1j. Minutes j
.1 � I
1 CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
JUNE 25, 1990
Mayor Chmiel called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. . The meeting was opened
with the Pledge to the Flag.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Chmiel, Councilman Workman and Councilman
Johnson
COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: Councilman Boyt and Councilwoman Dimler
STAFF PRESENT: Don Ashworth, Roger Knutson, Paul Krauss, Gary Warren, Jim
1 Chaffee, Jean Meuwissen and Tom Chaffee
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilman Johnson moved, Councilman Workman seconded to
approve the agenda as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
1 Roger Knutson: To point out something to you. Several zoning ordinance on your
agenda tonight and you need a four-fifths vote and I don't see four council
1 members. It would have to be tabled.
CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Johnson moved, Councilman Workman seconded to
approve the following Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's
recommendations:
c. Approval of Fireworks Display Permit, Minnewashta Homeowners Association,
Ralph Hagman.
d. Approval of One Day Beer License for Chanhassen Rotary, July 4, 1990.
e. Resolution #90-66: Approve Supplemental Agreement No. 3 for Trunk Highway
212 EIS Joint Powers Agreement, MnDot.
1 j. Approve Water Service to 23115 Summit Avenue in City of Shorewood, Larry
Schmidt.
1 k. Approve Plans and Specifications for 1990 Sealcoating Project No. 90-11;
Authorize Advertising for Bids.
1 1. Approve NSP Maintenance Contract for City Owned Street Lights.
m. Approve Revised Plans and Specifications for Utility Telemtry System,
1 Authorize Advertising for Bids; Project No. 90-3.
n. Approval of Accounts.
1 o. City Council Minutes dated June 4, 1990
City Council Minutes dated June 11, 1990
_ Planning Commission Minutes dated June 6, 1990
I/ p. Approval of Development Contract for Burdick Second Addition.
1 1
1
11 City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990
r. Approve Plans and Specifications and Authorization to Advertise for Bids for
Kerber Blvd. Street Lighting Extension from 500 feet South of Saddlebrook
Curve to 200 feet North of Big Horn Drive.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Consent Agenda items (a), Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Amend Article II,
' Sections 20-56 through 20-70, Pertaining to Procedures for the Issuance of
Variances, Final Reading and (b), Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Amend Section
20-92 Regarding Certificates of Occupancy by Adding Provisions for Landscaping
' Requirements, Final Reading were tabled until there is a four-fifths majority
present on the Council.
' Q. PARK FEES, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL.
Mayor Chmiel: Upon reviewing what has been proposed, I see some problems in
this and I'd like to see this sent back to the Park Commission. Don, would you
' like to?
ti
Don Ashworth: Yes. The City Council did act to amend the fee schedule for
' commercial/industrial property. Actually the action being considered was for
residential properties and the fee schedule that was established I think
addressed concerns of where you had escalating values in the residential areas.
However, that same schedule was then applied to commercial/industrial. In
' looking at some recent applications, that fee schedule produces a fee which is
totally exorbinate. It's the position of the City Attorney and myself that that
fee schedule was adopted, or let's say the application of that over to
' commercial and industrial was an erroneous type of an application and should not j
have occurred. In other words, it was more of an adminstrative error. Staff is
recommending that the City Council re-establish the previous $1,200.00 per acre
' charge and should the Council wish to further study the charging system for
commercial/industrial to potentially send that back to the Park and Recreation
Commission for further review. Given the number of applications we do have
though, I would ask that the Council re-establish that $1,200.00 charge at this
point in time.
Councilman Johnson: We would be going back to what we had before we made the
' other amendment right?
Don Ashworth: That's correct.
' Councilman Johnson: And then we can have Park and Rec review it in the interim
and see if it needs to be increased, decreased or anything else. What were your
concerns Don?
' Mayor Chmiel: Well basically there's a wide variation in some of the things
that I had seen in here, the fee for PMT prior to the amendment was
' approximately $3,600.00. With the fee after amendment being $16,200.00. If
that fee would have stayed in effect, the park charge for that new retail center
would be roughly $235,000.00.
' Councilman Johnson: Right, and we're backing it off to what it was.
2 --
City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 1
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah but I think that what's here might be just a little heavy in
IF
comparison with other cities in and adjacent to Chanhassen. I think we should
just take a look at this to make sure this is exactly the way we want to go.
t 'Councilman Johnson: I mean we've been doing this for years though as far as. . .
Mayor Chmiel: Right .
Councilman Johnson: You're saying that even if we back off to the 10% or
$1,200.00 per acre, that you think that's too high? The old one's too high.
Mayor Chmiel: No. Well the $1,200.00 is right in the ballpark as far as I'm '
concerned.
Councilman Johnson: That's what this does.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, right. But some of these fees as we're going into the
commercial and industrial areas, as Don had mentioned.
Councilman Johnson: But this fixes that doesn't it?
Don Ashworth: Well, what it does it re-establishes the $1,200.00 charge and ,
then if you would like to have it sent back to the Park Commission, you should
make that as a part of your motion.
Councilman Johnson: In which case PMT will now be at $3,600.00 right?
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. '
Councilman Johnson: So we're taking PMT back to $3,600.00 instead of
$16,000.00. '
Don Ashworth: And McDonald's would move to about $1,500.00.
Councilman Johnson: Versus? '
Don Ashworth: $21,000.00.
Councilman Johnson: Versus $21,000.00 and that's what we want to do.
Mayor Chmiel: Yes.
Councilman Johnson: So I think we have to pass this now and if we want Park and
Rec to review it more, let's ask them to.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, so move that motion. Is there a second?
Councilman Workman: Can you repeat the motion? ,
Councilman Johnson: Move approval with referral to the Park and Recreation
Board for further review.
Councilman Workman: Second.
3 1
City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990
1 Resolution $90-67: Councilman Johnson moved, Councilman Workman seconded to
approve re-establishing the $1,200.00 per acre park charge for commercial/
industrial properties and to refer the matter to the Park and Recreation
Commission for further review. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
' VISITOR PRESENTATIONS:
Mayor Chmiel: Eric. I don't know if this is going to be on what we had
discussed in our telephone conversation. I don't know if you got my call or
not.
Eric Rivkin: I got it. I couldn't. . .
Mayor Chmiel: I think what we've done is we have gotten some comments back by
staff. It 's been in our Admin packet. I think what Council may want to do is
to review their packet from what staff has indicated and come up with our own
conclusions and therefore I think that if you have anything in addition to add
' to what you've had before, I'd appreciate hearing that now.
Eric Rivkin: Okay, yeah. This is in addition to it . I want to say that I
' appreciate the staff for spending that kind of time on this. It's just that I
just really feel passionate about saving our wetlands and I really appreciate
what time has been devoted to this. I want to separate in studying What the
wetlands are like on the lots that border Lake Lucy. It may be aware of
' possible improvements that might be done to the wetland ordinance and that's
what I want to propose here. It doesn't have anything to do with any individual
lots at all. The intent of the ordinance is to protect wetlands reliably
' determined by technical information, soil data, topographical surveys and
accurate wetland maps and definition of wetlands. The ordinance currently uses
ordinary high water elevation to determine setbacks from those wetlands but also
the City as they said in their response, that these wetlands, the City could go
' beyond the ordinary high water in cases to determine the edge of a wetland. Can
the ordinance be improved? Well, maybe it doesn't but maybe we have enough
protection but I'd like to voice some concerns about it. It's commonly known
' among specialists in hydrology and boilogy that ordinary high water or 100 year
flood elevations don't always define the physical edge of a wetland. Not even
the division between a Class A or a Class B wetland since fringe wetlands
' frequently exist above these elevations. For example, if you study the 1989
aerial topo of lake Lucy around much of the shoreline, you'll see a large
difference on the north, around the island and the west and part of the
southwest shores. The difference between the ordinary high water elevation, 956
' and the edge of the wetland vegetation and wet soil areas is approximately 1 to
2 feet higher on the contour but those contours, some of those go up into what
they classify as Class B wetland which is reed canary grass. Even if margin of
' error or discount of the true contours, if you study the soil vegetation and
natural drainage in these areas it would show their vital and integral part of
the entire wetland ecosystem. They could have, since wetlands exist above the
' ordinary high water and the 100 year flood, an alteration can be permitted to
any of these wetlands areas. They could be anywhere in any one of our lakes.
