function by going up a little higher off the '
other and I realize you 're trying to come off the park but that would also
add congestion to the area which there is planned residential south of the
road and on either side of the road but parts of it you wouldn 't want to II make it a collector street that close to the residential although busyness
on this type of street is less offensive than industrial or an office or a
school use would be to existing residential . Then I don 't see the , I
realize the point about the park but I don 't see why we can 't swing up and II
have some sort of , swing back up to TH 5 and do like we 're doing on the
Planning Commission Meeting
May 16 , 1990 - Page 24
' north end and why are we necessarily run all the traffic through the area
down there .
Resident: The offices would probably like to face TH 5 too and get
visibility on TH 5 .
Wildermuth: Be served from the back .
Krauss: And they would be doing that . They would be oriented to TH 5 .
Resident: And then the address would be to the back of it .
Krauss: Well one thing that didn 't show here , if you look there 's two
' corridors with trees in them shown in that area . Both of those are creeks .
Bluff Creek . The western one is also a location that MnDot has said you
can access TH 5 so there would be a link from that internal road up to TH 5
' at that point and that office site , if the office goes there , would access
off that link .
Ahrens : As far as collector streets being located in residential
neighborhoods , they 're located in residential neighborhoods throughout the
entire plan . They run through Kerber Blvd . , they run on Pleasant View Road
and down Lake Lucy Road . I mean there 's houses right on all those
' collector streets .
Emmings: The parcel that 's identified as a school search area with the
asterick , what 's the size of the parcel , of the whole thing from Galpin
' over to the trees and down to Timberwood .
Krauss: It 's approximately 40 acres . That would be the school site .
' Conrad: The school would need the entire space?
' Krauss : And the road would have to skirt around that somehow .
Emmings: Then the road would have to be on either the north end or the
south end .
' Krauss : Depending on how the school plan develops , yeah .
' Emmings: So there are a lot of things that can impact the location of this
road .
' Krauss: I have to add too that the road on the north side that 's set up as
a frontage road was developed for a different purpose . It came out of the
downtown development and the downtown main street extended to the west and
a desire to serve Lake Ann Park to provide safer intersection to Lake Ann
I Park and not run the street somewhere through the middle of the park but
minimize the impact . So it followed an alignment that paralled •TH 5 .
I Conrad: If the school goes in there , and that 's probably really
hypothetical , do we really need a collector then?
Planning Commission Meeting
May 16 , 1990 - Page 25 1
Krauss: Possibly not . It would still be desireable from a traffic '
standpoint to have it but you 'd have to weigh the pros and cons . If a
school goes in there , you still have a loop if you will from McGlynn 's
going north to where that connection is on TH 5 and then the continuity is
there for that point and that may be sufficient .
Ahrens: I would think that it would be even more necessary if the school I
was there then . To have a street located .
Conrad: Access to the school .
Ahrens: Yeah , access to the school .
Ellson: Versus everyone turning left off of TH 5 . All the buses and
everything .
Ahrens: Right . '
Krauss: I 'd have to add too that the traffic levels that we 're showing
from Eastern Carver County traffic model on TH 5 are extremely high .
You 're looking at , the model 's projecting 40 ,000 to 50 ,000 trips a day . On
t�w,t type of road , that 's an awful lot of traffic . If you can keep people
off of that , local trips off of that it would be safer for everybody .
Ahrens: Especially the people driving kids to school .
Conrad: Yeah . It 's a valid point .
Resident: . . .the other two possible locations for the school , I think you
mentioned three .
Krauss: The school looked at a site north of TH 5 near Lake Ann Park
which I think is Gorra 's property . They also looked at a piece of property
on the south part of the Eckankar site . The Eckankar site raises some II problems for the City and for the school district . If the Park 's going to
be expanded as we want it to be , there 's not enough room to put a school in
there and you 've got to also question the point of putting a school
adjacent to the main street of Chanhassen which is someday going to be
developed commercially . Also , in terms of proximity to the students , it
was too far east . The Gorra site is a possibility . The grades didn 't
appeal to them as much . You only have access off that frontage road or off'
TH 5 on that parcel, which makes it a little more problematic to use and I
guess from a staff point of view , it didn 't encourage their residential
corridor to jump south of TH 5 as we felt a school might . '
Resident : Did they you look at the west of Galpin Blvd .?
Krauss: No they didn 't because that 's not being proposed to be sewered .
It 's outside the study area .
Resident: You mean on south of TH 5 and west of Galpin Road is not part
of . . .
Planning Commission Meeting
May 16 , 1990 - Page 26
' Krauss: Oh south of TH 5 is . The school district did not look in there ,
no .
' Resident: Any reason for that?
Krauss: We suggested some sites with them . We went out and looked at them
' with them and those were the ones we came up with .
Resident : What would be different about going west or east?
Krauss: Well west of Galpin you run into some environmental constraints .
Where that road is shown coming through , the single family area to the
south is quite full of wetlands and extensive tree cover . A school needs
' to clear fairly extensive areas if they 're not already cleared . The
preferred site right now is the cultivated field . There 's nothing to lose
there . It can be graded quite easily . The area to the north between that
' road and TH 5 really wasn 't large enough to accommodate the school unless
you really pushed it further to the west and if you push it that far to the
west , is that still a Chanhassen school at that point .
Conrad: Any more questions in relation to the schools? Anything?
Mary Harrington: It 's my understanding Paul , you said the site adjacent
' was selected by you after you folks had gone out and seen several different
sites with the school district and they had not formally picked a site .
They had preferences for a few of them and from my understanding from the
gentleman you did not show them anything in the section that we have a
horizontal line on the left hand side of this map south of TH 5 and just
east of TH 41 where you see a little bump out section down there , there 's
presently a house down there . That area is very flat . It also has acreage
' that is tilled and what not . That was not shown to them? Is that correct
Paul?
•
' Krauss: Well Mary , what we showed to them , we had discussed 3 sites on a
map and then we brought them out here and went out with their architect .
We drove up and down the corridor and they were looking at the entire
corridor . We looked specifically at 3 sites that had been chosen .
Mary Harrington: You had picked on a map for them? .
Krauss: Yes .
Mary Harrington: I mean you didn 't pick out that one to take a look at
for them?
Krauss: Not in detail , no .