The ordinance as it stands now, it's tough. I admit that but it is somewhat
flexible and at the discretion of the Council who happens to be here. Planning
' Department happens to be here and surveyors who happen to have different
opinions about where the wetland is or isn't. If alteration is to be permitted,
the ordinance could possibly allow a major negative impact which would set a bad
' 4
I
City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 1
precedent. Setbacks may be too close leaving portions unprotected by the intent
of the ordinance. I guess there needs to be, in my view, I guess a more
sensitive, more clear definition. A definition of a wetland first of all should
be in the ordinance and I suggested the cowarden system. It's very simple. At
least periodically the land supports predominantly hydrophites. Substrates is
predominately. . .hydric soil and the substrate is non-soil and saturated with
water, covered with shallow water sometime during the growing season. The City
has classified varying degrees of those 3 things between a Class A and a Class B
and I'm just asking for maybe it needs to be looked at as further clarification.
The reason for that is that these fringe wetlands I feel deserve the same
protection as a Class A in some cases. The DNR and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service told me, who both have visited the site. Have visited both Lake Lucy
and looked at the wetlands. That the extension of the same Class A wetland is
the same wetland basin and above the 100 year elevation. If it enhances the
wetland's value as determined by your ordinance, I feel that they should be
protected. Deserve the same kind of protection. So what possibly could we do
about it? Well, have the definition of a wetlands. Maybe have a limit set for
size. I don't know how tough it is right now as far as size but I'm suggesting
that as low as 1 acre on rural residential,and other kind of properties and as
low as 2 1/2 acres on farms qualify for full protection under the ordinance. I
also submit that the setbacks be further I guess clarified and I'm just
suggesting this. This idea is off the top of my head here because of the data
that I found. That let's say for instance for septic setbacks. It says 150
feet from the ordinary high water elevation or if we expanded that to include
not only the ordinary high water elevation but 100 year flood or the physical
wetland boundary, whichever is higher in elevation. Taking into consideration
your classifications and setbacks for structures and ground floor elevations,
you could add the same kind of wording. I feel it still would be the
responsibility of the developer to provide a reliable survey and technical
information to help the City determine the exact wetland boundary. So what kind
of benefits do you receive from this? Well, my feeling is that it will protect
all true wetlands. What is deemed a wetland up to their physical boundaries and
protect the watersheds the wetlands feed into with more sensitive clarification.
It will provide a clear defintion of wetlands in Section 20-405 and help all
involved regardless of who it is and when it is, make a reliable determination
of wetland boundaries. It will provide a basis for accurate mapping of physical
wetland boundaries which you're doing now, or want to do. I really support that
and it would match closer to existing public maps. Verifiable features such as
soil and vegetation would lead to accurate records with that regard. I think it
would be more commonly acceptable to related agencies. I think it would be also
readily understood and used by those involved in wetland protection situations.
Thank you very much.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you Eric. Do you have anything to say Paul?
Paul Krauss: Not a whole lot Mr. Mayor. I guess some of the things that Eric
is pointing out are true. Our wetlands ordinance I think I discussed with you
on numerous occasions is in need of updating. It was a very creative effort but
the technology has somewhat passed it by and adminstratively ours is tough to
administer. Eric pointed out the OHW symbolism and I think you're aware that we
protect now above the OHW and that's the issue that we had on Pfankuch and Frost
where the ONR stops at that line and we went uphill from there and wanted to
preserve that. There's a lot of new techniques that we'd like to use. We do
want to establish an official map of wetlands so that developers and homeowners,
5 ,
I
1 City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990
any interested party can come in and responsibly take a look and know what
they're dealing with. We've outlined a lot of ideas for valuing wetlands as to = `
the value of habitat so that you don't basically have a knee jerk response a
wetland is automatically good. There's different kinds of wetlands that have
' different value. Mr. Borg is here tonight. I think the McDonald's case is one
that points out that not all wetlands are all that great. That maybe that
wetland that we preserved on his property could have better been preserved some
' place else in some more important area. In any case, it's difficult to make
these changes in a piecemeal fashion. We think that a coordinated approach
ideally with the storm water program and the water quality effort is going to
' yeild the best results for the City in protecting the environment and that's
been our recommendation for quite some time.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you.
' Councilman Workman: Paul, if I could turn this around a minute and look at
maybe the specific situation Eric is looking at I think. Whether it's a
' buildable lot or not a buildable lot and the planning department has said that
that 7 acre, approximately 7 acre parcel is.a buildable lot. I don't know of
anybody that 's tougher on wetlands than Jo Ann and she wouldn't say that unless
there were good intent but I'm trying to figure out if you were here when we
' gave the variance on Kings Road near St. Joe. Do you remember that? It sloped
off and they were going to have a deck and that, remember that? It appeared
they were going to be getting real near a wetland but we said, but the argument
' came up that well it 's a lot of record and they have to have, remember this?
Paul Krauss: No but I know where the house is and I know the argument.
' Councilman Workman: And they had to have the opportunity because we initially ,, I
said no. You can't build. But they had every right to do so and so really it
was a variance situation where then we just went back and said, okay. We kept
an eye and keep it as far back as you can. Is this lot even more buildable? I
mean could we even by law tell the owners of this property that hey, you can't
build on this thing. It's now a swamp and you might as well take down the for
' sale shingle?
Paul Krauss: No. I've walked around on this parcel and depending on where you
measure it, you're looking at a lot that's 150 to 200 feet of high ground. In
' some places even wider than that. There's no setback problem for a house there.
The only setback consideration is where you put your drainfields so that it
complies with the 150 foot setback and you can't just plop down a standard
' drainfield configuration and have it work on that lot. You do have to use some
intelligence and design it specifically for it but I've walked the property. I
walked it with two members of our engineering staff. With Jo Ann and Jo Ann
' went back out there with Fish and Wildlife folks. It's a real pretty lot.
There's plenty of high ground. It's not one of the, there is really no question
of it's utility.
Councilman Workman: But isn't that sort of, that would be the bare bones and
basic brunt of what Eric's getting at. That he's basically claiming that that
lot, that 7 acres shouldn't and couldn't sustain a home. Then I ask the City
Attorney, can we legally tell those people that they can't build on that lot? I
mean if we can't, then the argument is really a variance situation anyway.
Potentially. Do you know which lot we're talking about?
' 6
City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 1
Councilman Johnson: Is it a lot of record before the wetland?
It
Councilman Workman: You maybe don't know which lot we're talking about .
Roger Knutson: I can talk about it in general. If you look at the criteria for
a variance, someone has a lot of record, it's not a self created hardship, if
you can't do anything else with it, that's one of the grounds for granting a
variance. It 'd be a very good piece for a variance. '
Councilman Workman: So really in this specific situation, we might have a
situation that we, in a general citywide sense, everything that Eric says, you
know Eric has a lot of good ideas about protecting the wetlands. There's no
doubt about it . I just know that he's really concerned about a specific lot and
if he may not be in here if he knows that we don't have, you know those people
have the ability to build on it anyway. I mean we're all concerned with what's
closest to our homes and Eric's no different but you know, I guess I'm trying to
take the shortcut around this maybe. I just made it long.
Mayor Chmiel: You certainly did but that's alright. Okay, appreciate it . '
Anyone else?
Councilman Johnson: The only thing I see is, I have the minimum setback of 75 '
feet from the ordinary high water. I didn't even realize, I always thought that
it was 75 feet from the edge of the wetland. It definitely is the ordinary high
mark and so that sounds like you can build a house in a Class B wetland because '
you don't have an ordinary high water mark in a Class B wetland. But you can't
do all the digging and filling required.