Mary Harrington: No . Okay , maybe that 's a site that you might be closer
to the middle and some sort of service road and being on a service road
might not be that bad of an idea . I know in Edina one of the high schools
' is sitting on a service road off of the freeway and it didn 't stop the cars
or the buses from getting to the high school or junior high on the east
side . I forget . I did send my kids there . But I drove past it all the
1
Planning Commission Meeting
May 16 , 1990 - Page 27 1
time . . .on the service road they were able to get to it . I 'm in question
about taking that entire 40 acre site just north of Timberwood and plunking
in a building which in effect is very similar to an office building
aesthetically and with ballfields and parks , etc . because the junior high
children are not going to spend their life indoors . You know you have gym
time and what we have effectively done then is we have cut off the
residential uses between the Timberwood area and just north of it and then I
by putting the office zoning in on the other side , you 've also cut off the
residential uses and potential because as you said, south of that curvy
road on the west side of Galpin there is a lot of lowland and trees and 111 boggy . . .which obviously will not get developed into houses unless we run
out of land in the future and they want . . .so what you 've done is you 've
effectively cut off sociologically the site of Timberwood and on the
particular use map you have surrounded it with offices , a school which
funtions and looks aesthetically like an office , another office and then
you 've dragged the commercial out and you have psychologically and
emotionally totally closed off that community of Timberwood and the
residents who live on the other side of Galpin and the people who don 't
live in Timberwood but they are on Galpin just below it . I don 't find that
to be . . .
Conrad: So your point is , you really don 't want a school there? Is that
really what you 're saying? That 's a long way of telling us . There are a
lot of sites for schools but I 'm just trying to . . . '
Mary Harrington: I would like a school .
Conrad: Not there?
Mary Harrington: Not necessarily pushed in my back yard .
Conrad: You said some other things that we just have to respond to . We
really haven 't , we 've been trying to cluster residential around and your
statement was we 've totally cut you off and I don 't understand what you 're I
saying .
Mary Harrington: With this particular concept with the offices . '
Conrad: No , I heard what she said . Somebody 's making a comment that I was
wrong but I heard exactly what she said .
Mary Harrington: Okay . If I could refer to the other one that we have
here we 've got residential , the last map . . .residential uses were all in the
area where it 's zoned office and then it was all , just kind of that section /
all the way down and then there was residential , abeit it was high density
and medium density and then regular density just to the north of it and
then it swung around with this tiny little strip and so there was I
residential . Now this residential has been eliminated okay and it 's been
shut off by changing this thing to putting the offices that had residential
initially . Does that make sense? Maybe I wasn 't explaining it right . I 'm
just saying that if we 're going to put a school in , maybe we should . . .
where there isn 't a lot of neighbors around it so the neighbors who
volunteer to move around the school as opposed to putting a school in and
Planning Commission Meeting
May 16 , 1990 - Page 28
' you push it on the existing group of neighbors who maybe are not interested
in having it all part of the school and not residential uses there .
' Conrad: Any other comments on schools?
Resident: At a prior meeting , I think it was . . .no one wanted to put any
medium density residential there because nobody wanted kids anywhere near
TH 5 . That was a big issue was hey , we don 't want kids near TH 5 and now
you 're going to put a school on TH 5? It just doesn 't make sense . Then
Paul said that we put a school in and residential tends to develop around
' it but as Mary points out , he 's putting office on the left , office on the
right , commercial across the street . We could devalue 3 sides by now
residential , you can 't put residential there . There 's not going to be any
' attraction . There 's not going to be developed any residential around the
school if now we 've changed the land just west of Galpin to office and the
land right within office . . . It 's going to be basically cut off completely
other than Timberwood and there 's that low wetland to develop off of there
and that 's all .
Conrad: Just to quickly respond . The school district picked that site
' out . They said that was fine so we 're not experts in locating schools . I
think your comments on close to traffic , that 's interesting . I think they
obviously feel that that 's not a problem but still it is . It 's of interest
' to me that they 'd want to locate a school on a busy street .
Emmings: Minnetonka High School 's on TH 7 .
' Conrad: Minnetonka 's there too .
Emmings: Hopkins High School .
Conrad: Access is really a key function I guess for school districts .
Eric Rivkin: I have a question , maybe Paul could answer this . Is there a
I positive impact or the design that Eden Prairie did with their Eden Prairie
High School and the park at Round Lake Park , the community center kind of
all rolled into one big pile of land there . I mean to me it 's bordering
' residential but I know a lot of the residents that live there are , they 're
developed so nicely they don 't mind seeing that because they 've got the
park , it 's kind of a buffer to the school'. They 've got Duck Lake and all
'
that stuff behind there and the residents in the Duck Lake were there
before the high school went in . ' There were some objections and stuff but
after it went in the design of the high school and everything, put all the
ballfields and all that kind of noisy stuff toward the park where it was a
' good design . I 'd like to know in clusting that kind of thing , wouldn 't
that be more of a , to find a way to kind of work that into the plan if the
school district , I don 't think they 're really in the business of planning
' communities . I think they 're in the business of schooling your children so
perhaps next to the Arboretum instead of an industrial area there , perhaps
that would make a better site . You 've got ponds that needs to be developed
' into something like park . The Arboretum I know , I 've talked to these
people , the head of the Arboretum , they do not like a Fleet Farm or
whatever as the proper land use for that next to the Arboretum . They fear
1
Planning Commission Meeting
May 16 , 1990 - Page 29
the worse will happen to that both environmentally and aesthetically to the'
community . It 's one of the most inapporpriate zonings I 've ever seen on
this but I think that might be a good site . Maybe come in from the south
rather than from TH 5 like you did at Round Lake . That might be a better
site and it 's kind of a nice buffer for the Arboretum . It wouldn 't be high
density residential , it would be offices and so forth so that 's just a
suggestion . Maybe think about that .
Conrad: Next item .
Krauss: Well the next one was a minor one . It was the Bluff Creek trail
corridor .
Conrad: Okay , any comments on the Bluff Creek? Anything? Then where 'd
you go?
Krauss: The MUSA donut hole and treatment of Timberwood and Lake Lucy
Highlands .
Conrad: So talk to me about the 2 1/2 acre deal . I guess your perspective
on that is kind of new . I went through the 2 1/2 acre deal many years ago . '
The Lake Lucy Highlands issue , tell me what you 're thinking in terms of
that Paul .
Krauss: Well Lake Lucy Highlands was platted under the same ordinance , pre'
1987 ordinance that created Timberwood . It 's a 2 1/2 acre plus subdivision
all with on-site sewer and as with Timberwood , the likelihood that that
would be further subdivided or need utilities in the future is pretty
minimal so we thought there was good reason to think that they should be
dealt with in a similar manner .
Conrad: Now your perspective on that , you know we have a petition in front'
of us tonight . Now what 's here on this petition , is that what you 've
bundled into this?
Krauss: No , it 's not .
Conrad: It 's not . This is expanded . '
Krauss: The petition has a much larger area .
Conrad: So your comments are really for what is existing? '
Krauss: Yes .
Conrad: Okay , well this is a two prong deal . Anybody have a concern with
those 2 1/2 acre folks?
Wildermuth: Is the Met Council really going to let us do something like
that? Fragment it?
Krauss: Well if you draw a donut hole around it and draw their attention I
to it , the answer is probably no . If you accomplish the same thing by
,
Planning Commission Meeting
May 16, 1990 - Page 30
guiding it "somewhat differently and putting in plan text , I 'm pretty sure
we can pull that off .
1 Wildermuth: What happens if in the middle of one of these areas , let 's say
for one reason or another we have 2 or 3 systems that fail . Of course on a
2 1/2 acre lot there should be enough area available for development of
'
another drainfield location but if something like that should occur , what
would your plan be? To put in holding tanks?
Krauss: We 've had a similar case up on Lake Lucy Road a few months ago
where there were 2 homes with failing sewer systems and I believe that
between them they have about 10 acres but due to the location of the homes
and in their view the proximity of utilities , they didn 't feel it was
' expediate or fiscally smart to put in another dr`ainfield or even possible
on one of the homes to put another drainfield . So the utilities are . in the
process of being expanded down Lake Lucy Road to pick up those two homes .
' The Metro Council did approve that extension .
Wildermuth : But let 's say that you had a situation like that that would
develop in the interior of one of these areas . Who 's going to stand the
' cost of running collector lines?
Krauss: Well frankly it gets very difficult . What you would have is a
' scenario where one homeowner needs utilities and nobody else around him or
her does and it would be very expensive to bring it in because the City
Council would have a difficult time assessing it oversomebody that wasn 't
' going to use it and wasn 't going to benefit .
Wildermuth : Can the Met Council force the issue?
Krauss: No .
Eric Rivkin: I can answer Jim 's concerns . Since the subdivision of Lake
I Lucy Highlands and Timberwood , as a condition of the building permits every
single one of those 2 1/2 acre sites had to have an alternate site for the
septic system . We had to rope them off in case the first one failed , you
' had a second one and I have some other concerns about that address that .
That relate to the comprehensive plan draft . I tried to tie it together
with the overall plan and specific concerns that you have about septic
systems and their . . .and all that . Is this like just an open discussion
' here?
Conrad: That 's the way I 've been handling it although it wasn 't really
I intended as , we 're using it to get input really . The key for me , to tell
you the truth , the key for me right now is the staff has dome some things
over the last month and some of these are new to us . Really the point is
for Planning Commission to say hey , we haven 't looked at that before and we
I
want to give them some additional direction . It really has not been to get
community input but being that you 're all here , I 'm kind of , it 's kind of
nice to know where you stand on some of these things and in terms of septic
I systems what you 're bringing up , I think we 've gone through , we are pretty
familiar with what you 're talking about . We 've had some experts in talking
to us about it .
I
11
Planning Commission Meeting
May 16 , 1990 - Page 31 U
Eric Rivkin: I have a whole list of � on map s that , the and text that
g P
and I want to address the petition too and I 'd like to know when would be a
good point in time to interject that so I can just talk it all out . '
There 's a lot of things that you haven 't heard before and probably don 't
know about that I want to bring out to your attention .
Conrad: Relating to what in particular?
Eric Rivkin: Well the text of the . . .
Emmings: Can 't he bring those to the staff?
Eric Rivkin: And the map and the petition. ,
Conrad: Well I 'm interested in the petition . I don 't know that I 'm real
interested tonight in the text . Which text are you talking about? '
Eric Rivkin : Well the Comprehensive Plan draft text . I understood that
from the agenda that you were going to welcome comments on the text and them
plan . That was my understanding . When does that come?
Conrad: Well those are in public hearing formats and unless , again we
appreciate getting as much input as we can but sometimes it gets out of
control and I 'm not sure how to handle what you 've got in your material .
Tonight was really not a night to go through the text . Tonight was the
night for us as a Planning Commission to hear the additional staff , the
things that I 'm covering right now in terms of getting us familiar with
what staff is recommending .
Emmings: Can 't he take those to the staff? Can't he take his comments to II
the staff and let them consider them and then to the extent that the staff
doesn 't address them , he can bring them back at a public hearing can 't he?
Eric Rivkin: I wanted the public to hear these so they could comment . ,
Emmings: Yeah but that has to be done . . .
Conrad: My perspective would be , rather than just those that are here
tonight , I think other people should be invited . The forum is a public
hearing for that . That is the forum . This is not a public hearing right
now . This is really just discussion here with staff and Planning
Commission .
Eric Rivkin: There are some things here that would help you fine tune it II
for the hearing .
Conrad: And that 's why I 'm opening it up a little bit . Let us see where II
we go on some of these things and maybe I can direct or open up some
things . I 'm real interested in the 2 1/2 acre and that 's where we 're at
right now . Jim , did you have any additional comments on the 2 1/2 acre
holes?
I
i . .
Planning Commission Meeting
IIMay 16 , 1990 - Page 32
IWildermuth: No .
Conrad: The question that remains is that we 've got a petition in front of
I us that really wants to expand that . Do we as a Planning Commission want
staff to look into that expansion possibility?
I Emmings: I wonder if we want to do that without there being any plan to
plat the property . I wonder why we 'd want to do that .
Conrad: Well it 's creating a zone and you know I don 't mind looking into
that . Usually when , Paul?
Krauss: I just wanted to clarify something . It 's not creating a zone .
I What it 's doing is creating a potential for future development . The
underlying area , I think most of our petition is zoned rural residential
which is large lot unsewered zoning right now . The Comp Plan coming in
I will not change that . That won 't change unless the property owner requests
that it be changed .
Conrad: Yeah , but still they will sink up . If we say that this is large
Ilot on the comp plan , that 's what we want .
Krauss: That 's true .
IConrad: So yeah , you 're right . It may not be petitioned to be zoned that
way but geez , we 're saying we 're committing that we want large lots there .
I I hear what you 're saying yet on the other hand I have to sink the two
together . This is comprehensive plan but it 's almost the same as zoning
because whoever owns that land can quality for whatever we said we wanted
here . So I go back , 2 1/2 acres . Basically to assess , to take another
II good look at 2 1/2 acre lot sizes as potentially for our zoning . I think
it 's been petitioned . I think there are enough people , at least in my mind
that would like it . I think there are some people who wouldn 't but Paul we
I need you to do an analysis of expanding the 2 1/2 acre from the Lake Lucy
Highlands to broadened area .