Paul Krauss: Well I think that sort of points out, I mean there are many '
inadequacies in this ordinance in terms of how you administer it. I mean you
can't build in the wetland proper so there are other language in the ordinance
that says you can't do the thing that you just posed.
Councilman Johnson: But you could build half a foot from the edge of the
wetland as long as you're 75 feet from the ordinary high water mark. ,
Paul Krauss: Beyond the OHW. That's true but that's really not, I mean most of
the wetlands in town are fairly well defined. The problem is we don't have any
mechanism right now telling a property owner where exactly that is. Our
ordinance basically says we know a wetland when we see it. Which means that Jo
Ann who's very good at it, goes down with somebody from the ONR, from Fish and
Wildlife and they pop some stakes in. That's not as scientific as I would like
it and it's not as well documented as we should have.
Councilman Johnson: But we may never document every wetland in the city because
it would be almost impossible to do out on some of these large acreages so we
have to keep a little flexibility in the ordinance but I think we're going to be
looking at this in the very near future anyway. '
Mayor Chmiel: Right, we are. Okay, if nothing else on that particular subject,
is there any other visitor presentations?
Rick Yeager: My name is Rick Yeager. I live at 1830 Pheasant Drive in Pheasant
Hill. I guess I have an observation, a question and then a request. First the II
7 1
11
1 City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990
observation and I didn't prepare anything formally so if I stumble through this,
stay with me on this one. The observation is I was absolutely stunned at how
quickly the City of Chanhassen responded to a small child getting hit by a car
in our neighborhood. The next day stop signs were up at that intersection and
' that was absolutely terrific and I commend anyone that was involved in that
decision making. About 6 months ago, I've lived in Pheasant Hill now for 3
years. I called the Department of Public Safety and now I'm getting into my
question here, and pointed out that we do have traffic issues in that
neighborhood. As the neighborhood has grown, it's become overflowing with
children which is precisely why we're there and it's not so much a question of
volume but it 's a question of speed and control for the cars coming through,
' some of whom are using the neighborhood as a throughway over to Powers Blvd. .
And I said could anything be done and the City was very responsive in terms of
dealing with it. They put things out on the road to measure how many cars come
across and I said primarily what I would like is stop signs to slow the traffic
down. If not that, speed bumps. Something as people enter the neighborhood.
If not that , at least Slow Down, Children Playing signs. Something like that
' and I was turned on all 3 counts. Stop signs because they're used for traffic
flow, not for speed control. I was told that the bumps are ineffective and I
was told that the signs saying Children Playing only encourage kids to play in
the street . So basically nothing was done. My question is this, if stop signs
' are only used for traffic control, why did we have to have an accident happen
before they were put in?
' Mayor Chmiel: That's a question that maybe I can pose to our Public Safety
Director.
' Jim Chaffee: I in turn will pass it to our Department of Public Works Director.
Don Ashworth: Well maybe if I can jump in. I was a part of the decision. One
of the issues, and Council may recall this. We previously had the items as
' noted going back to staff and then those recommendations back to City Council.
We interceded in that process basically eliminating what had been a public
safety or traffic safety committee and replaced that with putting items such as
' this back over to our Public Safety Committee. I think what you saw here was a
case where they have not had a meeting. We had this set up for next agenda and
when I became aware of the fact that we did have, I think it'd be better to say
that the child drove into the vehicle versus the vehicle driving into, but in
any case, it was our decision to move ahead with those stop signs and as a part
of an upcoming agenda, you can anticipate a request from staff to have the City
Council relook at that process because we are very concerned that we have
' procedures established that can bring questions like that back to the City
Council as quickly as possible. I think here was an instance where we were
trying to ensure that the citizens had access but we set a couple of different
' layers inbetween the citizens and the Council. I don't think that, that can
delay a decision and a decision like this one should be made quicker than it was
and that's where it's at.
' Rick Yeager: I will admit to some emotional involvement. My 6 year old was
riding with the 5 year old that day. They were riding together when the 5 year
old, yes indeed ran into the car but one of the things I think we can assume in
' a neighborhood full of children, whether it was the child's fault or the
driver's fault, certain systems have to be put into place because we can't
expect 4 and 5 and 6 year olds on bikes always to obey stop signs. It's just
8
City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 1
not the way it is so there has to be a better means of control in the
neighborhood because if something isn't done, it will happen again. I know. I
know how fast cars travel through there. I sit up on a hill on Pheasant Drive
and watch them. And again, because I have the emotional attachment. Because I
have a 3 year old and a 6 year old and I live on a hill with the driveway
heading down, I'm very concerned about it. And that abuts into, I forget the
name of the street but I would like a 3 way stop sign there because that's the
longest unimpeded stretch and cars speed along there and I'm concerned for my
own children's safety. Finally, this last question and recommendation I guess,
if I can make such a thing is that as one travels south on Galpin Lake Road off
of TH 7, the speed limit is 25 mph and I fully agree with that. It's a windy
road. Not very populated once you get down the hill there. You've got woods on
one-side and a pond on the other but 25 is adequate. You turn onto Pheasant
Drive into the neighborhood and you can accelerate to 30. Is there a reason for
that? ,
Don Ashworth: I'll let Gary go at this one.
Gary Warren: Galpin is a County road and the speed on that road is governed by
the County so I don't know if they did a speed study themselves. MnDot has
jurisdiction actually on the road.
Rick Yeager: I agree with 25 for Galpin.
Gary Warren: Yeah, I'm not necessarily going to argue with that. I'm just
trying to say how they may have arrived at their 25. All other streets are by
statute 30 mph unless the Commissioner of Transportation has done a speed study
and has given authorization for a modified speed based on sight distance,
geometric considerations and actual traveled speeds that the road is being used
at. Oftentimes MnDot will do a speed study and if there are no other
restrictive criteria, they will assign a road for the speed at 85 percentile of
the traveling public is using it. Sometimes we see the speeds get bumped up
just because of useage.
Rick Yeager: So speeds are dictated by the public rather than by safety issues?
Gary Warren: Well, it's a definitive input.
Councilman Johnson: That's the way MnDot does it. The 25 mph you're talking '
about is on the Hennepin County side as you come up from, as you're going from
TH 7 south?
Rick Yeager: Right.
Councilman Johnson: What's the speed limit as you're coming from the north?
Gary Warren: 45.
Councilman Johnson: Where does it change to 25? '
Councilman Workman: I think at the top of the hill. And they have patrols out
there because I, 9 months of the year drive that way regularly on Lake Lucy,
everybody knows that. And then north on Galpin and they're sitting right over
that hill waiting for people to do 55 over that hill.
9
11
City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990
Rick Yeager: And again, no question about the speed on Galpin Lake Road. I
think 50 is fine where 50 is and so is 45 and so is 25. I understand the logic ti
behind it . The logic I don't understand is leaving a county road coming into a
neighborhood and being allowed to accelerate into the neighborhood.
Mayor Chmiel: All residential areas within the City of Chanhassen are at 30
mph. Every residential street.
Councilman Workman: Jim? ' We've talked about this before, about a possible city
wide reduction to 25. Is that near to impossibility?
Jim Chaffee: I would say yes.
Councilman Workman: Would you have to do that city wide?
Jim Chaffee: Normally it's done a piecemeal basis. If we have a particular
stretch of roadway that we think is a real concern, then the Department of
Public Works puts in a request to the Commissioner of Transportation asking that
a study be done. Then they do the study but, it's based solely on traffic
volumes and speed and not necessarily safety. They will take into consideration
certain safety.
' Councilman Workman: Well what would be, and I'm asking Gary I guess too, what
would be the City, how could the City accomplish getting 25 city wide then?
' Gary Warren: It 's really a matter for the Satutes because State Statute
mandates that all streets except for like Interstates and there are some
exceptions like alleys and school zones, are 30 in the state. Wisconsin is 25.