II Wildermuth: Would maintaining these 2 1/2 acre lot size areas preclude
anyone within the area from subdividing?
Krauss: I had a long talk with the City Attorney about that today . The
I ordinance was changed in 1987 to preclude 2 1/2 acre lots with on site
sewer . That applies in the rural service area so right now the only way
you could subdivide property there is a gross density of 1 per 10 acres .
I Lake Lucy Highlands and Timberwood could not happen today . If the MUSA
line is expanded , it gets fuzzier . Apparently you have more latitude oddly
enough with the MUSA line expanding and flexibility frankly to use on site
I sewer . We agreed with the Metro Council in 1987 to deal with the area
outside of the MUSA line in that way . There was nothing explicitedly
agreed to with what happened inside the MUSA line .
1 Eric Rivkin: It was my understanding when I received the draft plan from
you and drafted the petition was that if the MUSA line were extended , could
2 1/2 acre lots with no service exist within a MUSA boundary and it was my
I
11
Planning Commission Meeting
May 16 , 1990 - Page 33 1
understanding that it could so I drafted the petition around that .
Wildermuth: What Paul is telling us that it can but the question is , one
of the owners of the 2 1/2 acre lots wants to subdivide , how small an
increment of land can we tolerate a septic system?
Krauss: We 'd have to do some research on that . It 's an issue that 's not II
been dealt with by the City . Areas that have developed inside the
MUSA line have developed with sewer . I 'm not aware of any exceptions to
that'.
Eric Rivkin: It would be too big of an environmental threat if you had
more density with septic systems beyond the 2 1/2 acre . In fact , I don 't
know that it would be acceptable to even our City Council that having this II
much land with 2 1/2 acre with septic would not be an environmental threat
either . I want to make clear the thrust of the petition . Since we
circulated it , there 's been a lot of changes going on and I guess the
fallout from this is a set of expectations I guess that I want to make
clear so that you understand where we 're going to go . We want to go ahead
forward . We 'd like to have some kind of incentives or guarantees built
into the policies that for those who want to keep large lots are not
penalized by the facto by keeping the land in the natural state and not
subdividing . We don 't want to be forced to sell and move on because of
forced assessments or unwanted utilities . We want guarantees that if a II septic system fails in a large lot zoned area with no foreseeable hook up
or feasible hook up to sewer , that that owner would have the right to
repair it or use that alterantive site that the City allowed them to have I
rather than forced to leave and subdivide in order to pay to bring in a
sewer line and likewise force all their neighbors to do the same because
now they 're going to get hit with all these assessments . We want to rid
ourselves of so called pending special assessments on utilities we don 't
use now or will never use in the foreseeable future . There in effect ,
we 've got $460 .00 an acre assessed on us now for the Lake Ann Interceptor .
That 's as good as levied because when we buy or sell the property as many
people have , they put the money in the pending specials in escrow and the
$480 ,000 .00 that was spent by Chanhassen basically was taken out of
circulation locally by the people who own these lots . I could have had
$4 ,660 .00 more to finish my house which would have increased the value .
Given the City more taxes . The Moran 's could have used their $2 ,800 .00
taken away by their bank to do more planting . The Cordell 's could have I
used their money to take their treeless lot and make more , increase their
value too . We don 't want to be taxed on the basis of potential for
subdivision . Zoning is very important now as Ladd said or implied and the
petitioners want to stay rural residential or large lot residential and the
tax benefits that go with it .
Wildermuth: I think this issue is going to keep Roger really busy .
Eric Rivkin : Now as far as the feasibility , we just want to keep
discussions going on this . We want to sit down with them in discussions and
be able to . . . '
Krauss: If I could interject for a moment . The special assessment that
I
•
Planning Commission Meeting
May 16 , 1990 - Page 34
' Eric 's referring to was one that was approved by the City Council over 3
years ago relative to the installation of the Lake Ann Interceptor . The
City basically fronted the money for the construction or our share of the
' cost with the assessments to be levied against undeveloped properties and I
think Eric 's right , it 's $460 .00 an acre and those have been listed as
pending specials . It 's a trunk charge basically . But the Planning
Commission 's not really in a position to anticipate what the City Council
' did 3 years ago in terms of over ruling that assessment . That 's something
that the City Council would need to deal with and it really doesn 't have ,
since it took place 3 years ago I don 't believe it has a direct bearing on
' the Comprepehsive Plan itself .
Eric Rivkin: The map that you have before you now does reflect one thing
' that we wanted in the petition and that 's large lot zoning but not in the
areas that were petitioned . I can go over here to show you the petitioners
that want the large lot zone . It extends all the way to TH 41 . If I had
more time with this petition I could have gotten a lot more signatures .
' Some of them along TH 41 here but when you talk about foreseeable future
and who wants to subdivide and who doesn 't , these are the people . As far
as going all the way to where sewer stops on Lake Lucy Road , these people
' signed the petition and do not want to develop into quarter acre lots . If
they want to develop , they expressed a concern of the environment and the
quantity of land that 's in these houses . The . . .are too steep there .
They 've got a lot of wetlands . They can 't subdivide either . They 're in
' the same kind of lot type that we in Lake Lucy Highlands are . They may have
larger land areas but they are undevelopable . There 's 2 exceptions here
and as far as developability is concerned but they in spirit , as long as
they 're living there , want to stay large lot . This is an area . . .and
Hennesee ' s and Jerome Carlson who owns this and this also want to see large
lot residential . We plan to submit the petition to the Metropolitan
' Council since it has been already submitted and we don 't . . .
Conrad: You 're submitting the petition to the Metropolitan Council?
' Eric Rivkin : Well we 're going to copy them . Just give them a copy of the
petition to let them know our feelings but we don 't see that that 's maybe
any guarantee that wer 'e going to get what we want but we do see one thing
that is pointed in the right direction here and that 's large lot
residential . I 'm just saying as we circulated the petition , these are the
petitioners who want that designation. The ones that I couldn 't get , well
' there are some fence sitters there but basically that 's the kind of lots .
that these people want and if MUSA is extended , we feel also , I don 't know
if 'we 'll get this but we 're willing to concede if that 's the case that we
don 't want it until the year 2000 which is kind of what the deal was .
Things will quiet down for a while and it would give the City and
yourselves some time to be able to assess the environmental impact of
particular developments in certain areas so that maybe to plan a little bit
better so that things aren 't done in a rush and knee jerk fashion and then
you find out later that you 've just polluted your watershed to the hilt .