So if you're looking at across the board type reduction of that, that's
something that really the State legislature would have to deal with. I'm sure
MnOot would not arbitrarily come in and do a speed study of all our streets to
arrive at a 25. But they will address geometric constraints and other things of
'hat nature and the actual speeds traveled but that's the limit of the
Commissioner's perogative.
Roger Knutson: The City of Chanhassen can't do it. Only the legislature can do
that .
' Rick Yeager: So what I'm hearing is you have no local jurisdiction over traffic
safety issues?
Mayor Chmiel: Over the speed aspect.
Don Ashworth: With some exceptions. Again the Council remember we did set
' Frontier Trail in various spots.
Gary Warren: I think we have a Statute, and Roger can correct me if I'm wrong,
in 3 areas that we can set local jurisdiction. One of them I know is alleys.
The others is schools zones and there's a third one that escapes me.
Councilman Workman: Cow crossings?
Rick Yeager: Just an observation, I lived in Golden Valley before moving here
and there were plenty of streets in Golden Valley, residential streets that were
' 10
City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990
posted well below 30. And maybe it is done on an exceptional basis and that's
great . I'll go the exceptional route if that's what it takes.
Jim Chaffee: Excuse me Mr. Yeager, you can post them any speed you want. It 's
the legality of issuing citations if they are exceeding that particular speed
limit that we run into problems with.
Councilman Johnson: They get thrown out of court if anybody protested basically
but we could post it at 12 mph if we wanted to.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, I understand some of your concerns with speeds because I
see the same thing. Many things that I've been watching rather extensively
within the City. Even stop signs. Nobody stops for stop signs anymore.
They're just rolling stops, if that. That's become a real safety problem but we
can't do anything really as a City other than post some of these things and
issue citations. I think it's the State's responsibility to start teaching
drivers what they must do. I'd love to stand back and do some preaching but I
can't save the world as much as I'd like to. I'd just like to see all drivers
do precautionary things and that should be just an automatic going through a
residertial area at 25 mph. I watch myself rather closely, even in a 40 on
Vsrhe- Blvd. with children on bicycles. Rather than being on the paths they're
on the streets. Unfortunately there's, you know you slow down and I do and I
may slow down to 30. I've had cars even pass me on Kerber Blvd. .
Councilman Johnson: And say a few words?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes I have. But there are a lot of problems. I agree with you.
Rick Yeager: And I'm not going to approach the State and try to have them make
change. I'm not looking that long range. I'm looking at something short term
that we can put into place that makes the neighborhood a little bit safer.
We've had an issue now and you've responded well. I'd hate to think that it I
takes something like that again and then okay, now we'll put stop signs over
here or it's going to take something else to happen and now we'll fix that.
That 's very reactive. I'd rather see us be proactive in a manner that spares the
kids.
Mayor Chmiel: Sure, I agree. So if there's something I can do in terms of
getting to that committee, I would certainly like to do it.
Don Ashworth: Again, we can request the State look at the speed limits on your
street. There is a possibility in that process that the State could order back
down the stop sign that we just put up and I don't know if that's but we can
request a speed study.
Gary Warren: We can certainly request a speed study with Council resolution. I
might point out too, and I was informed by Dave Hempel of my staff that as it
relates to the intersection with stop signs, it may appear reactive and I guess
we certainly wanted to respond because of what we saw happening here but the
approach that was taken, there was correspondence back to the neighborhood
requesting a petition to be submitted which is our formal process for evaluating
an intersection and we were basically, that was the City's last communication on
that intersection for us then to complete the study and do our thing on it. To
evaluate those stop signs so we pre-empted that process because of the obvious
11 '
11 City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990
concern in the neighborhood and we're, I think glad we could respond as quickly
but we do need to follow that process.
Mayor Chmiel: Maybe what we can do Rick is to let you know when Public Safety's
' meeting and they'd probably welcome having you come to them and just indicate
what you did to us this evening.
Rick Yeager: I'd like to do that and again., I applaud the City for responding
the way they did and long term we just wanted to button down the neighborhood so
it 's a little safer. Thank you.
1 Ti m Chaffee: Mr. Mayor and Mr. Yeager, the next meeting of the Public Safety
Commission is on July 12th at 7:00 here at City Hall so you're more than welcome
to come and bring neighbors if you would like to to address this issue.
Councilman Johnson: And there's one other thing to note is that in Carver
County we have the highest revenue from traffic citations of all the cities in
41:e: County from the last reports I saw so our Public Safety Department or our
contract with the Sheriff is working. We are getting out there and doing a
fai -:y effective job if you look at just the revenue basis as an indication.
Mayor Chmiel: Any other visitor presentation?
PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST TO VACATE A DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT ON AN INTERNAL
1 LOT, SOUTHEAST CORNER OF DAKOTA AVENUE AND HIGHWAY 5, MCDONALD'S CORPORATION.
Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, I really don't have a whole lot to say on this one.
It's an easement that's being replaced on the new plat.
Mac- Chmiel: Is there anyone in the audience wishing to address this?
Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to close the public
hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was
closed.
Resolution #90-68: Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to
approve the Vacation Request *90-3 for vacation of utility and drainage
' easements as shown in the description in Attachment $1. All voted in favor and
the motion carried.
' AWARD OF BIDS: COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICER VEHICLE.
Don Ashworth: I think this is our second or third time back with the CSO
' vehicle. In each of the instances trying to find a way to bring the item closer
to the budgetary amount. I think when we had first looked at this we were
talking about $16,000.00 to $18,000.00. Then we came back with bids in the
$15,000.00 range. Finally, back with recommendation that we be looking to the
standardized bidding process through the Counties. That has produced a very
successful bid for us. Lenzen Chevrolet in the amount of $13,517.00. The bids
were very competitive with other bids being $13,600.00, $16,700.00 and
' $14,100.00. Staff feels that the bid received is within the budget for
CSO vehicle as well as within the amounts anticipated in the contract with our
neighboring cities. Staff would recommend approval of the low bid of $13,517.00.
12
I
City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 1
Mayor Chmiel: Any discussion? I would so move that recommendation for 1
$13,517.00.
Councilman Johnson: I'll second that and glad it's coming out of Carver County. '
Councilman Workman: Discussion?
Mayor Chmiel: Discussion. 1
Councilman Workman: I don't really have any discussion. I just wanted to let
the Council know that you've got a majority and I'd like to be a part of it too.
Resolution $90-69: Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilman Workman seconded to approve
the awarding of the low bid to Lenzen Chevrolet in the amount of $13,517.00 for
the Community Service Officer vehicle. All voted in favor and the motion
carried.
AWARD OF BIDS: MURRAY HILL WATER TOWER REHABILITATION PROJECT NO. 89-24. I
this is a rebid basically of the Murray Hill water
��. r Warren: Mr. Mayor,
toyer as noted based on our lead content issue with the PCA. We received four
bids as summarized. The low bidder is Odlund Protective Coatings in the amount
of $64,260.00. Considerably lower than the other bidders but we feel
comfortable based on their work on the downtown tower. They did an excellent
jo`, and we think it reflects the fact that they want the job. We have every
ri;hht to believe that they will do a good job for us as they did on the other
tower. I
Chmiel : Good. I think that's an excellent bid for us. Any discussion?
If no discussion, can I have a motion?
Resolution $90-70: Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to
accept the low bid of Odlund Protective Coatings, Inc. in the amount of
$64,260.00 and award the contract for reconditioning of the 200,000 gallon
Murray Hill water tower to Odlund in that amount. All voted in favor and the
motion carried.
PRESENTATION OF 1989 AUDIT REPORT, DELOITTE AND TOUCHE. '
Don Ashworth: We have Cliff Hoffman and Dan Meyleben here with us this evening.