Conrad: I really do want to study this . I think it 's valid in terms of
them petitioning . I think in my mind the potential of a large lot zone is
I
Planning Commission Meeting
May 16 , 1990 - Page 35 1
still valid in Chanhassen but I need Paul , you to come back to us and look II
at it .
Krauss: I would be happy to do it but I guess I need some direction as to II
what you want me to bring back . I mean clearly you can do that .
Conrad: Yeah . Pros and cons . There 's some financial aspects I think . The
thing that worries me about what was just said are there are some cases '
where you could have sewer failure and you 're asking for no , a guarantee
that the one thing we 're not going to do is say somebody has sewer failure
that we 're just going to allow contamination and what have you and that 's I
basically what you 've kind of said . We 're not going to , don 't force us to
hook up . I think the City has an obligation to maintain all the quality of
life that you moved into that area for and so I see a lot of legal things .
I see a lot of problems potentially getting what you want because to insure
that we 're maintaining the natural aspects , there are some things that we
just have to look at . We 've tried to do 2 1/2 acres before in this city
and I was involved in that and at the end the neighbors didn 't , when they I
saw what it entailed and the fact that they couldn 't subdivide anymore , a
.Ic,t of them pulled out . That 's the other thing that 's going to have to
happen . If we decide to do this , and again I 'm just speaking for myself
right now . Only for myself but there are certainly financial implications II
of that . The future potential . It would be in my mind , it would be large
lot zoning and nobody could subdivide period until you changed the zoning
and therefore that has some impact on neighbors on your petition . It may
seem nice to keep the green but when you say you cannot subdivide , there
are financial implications and personally I 'm all for what you 're talking
about but there 's a whole lot of stuff in the way of getting you there and I
we can kind of work with you on that and see what we can do . I feel that
we> and again I 'm speaking just for myself right now .
Mar, Harrington: The City of Orono has large lot areas and it works our
ver/ nice as far as it 's a very prime area and high value . Very sought
after . From an appraisal standpoint , people look for something like that . '
That 's kind of what they want . It 's something that Chanhassen is known
for . You don 't come here because they . . .buildings . They come here because
it 's small town and it has a rural nature and it 's more small lots , look
how fast the lots gobbled up in Lake Lucy and how fast they gobbled up in I
where is the place I live in , Timberwood . They really went fast from an
economic standpoint .
Conrad: And I hear what you 're saying and . . . '
Mary Harrington: There 's really a market for them .
Conrad: There really is .
Mary Harrington: You could be another Orono . ,
Conrad: But you really end up with like with the problems you 're
experiencing right now . As we expand you end up with some problems because"
communities aren 't , it 's more difficult to deal with some of these large
lots and buffer and all those things . They 're unique situations but
1
Planning Commission Meeting
May 16 , 1990 - Page 36
anyway , other people here , you know I spoke for myself . Are we interested
in pursuing this? Should we direct staff to take a good look at a large
lot?
' Wildermuth: I think the idea is great . I 'd like to know the pros and cons
of the large lot zoning .
Conrad: We just need you to come back whenever Paul and just say here 's
what the implications are . I think the citizens should know too the
downstream type of stuff . As you get into large lots .
IEric Rivkin: What can happen . What can 't . The 180 foot rule or whatever
it is . If you 're , if this did go in like on Lake Lucy Road there , we don 't
have any objections to people extending the line hooking up to there but
the people on the south who don 't have subdivideable lots , are they going
to be forced to hook up just because their house happens to be closer to
' Lake Lucy Road and they 've got a functioning septic system? It 's kind of
unfair so where development ends and wilderness begins , you 've got to draw
the line somewhere and that 's where it is .
I ' Conrad: See the implications of some of the things that you 're going to
see though is if I don 't see somebody wanting this , more than likely we may
not include it in the large lot area . I think there 's a financial taking
to people who don 't want the large lots and they 're going to be in here
lobbying against what you want .
' Eric Rivkin: Well the petition is not an all or nothing proposition . It
was simply , actually right now it 's simply came out to be a catalyst for
discussion and get people moving and that 's what 's happening .
' Conrad: You 've got us going . We 're responding to that . There was a hand
out there .
I Ed Hasek: I was just interested , I 'm fairly familiar with Orono and some
of the problems that they had with servicing their . . .because of their large
lot developments . It 'd be interesting to know what kind of taxes compared
to taxes that are generated by large lot compared to small lot and what
I
that can and can 't do for the City as a whole because the City is more than
just a large lot subdivision . It is a single family out there that 's a
quarter acre and it 's their kids and it 's their streets and it 's their
I utilities and so forth and so on so from an owner standpoint within the
City I 'd like to know how large lot developments carry their own portion of
what 's going on from that respect .
IIMary Harrington: Well from an appraisal standpoint , I 'm an appraiser and
it usually tends to be worth 2 , 3 or 4 times the value and sometimes more
in like in Orono .
Iespecially
Ed Hasek: That 's usually the case but that 's not the case in Chanhassen .
That 's not the case in Chanhassen .
Mary Harrington: Right but I mean a lot of your Chanhassen houses let 's
say in on like south of Carver Beach Road and east of , what is it CR 117
•
11 Planning Commission Meeting
May 16 , 1990 - Page 37 i
there , that have a lot of nice little splits and split entries and split
foyers and there are a lot of these houses that are up and worth 2 1/2 to 3'
more times the value of those nice houses and they 're picking up the tab .
Conrad: Well we ' ll take a look at that . I think that 's one of the things
that we should know . I guess personally if somebody moved out here and
wants to live on a large lot , boy I tell you , that 's why you moved out
here . • '
Eric Rivkin: And the people in Pheasant Hills , a lot of them , we 've been
in some meetings about that Carrico Addition there and we brought this up II
and they said they would sign a petition just because they think the large
lots next to them are amenities to sell for the values of their homes . And
the people in Greenwood Shores expected the same thing so the surrounding I
communities like to see the green belt . They definitely do .
Conrad: It 's going to be trouble with the people that you want in this
area when they find out that they can 't subdivide . They 're going to be
real irritated .
Eric Rivkin: Well why isn 't that , like I say , this is not an all or II nothing proposition . This is a catalyst and if all we can get out of this
is large lot zoning with some guarantees for the future , that may be fine .
Okay? Alright . I 've got a couple other basic questions .
Conrad: On?
Eric Rivkin: About environmental impact on the plan and whether or not ,
I 'd like to know whether or not you plan to fill out an environmental
assessment worksheet for this in the planning stages before it gets
accepted ,
Conrad: On the entire plan?