They'll be introducing John Schaffer who did the in-house work. Also present of
course are Tom Chaffee and Jean Meuwissen from our staff. I've asked that the
presentation be kept to a reasonable length. Hopefully 15 minutes. There's a
couple of other items on the agenda and at the end of the presentation by
Deloitte, the Council may wish to bring up questions regarding either the
arbitrage report and necessity of that under Federal legislation. That's a
separate item but one you may want to speak under. And the other one was the
utility rate increase and again that is another item later in the agenda but
again the auditors are fully aware of that item as well. With that I would like
Cliff to start.
Mayor Chmiel: With that then as Don had said, 15 minutes. As they said in the
Army, you get 15, expect 10 but take 5.
13 '
I
11 City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990
Cliff Hoffman: Okay. I'll talk as fast as I can Mayor. First of all I'd like
1 to start off with the handouts that you should have received earlier that kind
cf show some overall statistics on the City and give you a feel for how things
look against the trend line. Do you have those?
Mayor Chmiel: No, I don't. Okay, we'll share.
Cliff Hoffman: I'd like to start off with one of the things that some people
measure efficiency in government with is, what is the ratio of number of
employees to population and to household. We have the statistics here to
' compare how you've done over the last 3 years. First of all let me say
Mr. Mayor that I've never seen somebody in the Twin Cities metropolitan area,
ant we audit over 12 cities as a ratio as high as 232. That shows a very high
efficiency index if you looked at it that way.
Mayor Chmiel: We have excellent employees.
Cliff Hoffman: Now that also may argue though that you're not providing enough
cit;. sevices but that's the other side of st. But in looking at the numbers
t`ouc!- and the other way that some people like to compare that is to number of
!- c.:sehclds. Both the numbers are among the best I've ever seen in the Twin
Cities metropolitan area. To give you some comparisons for instance, the City
of Bloomington, the ratio of population to employees is 168 versus your 232
number. City of Brooklyn Center, it's 213. City of Robbinsdale it's 1 to 200.
' So you're doing very well. The other thing looking at the first page, one of
the cancern3 that we have are the losses in the water and the sewer fund that
we'.e shown there. Ordinarily what people look for that are looking at your
' financial statements is that your enterprise funds at least break even. We'll
get to that a little bit later. On the plus side though you have no unfunded
pension class. There are no skeletons in the closet at the City of Chanhassen
ar:c' one of the things that auditors talk about is the big bang that's coming in
1('S' . Accounting's going to get a lot more conservative and you've already
hoc ed everything related to that. You are on almost a full accrual basis of
acocurting so the numbers are real, and they're not going to get worse where for
r any other governmental entities, as they get towards 1994 it 's going to get
much worse. Turning to the next page, to show what the ratio of your net debt
is to estimated full value and also on a per capita basis. One of the things
that 's happening at the City of Chanhassen is this is a young city that's
growing very quickly. The national average debt per capita is $572.00. However,
if you were in the upper quartile though, there are some that are on the
$7,000.00 per capita range. A part of this reflects your age. One other city
' that's probably about 5 to 10 years older as far as development than you are is
Eagan. That's $1,325.00 per capita so you can see if you're young and you're
growing the number is much higher. Part of it reflects also that you're
building things in today's dollars versus what they were 20 years ago. So I
don't think there's anything to be overly alarmed about. Now dropping down to
the enterprise fund. Looking at what's called the operating ratio and your
' water and sewer fund. This is operating expenses without depreciation over
revenues. Your ratio is 79% and the lower the number the more profit that
you're making versus the national average of 64%. A city like Eagan is 69? and
one of the things that we'll talk to you about a little bit more is that you
really need to work on I think, improving those margins. Turning to the handout
on the fund balances, and these are your operating funds. The general fund, your
special revenue funds and your enterprise funds. When we back out property, one
' 14
I
City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990
of the measures is how liquid are you and you have had an increase in fund
helance of $431,000.00. That's positive and it's good that that's no dropping
ir+ the hole. That 's kind of looking at what are your fund balances if you take
ojt property because you can't pay bills with property. That's a good positive
tread. On the next page, we've had a good increase and your unreserved fund
balance is half from over the years but as you can see from the next page
though, that you've needed that because as the city budget grows and as the City
of Chanhassen keeps going from a population standpoint, actually you have less
coverage as a percentage of your total expenditures than you did back in 1985.
I'd like to go in 2 more pages to the revenue pie chart John. Looking at 1984
versus 1989, going back 5 years, you'll see a small change in user fees. They go
from 3.6'r, to 3.8%. There's a very healthy increase in the license, permits and
fines. It was 11.4% of your budget back in 1984. It's 26.3% today. Now the
other thing that's interesting is property taxes are a lower percentage of the
total budget than they were back in 1984. That's fantastic. I don't have any
other clients that are like that. The other thing that you've done from a
management standpoint and it gets back to this efficiency index is as you've had
an increase in revenues related to building permits, that type of thing, many of
the expenses related to those revenues you've contracted with outsiders for and
so you haven't added city staff. So as afl cities go through a boom and bust
cycle, you don't permanently put those people on the payroll. To give you an
etarple or that, that ratio I talked about where you've got 1 to 232 people.
-he City of Minneapolis, that number is 1 to 70. As you know, Minneapolis has a
ver; large public works development. It does all the streets and all the
hig4„Jays there. You can see the difference though. Turning to the next page,
p.-o5a5ly the most dramatic change since 1984 is- the change in the percentage of
your total general fund budget that you spend on public safety. It was 24.7% in
°0,4 . Now it 's at 34.4%. A range of 30% to 40% is pretty typical in Minnesota
among the cities in the second class so I would say that you're more normal now
than. you were back in 1984 and you shouldn't be real proud about a big number.
One of the clients that I do a concurrent review on is the city of Miami and
that numb` - is 60% so you spend the money in the other areas so you don't have
to spend the money here. Turning to the next page, another measure of -
efficiency in government is general fund revenues and expenditures on a per
capita basis. This is a very level chart. It has gone up but very little from
19C.', especially when you factor out inflation. Part of this is the growth that
.,ou're required to provide as the City becomes a larger city. Now if you take
this on a per capita basis and in the City of Chanhassen, if you multiply the
per capita times roughly 2.97 or 3, that gives you roughly what it is on a per
household basis and a lot of other cities publish per household information.
Bloomington which is a very efficient city, is $830.00. Brooklyn Center is
$802.00 and that's versus, your's would be about $708.00 so your numbers are
very low. On a per capita basis once again, comparing you to Eagan, your
$236.00 compared to $245.00 so once again you're less. The next page gives a
cor.parison to how your public utilities are working here. Your water and sewer.
Our concern here is that the revenues need to be a greater percentage of the
overall operating expenses plus depreciation. You need to be putting more cash
flow away. And I have taken a look at the City Manager's proposal from a rate
standpoint and I found that it's very innovative. It's kind of like a public
utilties and I have experience in the electrical/utilities industry and the use
of, in effect almost a demand charge in the water utility area does seem to make
sense because what you're faced with is as you have to add new water plants,
those are substantially more expensive than what the base is. As you add
capacity, just as you would add a new electrical power plant, they cost
15 ,
1
•
City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990
;.gib startially more than what's in the base. So it does seem to be a very
innovative approach. Also there is rate relief in there for the senior citizens
who have a minimal demand charge so I've taken a look at it and it does seem to
be fiscally very sound. Another thing I'd like to emphasize is that you
' probably should put together a plan of carefully studying the rates every year.
It 's not good to go, you've gone almost 5 years without a change in the rates
and a small step increase every year would be much more preferable than to a
large increase that you might be faced with in the future. Turning to the next
page, it's kind of a summary of your investment performance and that goes from
right to left . The key thing is that the investment earnings keep going up and
yo,_1've done a good job from a yeild standpoint. Maintaining fairly high yeilds
while still preserving the safety, the funds that you have invested. Turning to
the last page talked about the debt per capita. From 1997 you'll see a
significant drop in the average debt service payments in the city and I would
I label those the payoff years. The City doesn't have that long before it's going
to be a substantial increase in it 's tax base while there's going to be a
s..!:ta-=tial drop in the debt service as these tax increment districts expire in
' the year 2000. The City has a very strong future. Also you'll notice the top
pa-t of the chart is tax increment districts that are not supported by the
genErai taxpayers. The middle of the chart is special assessments and then the
bottom of the chart , the white at the bottom is the general obligation debt.