Eric Rivkin: Well according to the Environmental Quality Review Board , II this comprehensive plan qualifies as a project requiring' an EAW . The way
it sits before it goes to Council or when it goes to the Metropolitan
Council or whatever but before it gets accepted and voted in and concrete , II
it is a process that requires one so .
Conrad: I 'm not familiar with that .
Krauss: If I could respond to that . Mr . Rivkin is wrong on that issue .
There 's probably been about 400 comprehensive plans approved in the Twin
Cities since 1977 . Not a one of them has an EAW or an EIS . Now that I
doesn 't mean that some of the issues that could be raised are unvalid but
the plan itself is a study of what those issues are . You 're getting that ,
that 's what the comprehensive plan is .
Conrad: That 's a surprising statement on your part . If you have some
information that we should be aware of , why don 't you talk to staff about
it and I think they 're the ones that have to meet the State requirements
and we 're really responding to Metropolitan Council 's requirements so as
II
Planning Commission Meeting
ilMay 16 , 1990 -- Page 38
I you know we 're really sensitive to environmental issues here . You 're not
talking to some folks that aren 't sensitive to that so we 're trying to plan
around those issues so I 'm not sure where you 're going with that but if
I you 've got some stuff , I 'd sure hand it to the staff and they can look at
it and apprise us of what it means . Anything else?
I Eric Rivkin : Yeah , I want to commend , I read the comprehensive plan draft
over and I want to commend the Planning department for addressing such
environmentally sensitive comments in there and most of it sounds really
good and I just hope down the road that the actions match the words . I
I would suggest some specific goals and policies relating to environmental
protection that I have in here and I wanted to hopefully go over them
tonight .
IConrad: Well could you , seriously what works really good for us is to get
us comments in advance so we can look at them and see what they are on
paper . Even to the point of getting your comments to staff so staff could
I distribute them to us . Then we can react having thought about it as in any
group not thinking about something that not really , you could talk to us
but really it 's hard to react on the spot so I 'd really if you could put
I the time , and I appreciate you going through that . I think that 's just
c‘utstar:ding that you would but the best forum for doing that and I
guarantee they 're not going to be dropped . We will read them but if you
coy_!l.: get staff a copy of what you 've got , staff can get that out in a kit ,
Iin a packet and we can review it and it 's a lot better format for reviewing
suggestions .
I Krauss: In fairness to Eric , he reviewed the earlier draft of the Natural
Features section . You did not have the updated one . Some of the stuff
that 's in there came out of our discussions and some other things that were
I going on . In fact , why don 't I just give you a fair copy of that so you
can see the update .
Eric Rivkin : Thank you .
IConrad: But I really , I 'm trying to make this meeting move but I don 't
want to discount the energy you put in . Not at all . I totally appreciate
I the time . We 're not the wisest people in the world as some people can
submit to or believe but we really like that kind of input . That 's just
terrific .
IEric Rivkin: I 'll try to get a written summary and before the June 6th
meeting and I guess I would expect that since , you said that people north
of TH 5 would be .
IKrauss: We had arbitrarily I guess had to split it up somehow so what . . .
issues above TH 5 on the 6th and below TH 5 at the 20th . If we need more
I meetings , we 'll schedule those at the July meetings but for now that seemed
to be the best way to kick off the process .
I Eric Rivkin: Is someone from this commission going to be at the Eagan Town
Hall tomorrow where they 're discussing this cutting edge ordinance about
the sewer utility fund that 's going to be created for utility bills to fund
Planning Commission Meeting
May 16 , 1990 - Page 39
a protection for the runoff?
Krauss: We 're fully aware of the Eagan program and have been given copies
to the City Council .
Conrad: Say that again . Steve was volunteering to go that 's why I didn 't
hear .
Krauss: We 've been following . There 's a number of communities that have
done storm water utility districts , Eagan being one of them . What Eagan 's
doing that 's different is that they have a strong water quality emphasis in
their plan . We 're aware of what they 're doing . Our engineer is talking to
their engineer . We 're getting materials forwarded from them and we 're
giving them to the City Council for consideration of the storm water
utility program that we want to embark on .
Conrad: Okay . What else on our agenda did you cover?
Krauss : I think we 're down to the Bluff Creek trail corridor .
Conrad: Okay , that one we had no comments on . '
KrauEs: And the park deletions up around Lake Lucy and TH 41 which I think
are statements of fact the way things are .
Conrad: That was it?
Krauss : Yes . '
Conrad: What else? Anything else on what Paul presented? Anything?
Anybody else who has been with us?
Mary Harrington: . . .if you did move the MUSA line would we also have to
consider putting a well and a water tower and that kind of stuff? Have you "
auvs thought about where you 're going to put the wells in to do those
things?
Krauss: Yes we have . That element is going to come to . . . ,
Mary Harrington: . . .Are they going to show up on the plan or anything?
Krauss: They will . ,
Mary Harrington: But they don 't . . . II Krauss: Well we 're kind of damned if we do and damned if we don't . If we
come to the Planning Commission with a completed plan , we 're blamed for
doing things behind people 's backs . If we come to them with a plan that 's II
still in the formative stages , we 're accused of not having our act
together . I guess we 're trying to walk a tightrope inbetween the two .
Conrad: Anybody else who wants to make a comment? Al? '
.
Planning Commission Meeting
II May 16 , 1990 - Page 40
I Al Klingelhutz : I just got in on the tail end of what Eric was saying and
I 'm a little bit concerned because up in that area there is still some
quite large land owners and I think one of the reasons that that land was
I purchased was for future development and I don 't think it was purchased for
2 1/2 acre lots . Furthermore our present ordinance wouldn 't even allow 2
1/2 acre lots because it 's still 1 in 10 . It allows 2 1/2 acre lots but
I you can get 1 unit per 10 acres . So if you have 100 acres , you can get 10
lots on 100 acres . The people would still have to put in their wells and
septic tanks and possibly the sewer will be coming around that area . I
believe it 's been assessed for when the sewer is available for that area
I for $430 .00 an acre just for the sewer availability . Even if sewer don 't
come in and these large lot subdivisions , I know they sell well . I 've sold
a lot of them myself . People like to live in them but we do have to make
I room for people other than the large lot subdivisions . We 've got a lot of
young people growing up in Chanhassen . We 've got a lot of industry coming
in Chanhassen and we 've got to find a place for these young people to build a house and they aren't going to be able to afford it on a 2 1/2 acre lot .
' Conrad: Yeah we know that . I think tonight what you heard me say Al was
to take a look at this . The pros and cons . That 's what we 've got to do and
I T. don 't think this is going to influence whether we have enough land for
future generations but we just have to take a look at it . I think there 's
a petition in front of us and I think staff can give us a fair analysis of
Ithe right way to fly on that . Anything else .
Batzli : Something that Al said , the 2 1/2 acre lot and the 1 in 10
c'ensity . If this was within the MUSA line you wouldn 't have the 1 in 10
IIp -oblem would you?
Conrad: No , it wouldn 't be there but I think there 's going to be other
Ip,-oblems .
Krauss.: There are other issues . That kind of development was not
I anticipated in the zoning ordinance and you probably have to change the
zoning ordinance to correspond . Not to belabor the point but I was
wondering if the Planning Commission had any feedback on the school site
itself . I 'd like some further direction on that .
IFilson: I liked it . I like the idea of the Lake Ann . I guess you brought
up some points about the topography and things like that but that to me
I sounds more like the Round Lake Park connection than the Arboretum one if
you want to be next to a park and combine even ballfields if necessary
whatever but I don 't have a problem with it being against a highway . Not
II just because other schools have done that but they 're not built so that
someone 's running after a fly ball out onto TM 5 and I guess I 'd rather see
it there because you do see residents around schools . I mean every city
yc..... go to there 's residents around schools . That seems like a logical
I transition to me so I didn 't have a problem with where that was located at
all .
I Batzli : I think you 're going to have a heck of a time with this collector
street if you put the school there . If we do need that collector , I think
you ' re going to compress it one way or another north or south to the extent
Planning Commission Meeting
May 16 , 1990 - Page 41 1
that it may not be used as much if you 're worried about making it too
curvy . I don 't know that I agree that a school looks industrial . The
comment made on that so I don 't know if I find that comment valid but I
think the question about the street is certainly troublesome and if the
school board people and the school officials don 't mind putting it on TH 5 ,
I guess they know better than I do on that .
Ahrens: I don 't have any problem with the site itself . It 's great to have'
a park around every school like Eden Prairie High School but I don 't think
that anybody in the district 's going to want to pay for that kind of land
around every school that goes up in the city .
Krauss: Well withthe 40 acre park , and again this is a staff to staff
discussion but we 've talked about mutual development of recreational
facilities and the school district clearly wants to encourage that . The
question was raised whether or not the community center should be there?
Well there may not be a community center at all and there are different
sites that are being looked at for that but clearly a cooperative effort
with the school district wherever it is , recreational facilities is
something that we 're all talking about .
Ahrens: How bit an area is this that you 're planning that the school
district would like to put the school on?
Krauss: They 're looking for 40 acres most of which would be open space . '
Fields and play fields .
Ahrens: Like ballfields and stuff so it would be green around there? I 'd II
like to see how it would look like to have the school there and the
collector street to the south of it . See how that would work .
Resident: Isn 't it pretty rolling land there for ballfields?
Krauss: The land there is somewhat rolling but there 's nothing on it . II It 's also got valleys in terms of nobs . It would take flattening to put a
school there or anything else for that matter but the grades don 't get
difficult until you get down to the creek which they perceive to be the
border of the school site .
Wildermuth: I think the school would work either on the north or south
side of TH 5 . The idea of putting a school on the north side of TH 5 on
the west side of Lake Ann and perhaps combining it with the park and the
community center , I think is pretty attractive but as you pointed out , the
topography isn 't all that great so there would be something to overcome II there . It 'd probably be some additional land expense incurred in going on
to the north side of TH 5 . I guess we really missed the boat on the
Eckankar site but that 's history .
Emmings: As far as that site for a school , it 's clear to me that it isn 't
going to be residential up to the highway and it shouldn 't be . Then you
ask yourself , what else can you do in there and one of the plans we looked
at was to put office or industrial in there and I think in a lot of ways well
were looking for something that would be a little less intensive than
1
II Planni•
ng Commission Meeting
May 16 , 1990 - Page 42
il
I office and industrial and it seems to me a school kind of fits that bill .
I 'm frankly surprised to hear the objections from the Timberwood people and
I think , or at least from the 1 or 2 -that talked tonight and it seems to me
I that is a less intense use . It 's not used all during the day or it 's not
used so much on weekends . It involves a lot of open space which kind of
gives them something in terms of a nice buffer . It doesn 't change the
character too much between them and TH 5 . I think it looks very reasonable
I for that area . I don 't know what , I guess as I sit and listen to the
comments that were made by people from Timberwood I wonder if they , I hope
when it comes time for the public hearing , I sure don 't want to hear it
I tonight because I don 't know if the 1 or 2 who talked here are
representative of the whole group but I sure would like to know what they
would like to see in there as opposed to so I hope they 'll come to the
public hearing prepared to talk about what they want to see in there .
IConrad: I 'm sure they want residential . It 's pretty clear .
I Fmmin:gs: But they don 't want to live next to a collector street but they
want other people to live on the highway and that makes no sense to me at
all for the same reasons that they don 't want to have a collector street
I next to their neighborhood , why would they think someone would want to live
next to a highway . That I don 't understand .
Mary Harrington: Go down 494 and they 're all over .
IResident : You don 't have to go very far to get to the highway . . .
IF ,rr;i ngs: Or on colletor streets .
Mary Harrington: They 're less offensive . A highway 's less offensive . . .
IEmmings: I think when you buy a house and you don 't buy all the land
around you , I don 't know what you think is going to happen to that
surrounding land or what makes you think that you can control what happens
I _ to that land . This is a process that allows everybody input but we 've got.
to come up with a plan . If we look at that piece of property , I really
don 't see any reasonable objection to a school on that site . I see peop'.=
I objecting to anything that 's in that site except residential and that is
not reasonable to me .
Foster : My name is Mark Foster and I am a resident of Timberwood .
IMark
I guess I agree with some of the Timberwood residents that have spoken
here . What the school does right there is effectively cut off any further
residential development around Timberwood . I think that 's kind of the
Ipoint we were making . I think we all agree with that .
Conrad: But I think that 's real interesting . I 'll take you up on that .
I It seems like to me school is community . School is not industrial . School
' s kids , community and you tend to like to cluster , have a school close to
a neighborhood so I don 't understand that .
I Mark Poster : With that collector street the way you have it , you 're not
going to get the residential development on the south side .
. . 1
Planning Commission Meeting
May 16 , 1990 - Page 43
Conrad: We 're trying to buffer you as much as we can I believe but you 're I
never going to be , I 'm not sure that you 're going to achieve this ultimate
but still I 've got to press you on the school issue . School is community .
School is neighborhood . School is pride . School is all those good things II
and you 're telling me that it 's not so I 'm not sure .