' You n7,'iced you've managed to keep that very low.
Courcilman Johnson: Earlier you had some figures related to debt . Let's see,
where 4.e.s that?
C1_.T Hoffman: On the second page? The debt. . .
' C::ourc.ilman Johnson: Right . That didn't include the tax increment or did that
include tax increment?
Clifr Hoffman: The 1932 does not include the tax increment. It includes all
your special assessments. It includes all the GO bonds. Because the tax
it-event is levied against specific businesses who have that value, that 's not
' in there.
Mayor Chmiel: I just have one specific question. That enterprise fund on the
operating ratio, water and sewer. You said that we have to improve that
particular margin?
Cliff Hoffman: Yes. It'd be nice to see that margin improved through the,
' since you can't do a lot about the operating expenses, that means somehow to
raise the revenue side of the equation. The only way I know of doing that quite
frankly is in rates. The hard thing is you can't really compare your rates to
' neighboring communities because you've got the newest plant. That makes it
difficult.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Is there any other?
Cliff Hoffman: I'd just like to, I have a handout on the International City
Management Association warning trends and there's 22 factors that are in this
handout. I would say that the City of Chanhassen is doing an outstanding job in
rinost every category. The only thing that I just want to bring to your
attention is the enterprise fund losses which you'll see in the operating
16
11
City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 1
deficit section. But other than that , another way to grade the City Council and
It
management, if you turn to the second page on management practices to avoid.
-here's a list of things that you shouldn't when it comes to budget time and I
think in every case here you're not doing any of the things that you shouldn't
�r. doing. That 's very positive. You are charging today's taxpayers for today's '
se--vices. You are not pushing the cost of today's government to the future.
That 's a very, very key factor. You're following a conservative, consistent
accounting disciplines. You've got good staff that maintain good accounting
disciplines. Briefly on the annual report and I'll turn it over to Dan on the
r:zna?erent letter, the one thing to work for in the future in the annual report,
our opinion is qualified as far as fixed assets are concerned. In the front
c-,ver you'll see that the opinion has a long paragraph that describes the fact
that you don't maintain detailed records of the general fixed assets in the
fixed assets related to the enterprise fund and Dan will talk about that. We
reed to fix that sometime over the next 3 years to get those records in place or
rerrove that qualification because I think removing that qualification combined
a CFO certificate could significantly improve your bond ratings.
Chriel That 's great.
'"_ ff Poffman: So with that I'll turn it over to Dan, unless you have any
:.;eci'`ic questions on the large white document.
on Mayleben: Mr. Mayor, members of Council, I'd like to talk about the small
--cc rt There's a letter with our letterhead on the top. The first couple
ragEE is an introductory letter and in our letter we set our observations are
rot to resolve the special audit procedures. It's just part of the audit. If
y:-u turn to the second page, the report is broken into five sections. The first
tuo sections primarily deal with internal control matters. The third section is
h,oucereeping type items. The fourth section is future or forward looking items.`'
fifth and final section is the report on compliance for certain laws and
regulations promagaded by the U.S. Accounting Office. If you turn to the third
rags. Section 1 we talk about segregation of duties. If you read through that,
as an auditor it 's our responsibility to bring to your attention this matter.
rf yc,, read through there, in the comment we indicate that even though this
.!Ywkness does exist , there are other controls to offset the weakness identified.
The second comment we talk about fixed asset. As discussed here and as Cliff
referred to, the City doesn't have detailed records for their fixed assets. So
it raises a question, why should we have detailed records. Having detailed
records will enable the City to better control their fixed assets to guard
against unwarranted use and/or disposal. Fixed asset listings could be provided
through your insurance carrier to make sure that all these fixed assets are
properly covered by insurance. And having the detail will allow us to audit it.
The next few pages are just primarily housekeeping items. The only item I'd
like to talk about is the comment about bond arbitrage. Bond arbitrage as
discussed in the comment, the Tax Reform Act in 1986 as you're probably well
aware, made dramatic changes in the rules governing the issuance of city bonds.
With very few exceptions, any interest earned on bond proceeds that exceed the
amount of interest earned, I'm sorry, that exceed the amount of interest paid
has to be rebated back to the IRS. So the difference between your interest
expense and your interest income is termed arbitrage and must be paid back to
the IRS. So you issued bonds '86-'88-'89 and some of the bonds, the interest
earned has to be rebated to the IRS. Now what's the risk if you don't have some
urc'.,e computation and what's the risk if you don't pay in money you owe to the
17 1
I
1 Cit.,- Council Meeting - June 25, 1990
1 IRO? Well a couple things could happen. There can be penalties and interest as
anytime you don't make payments to the IRS or in the extreme measure, the -
IRS could come in and say well, your bond issue is no longer tax exempt . So I
' mean that's the worse scenario but who knows what's going to happen.
Councilman Workman: They could put Tom Chaffee in jail.
Con Mayleben: I don't know if they could put Tom Chaffee in jail.
Councilman Johnson: I think it's interesting the IRS believes that they should
get this revenue versus the citizens of the city of Chanhassen.
D:r t'a;leben: I think a lot of it came about because of the perceived or real
abuses by other city governments where they would go out and they would issue a
tremendous amount of debt. Pay 6%, earn 12% and just.
Ccu`icilman Johnson: Just finance their city that way.
".,yls5en: Finance their city that way. Not spend the money for 3 years.
No . t` y have opened the window a little bit and moved it from 6 months now to 1
' ec so they are moving in the right direction now with a little more sanity. 6
months to 1 year meaning the time you have to spend the money. Proceeds of the
horse:. If you spend the money within the first year issuance, you avoid the
' s-t t-age issue.
Councilman Johnson: Right . So if you're trying to catch a window of
r" tur:ity by bonding something early, be careful. '
Cc , Mayleben: In Section 4 we get into future or forward looking
cnnsiderations. Our first comment is about financial policy. The City's
' ca :genent has done a quality job conducting financial affairs of the city. To
irsure that these current practices are carried forward, we recommend that the
City develop and implement a financial management policy. Such a policy would
a: a compass in operating the financial affairs of the City. A financial
' nanagenent policy typically includes such things as target of fund balances.
what our fund balances should be. What are the investment policy of the
City? What the water and sewer revenues should be as a percentage of the
' operating expenses. Also included could be a capital purchase plan for the next
5 years. The advantages of having such a policy, it serves as an indicator that
the City has control of their financial destiny. An established procedure would
' save management future decisions on the same issues in the future. So once a
policy's in place, it becomes difficult to change. It protects against radical
change in the event of a Board turnover. So once a policy's in place with a
' Poard turnover, it's much more difficult to lead a city down a bad path. The
next comment on our report.
Cliff Hoffman: Add one other thing. One of the things that is very effective
' in improving your bond rating is that if you, let's say you got this
qualification removed on your opinion and you got the GFOA certificate and you
also went out to New York with your financial management policy. That tells the
pe:ple from Moody's and Standard. . .what they can expect you to do in the future
' if you run into things in the economy. Those elements pull together and make a
tremendous difference on bond ratings. What we're telling you to do here is j
nothing more than what you've already been doing. Just putting it in writing.
' 18
C:t/ Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 1
>_ns this is what we stand for. The elements that I talked about before,
rr nagement practices to avoid. It's basically putting some sentences around
that a 1
` structure.
{ b- Mayleben: Cliff eludes to the next comment about certificate of achievement
or excellence in financial reporting. What the certificate really is, it's
like a Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval. The award signifies that the City
has cr,.,:lied with all reporting requirements of generally accepted accounting
=rinciple and supplement requirements of government accounting. So as Cliff
stated before, if you do 3 things. Your fixed assets, your financial management
pal and your certificate of excellence, the answer is really money because
the money comes from the lower interest rates on your bonds.