Mark Foster : I 'm not opposed to a school per se but I wanted to make the
other point is why wasn 't a school looked at to the west side of Galpin and
south of TH 5?
Conrad: Well I think we can take a look at it . You know . . . '
Mark Foster : It seems like you pinned it right there .
Conrad: I think the school board or the people came out and took a look ail
SDne sites and there are others and I think we can identify several sites
that are potential . And just because we put an asterick someplace right
now doesn 't mean anything . They can select a site . A school can go into
6T? residential neighborhood . It is a legal permitted use in any
` s dentiai neighborhood . We 're just trying to get in front of the
Planning process a little bit and say what are the potentials so there are II
probably 20 sites that could be looked at and they 've looked at some right
row .
Vark Foster : Does the City pick the sites for the school district to
ch000 from?
Krauss: Ultimately it 's the school district 's choice . The process is one
whereby we 've tried to cooperate with them and hopefully identify some
sites that work in the mutual interest . The school district is not , they
haven 't said that this is where they 're going to go . Even if we bought it I
and gave it to them , they can 't commit to doing that until they actually
fund the school . They did say however if we gave them a site , that it
world be a factor they would consider . But no , it 's a long process . The
school board does not have the school funded . They know they have a need
for one . It 's not programmed and there 's a long way to go .
Conrad: In locating a school , again going back to what I just said , I II don 't like to put schools in the fringe . Again , it kind of defeats again
my personal opinion of what a school should be and a school should be
supporting local people . If some kids can actually even walk to school ,
that 's even neater than something else but any other comments? I 'm talking "
and really .
Sharon Burry: I 'm also a Timberwood lot owner . My name is Sharon Burry
and I currently live in Minnetonka near a school and I love it . The
ballparks are there . The kids are playing . Now I was against having any
commercial going there . I like the idea of residential but I even liked
the idea better of having a school because you have all summer long that
you 're enjoying those ballparks where there 's no kids there . You 're
overlooking a beautiful green so you don't have to look at a commercial II parking lot with a commercial office building or somehow since that might
not be up to our standards of what we would like to see go there , like the
I
Planning Commission Meeting
May 16 , 1990 - Page 44
' medium density housing that they were speaking of . I just wanted to let
you know that there are other Timberwood owners who do promote and like the
idea and feel that it is a very good plan and so I just wanted to let you
' know that that 's how we feel . Thanks .
Ed Hasek: The proposal , nobody 's had time to react to . . .
Conrad: We haven 't either . That 's right . We have seen it tonight for the
first time .
' Resident: I 'd just like to clarify one thing . We 're talking about a
middle school right? We 're talking 13 , 14 , 15 year old kids . No licenses .
We 're talking a parking lot for teachers . We 're not talking a high school
it 's basically a middle school?
Krauss : Yes , it 's a middle school and I specifically asked if there would
' be lighted ballfields and they said no .
Resident : Okay , that 's a high school then so we 're talking an open green
area .
' Sharon Burry: I think it would be very pleasant to look at given some of
the other alternatives .
' Co.Irad: It sure seems to us who 've looked at issues like this , it sure
seems a real good solution to some things versus some alterantives that
you 're going to have to deal with sooner or later . Annette , did you have
Ianything else? Okay .
Resident: So this secondary on the map is wrong? It 's a middle school ,
Inot a secondary school?
Krauss: It 's a middle school .
IEric Rivkin : Do you want to take breather and think about Lake Lucy Road
being designated as a collector? Is that what that black line means?
IKrauss: It is a collector .
Eric Rivkin: It is one now?
IConrad: Yeah .
Eric Rivkin: How can you have a policy that says that , I don 't know if
I
it 's an official policy yet but it 's an official trail designated by the
Park Board for I think , there 's no sidewalk and yet it 's going to connect
Lake Minnewashta Regional , possibly 3 other , 2 known parks and one other
' possible park . Are you going to have kids on bikes and things traversing
back and forth . . . It 's kind of an unsafe situation . It 's kind of a
concern .
IConrad: I 'd love to have a trail on TH 101 . Seriously , you see all the
kids , all the people on TH 101 trying to get to Chanhassen . It 's terrible
. i
Planning Commission Meeting
May 16 , 1990 - Page 45
so yeah , maybe there 's a way around it . We do need pathways to get people
from one place to another . I guess the Park and Rec has designated that as
an , is that a trail corridor there? Is that what we .
Krauss: I would believe so .
Conrad: The fact of the matter is on those issues , it 's easier to put a I
trail on a road like that than a lot of other neighborhood roads . That 's
flat out , that 's the way it is and the real question becomes does the
community want ways to move people around a city on foot or on bicycles
other than out on a highway and so far the trail system is not a real I
popular thing but I think it has a purpose . As we grow , as this community
grows and we 're going to be big . We 're small right now but a few more
years , there 's going to be a lot of folks out here and the problems are
Going to get worse .
Eric Rivkin: . . .residential zoning , it probably is not going to be a '
problem but if that area goes high density , if you can imagine that road
being the density of Kerber Blvd . without sidewalks , that 's very dangerous .
Conrad: Absolutely .
Al KlingE-lhutz : I happened to mention at the . . .meeting last night , I
understand that Eden Prairie is getting a bicycle trails all along the the
"our lane highway 5 and I was wondering if Chanhassen is going to get
bicycle trails . They 've already got it in their highway plan .
Conrad: what are we doing on that issue? Well it 's Park and Rec and it 's I
sort of, what is Park and Rec doing on trails , especially along TH 5?
''"muss: Well I wasn 't aware but Jo Ann is saying that the trail is
extended .
Olsen: I 've had contact with . . .and they are planning to put in a trail
from Eden Prairie where they have enough right-of-way . . .
Resident:- All the way out to TH 41?
Olsen: I believe so . '
Krauss: Well the improvements don 't go to TH 41 . Right now it 's going to
be 4 lane out to the west side of downtown . . . .the rest of the distance is I
something the City is talking to .
Conrad: Okay , thank you all for coming tonight . Is there anything else? I
Is there a motion to go home?
Emmings : There 's this tree ordinance . '
Conrad: That 's just for our , is that for discussion?
Krauss: I didn 't even know how that got in there . '
Planning Commission Meeting
May 16 , 1990 - Page 46
' 4=hrens. I thought that tree information was very interesting .
Olser : It 's one of the model ordinances .
1
Wildermuth moved , Ahrens seconded to adjourn the meeting . All voted in
favor and the motion carried . The meeting was adjourned at 10:25 p .m . .
Submitted by Paul Krauss
' Planning Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim
1
1