Co_ir.cilnan Johnson: Who issues this certificate and what does it cost to get
rated?
Cliff Hoffman: The government Finance Officer's Association issues the
certificate and you turn it in. I think you pay about $400.00 Tom for a city of
r - size and what happens is 3 independent reviewers look at your report and
:omrare it to a checklist. Those 3 have to unanimously agree that
your
_. . t tcasr.'t do just what the minimum required is but it truly is excellent .
YoL' -C going above and beyond what just what you have to do. There is a lot of
::,tat�.;tical information that has to be
put in there and that requires some work.
,A' -c, there's a detailed transmittal letter that has to be in there. That's
"-c' of the State of Nation speech from your finance officer and your City
m.1.'-a;er. That becomes a very good PR and marketing piece that's in the annual
E=::rt . Much like a management's discussion and analysis that's in a corporate
a-;rual report . So it is effective and it just adds a lot of polish to the
_: c„tation. Particularly when you're preparing it and giving it to somebody
t,,Ft 's outside of this area like an outside bond agency and that type of thing.
aer!=. that dimension.
P...J.wo,, the It might help us by the way in our application, Deloitte has how
ra'-, on the reviewing staff? o
"iifr Hoffman: We have 2 in our office and our certificate clients of
Minneapolis, there are 12 other clients all do have the certificate so I know
you can get it . That 's not a factor. Now don't think though that you get the
certificate and then if the Council doesn't balance the budget and the other
rood things that you've been doing, that's not going to help your bond rating.
You still have to stay the course that you're on right now. We've had excellent
cooperation of the staff and one other thing that auditors have to communicate
with City Councils now because we have to treat you like the audit committee, is
that auditors have a schedule that we call a past adjustment schedule where we
post errors that are inmaterial or judgment differences or things that the
client told us they are inmaterial so we don't want to record them. We had none
of those types of things here. We had no significant differences. That's a
different communication than maybe you've had in the past but all auditors are
required to say that now. Were there any judgment differences? Do we think a
number should have been a higher number or a lower. Even if it wasn't material,
to treat you as the audit committee because our report is to the City Council.
It is not to management. '
19 '
City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990
Councilman Workman: Well I guess I'd like to applaud our crack management staff
for a job well done. We can sleep comfortably tonight.
Mayor Chmiel: Any other questions? I guess I would second what you' 9 y said Tom. I
think staff has done a great job on all aspects of running this city. The only
thing I can see as you've indicated is just a little polish in what we've got.
Formulate it just a little bit better.
' Councilman Johnson: Fixed assets.
' Mayor Chmiel: That's right. Yes. The only other one thing I saw.
Councilman Johnson: That takes manpower. Both of those are a question of
manpower and priorities. Establish your priorities that we want these two
' things done and approve the manpower to do it. Or womanpower.
Mayor Chmiel: That's right. If there are no other questions. Anyone else?
Don Ashworth: I would like just to thank,Jean and Tom for the work they've done
this past year. I think you look back at some of the statistics of the number
of people in typical departments, I do not think that you'll find any city of
our size having the number of employees that we have. In other words, we are
far below any type of other cities in the number of employees and yet year in,
year out we have virtually no errors coming out of the finance department which
includes a large task for special assessments and utility.
Cliff Hoffman: A lot of people don't realize even for your size you do have a
' lot of activity going on here because you're growing. It's a lot easier to run ++
a city that's 14,000 but it has been 14,000 for 10 years. It's also a lot r. 1
easier to be on the board.
Mayor Chmiel: Very good. No other discussion. Is there a motion? Or is there
one required?
' Don Ashworth: None is required. We will be coming back with trying to put into
place some of the recommendations that have been made by the auditor's officer.
At least where we stand on each of the items so Council can expect that in the
' future.
Councilman Johnson: There's a thing about arbitrage in here. Approve the
Deloitte proposal to complete arbitrage is recommended.
' Don Ashworth: Right. Did I include that as a part of that item or is it a
separate item on the agenda?
' Councilman Johnson: On item 5, the last sentence.
' Don Ashworth: You're right. So staff is making a recommendation that we do
employ Deloitte to carry out the arbitrage calculations as required by the
Federal Government in accordance with their proposal which has been attached.
' Mayor Chmiel: Motion?
Councilman Workman: So moved.
' 20
•
City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990
Mayor Chmiel: Second.
Councilman Johnson: At that little cost, it 's not worth
going out to try to
find a better bid that's for sure.
Councilman Workman moved, Mayor Chmiel seconded to approve the Deloitte proposal
to complete arbitrage. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
PRELIMINARY PLAT TO SUBDIVIDE 63.7 ACRES INTO 159
THE WEST SIDE OF COUNTY ROAD 17, JUST SOUTH OF LAKE ISUSAN FHILLS 2NDSANDC3RDD ON
ADDITION, ARGUS DEVELOPMENT.
Paul Krauss: The applicants are requesting approval to subdivide out 159 single
family lots without outlots to be dedicated for park. This is the fourth phase
of the Lake Susan Hills PUD. The plat's average lot size is 14,700 square feet
with over 50% having 15,000 square feet or larger as required by ordinance. The
plat's generally consistent with the approved concept, PUD concept plan with
changes stemming mostly from issues connected to topographic concerns and poor
soils that were uncovered. Also this phase has 4 more lots than was originally
proposed but conditions have been required to insure that when you take the
whole PUD cumulatively, that the gross allowable number of homes, which I
believe is 411 for the entire POD won't be exceeded. The street layout is
generally acceptable. Streets will be constructed in a phased program. To
insure that everybody's aware that streets will be extended as they move into
neighborhoods and buy lots, we will have streets paved up to their end—There
will be barricades. There will be signs on those barricades that say the
street's to be extended. In the short term though, the street layout, the
phasing layout makes pretty good sense and doesn't leave us with extraordinarily.,_
long cul-de-sacs. At least we can live with that situation. There are some
road grades in excess of 7% which is the City standard. We're recommending that
the plans be revised to eliminate those. Grading will be significant. We
believe it's generally reasonable. Although we note that some additional
grading detailing is required on both the grading plan itself and related
drainage issues. Lots 11 and 13, Block 4 contain a steep wooded ravine that is
generally found in this area over here. Since it is a wooded ravine and since
there are soils issues associated with it, we're recommending that the plat be
revised to pull the homesites back from there. That can be done. You've got to
massage the plat around somewhat. It will look a little different in that area
but we think that it 's worthwhile to preserve that feature. We're also
requesting a tree removal plan so that we can attempt to save trees that are
widely scattered around this site. Host of the site's been actively farmed and
doesn't have a whole lot of vegetation on it. The applicant presented the plan
to the Park Board wherein they were offering basically a larger amount of
acreage than had been originally proposed in the concept. in exchange they were
looking for some concessions on the park dedication fees that would have been
assessed. The Park Commission determined that the additional open space was not
suitable for park due to soils, grades and drainage issues. They were willing
to accept it as park however since it was adjacent -to other land that they were
going to accept but they recommended that no reduction in park fees result from
that. Details regarding drainage and the park continue to be worked on between
1 .
staff and the applicant. We've got a goal of insuring that there's
into the park and that the land is as useable as possible. The Planning access
Commission recommended that the preliminary plat be approved. Staff also
21 ,
1
11 City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990
' recommends approval with the conditions as modified by the Planning Commission
and outlined in the staff report. -
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Paul, is there any reason why, even though preliminary
' coming in is not signed by a PE?
Paul Krauss: None that I'm aware of. Maybe the applicant can explain that.
We've been working with a registered engineer on the plat.
Mayor Chmiel: I often times think that that's a requirement even in a plat. To
' know that there is that being done with that PE's number attached to it as
indicated. Gentlemen, do you have any discussions as to what Paul has indicated
thus far? Anyone wishing to address it? Just state your name please and where
you're located.
Brian Olson: Thank you Mr. Mayor. Mayor, members of the Council, my name is
Brian Olson. I work with Argus Development. Joe Miller Homes is the home
' builder and he'll be the home builder throughout this whole 159 lots and will be
phased at approximately maybe 3 or 4 different phases over the next 3 and 4
years. I've got a few points to kind of go over on a couple of the staff
' recommendations and maybe we can have a little more discussion on the full
meaning of them. Paul, is this the same staff report then as the Planning
Commission? So it's all the same recommendations?
' Paul Krauss: Well there's one modification Brian. Condition 9 was modified by
the Planning Commission such that the applicant shall provide calculations for
City Engineering Department to demonstrate that the ponding area on Blocks 5 and 1
6 within the parkland meets the 100 year storm.
Brian Olson: Okay, as long as we're talking about that point there. It notes
here in the staff report that they would like to see the holding pond located in
' the north part of the proposed park area. Where it is right now as far as on
the plan, it's in the lowest portion of the site and I believe when the original
PUD was approved, it did go through the watershed district and they concurred
' with that location. We would prefer to keep it in that location. We in fact
did meet with the engineering staff last week about that and they seemed to
concur also that that's the best location for the pond. So I'd like to
' recommend that that condition be changed to allow the park to be located as is.
Councilman Johnson: This doesn't say it moves anymore. The new condition 9
doesn't say what the old condition 9 did.
' Brian Olson: Okay.
' Gary Warren: Mr. Mayor, the engineering position on the matter as conveyed by
Charles Folch, our assistant who was at the location of the pond, he
acknowledged that the location of the pond for the north area but it was
' conditioned that there's a few concerns that we had that had to be addressed by
the developer. First of all was the 100 year ponding limits. That was the
condition you mentioned coming out of the Planning Commission as far as
calculations for that. That needed to be defined so we could determine the
' proposed or the impact on the proposed trail system for the park and second was
an erosion control plan to deal with the overland drainage from the storm sewer
outlets at the north end. Finally was a culvert would need to be designed and
' 22
1
City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 1
constructed under the proposed trail to connect overland drainage so they're all
kind of interrelated but I don't want the impression to be that there's a blank
check that engineering has written off on the location for the north side. There
are some things that have to be dealt with here first.
Brian Olson: That's correct.
Paul Krauss: If I could expand on that too. There's a very real concern with '
the park and how it functions and that's why this issue's been raised. The pond
that's being proposed by the applicant is down in there and most of the park
property, active park area is down in here. What's happening though is that the
pond in this location, if it's not designed appropriately, makes this area
dedicated park property inaccessible. If the flood balance on this thing is too
high, the trails that are going to run around there connecting the two parts of
the parks and different parts of the subdivision, they're going to be
impassable. That's why we have a real concern with how that drainage is
handled. We had originally proposed it being up north there because that
isolates that ponding area and allows for a continuous park. The drainage is
the key relative to the recreational use. ,
Brian Olson: And I agree with that. We worked it out at the Planning
Commission and Park so that we are going to have those trails out of the water.
Mayor Chmiel: One of the problems I have with that, these last rainfalls that
we've had I've had too many calls at my home at different hours of the night and
day coming out to say, come and see the amount of water that we have and where
we have it. I think that's something that really has to be addressed.
Brian Olson: We'd really like to have a useable park next to our homes also.
Councilman Workman: So you're agreeable for it to be located on the north side
then?
Brian Olson: We can't. If we have to move it to the north site, then we still
have to build a pond in that location because that's the lowest part of the site
and the watershed district is going to require it. As a matter of fact, I can't
even get all the storm water drainage off of this property up to the north part
of the site. '
Mayor Chmiel: How's that going to be addressed then?
Gary Warren: Well the calculations and such that need to be provided for us to
evaluate it is the crux of that.
Brian Olson: See what we talked about at the Planning Commission and then also '
last week was the fact that the bounce area, the 100 year flood area can be a
rather unusual shape. It doesn't have to be rounded like a park and we can keep
it away, or a pond, and we can keep it away from the edges where the trails are
planning on going. The very center there of that proposed pond area, it's
somewhat shaded there I guess. That's about all the bigger that pond is going
to be. It does not go way out into the area but the 100 year flood would. But
we're going to work on that with the staff to make sure that the trails will be
dry.
23 '
•
11 City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990
Councilman Workman: How about the issue of making that north part , is that pond -
going to cut off them and make two sections of the park? Is that what you're
getting at?
Paul Krauss: Councilman Workman, that is the concern. Now it's really a design
problem at this point and it's up to the applicant to demonstrate to us that
that's not going to happen. If they can do that, I guess we're comfortable with
it. If they can't, we're going to have to find another answer.
Councilman Workman: And until we get the proper data we can't even consider it.
Mayor Chmiel: Right. Okay.
Brian Olson: Also, on condition number 1. It talks about all street stubs to
' have a temporary cul-de-sac. Some of our street stubs that we're proposing are
relatively short in length. Through the future phasing perhaps some of these
won't even be 100 feet long without even any driveway access out onto it. And
if that's the case, I would hope that perhaps we could just work with
engineering department on that portion of the recommendation here on the report.
Maybe leave it in his best judgment then as far as do we need a temporary
' cul-de-sac or not on that.
Paul Krauss: We've discussed that in house and if there are in fact no homes on
this stub street, we'd want it paved up to the property line but you put the
barricade out at the street intersection to stop anybody from going down there.
That would be acceptable. to us.
' Gary Warren: As long as there's not a driveway access onto the street so they
have not a full street, we would go along with that. j
' Mayor Chmiel: Staff is comfortable with that I guess. I don't have any real
problem.
Councilman Workman: You're saying, I'm not sure I'm clear what you're saying.
You aren't talking about on the cul-de-sac situation. You're talking about on
the potential connection.
' Gary Warren: This is where the future road would be coming with a subsequent
addition as Brian has indicated. So long as we don't have a driveway. . .
Mayor Chmiel: Would you want to continue this out Paul.
Councilman Workman: On the north side.
Brian Olson: On the very south there Paul, by the very southern cul-de-sac.
Paul Krauss: For example there's a stub street and this one is here. The
' street would be extended up to this point. All the homes are on this portion of
the street and there is a cul-de-sac there. Ue would want this paved which
would put a barricade out here.
' Councilman Johnson: It's got to be obvious that the street is going to continue
there so people don't think they're on the end of the road and that they'll
never have a street on that side of their house.
I 24
I
City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 '
Mayor Chmiel: Right. It eliminates a lot of problems as they come back. I
Brian Olson: The other thing would be point number 8. There was a lot of
discussion about building trails at the Planning Commission. I think the
Planning Commission crossed out the paved portion of that recommendation. See I
don't know if you're looking at the same recommendation that I am though.
Mayor Chmiel: I don't think I am. '
Councilman Johnson: This still says paved and signed.
Mayor Chmiel: It does say paved and signed, yeah.
Paul Krauss: To the best of my recollection, that wasn't changed. There's a
reason for that and the reason is similar to the issues with road extensions.
Cities have a devil of a time paving those trail connections at some point in
the future when the park is developed. What we'd like to achieve is that we
believe there's a connection right in here. That there be some paved access
with a sign that says trail for park access, so that as homes are developed
around there, that those people are aware that that's the condition that's going
to be in there and that might have to suffice for several years until the park
itself is developed by the City.
Councilman Johnson: Yeah, I discussed the park access on Chan Pond with one of
the neighbors that bought the house next to the park access and both neighbors
had sodded right up together. I said are you aware that you just sodded 5 feet
of city property. He said no. He had no idea. I don't which neighbor sodded
the park access but it'd be a few years probably before we can pave that access.
There's some more work to be done on the park before it's reasonable but those
two neighbors would probably have something to say about it when we go to do
that.
I
Brian Olson: Okay, as part of this recommendation in here it says paved and/or
signed so it would be okay if we just went ahead and signed those access points?
Paul Krauss: My conditions just says and.
Gary Warren: On page 10. '
Paul Krauss: On page 10 which is the most recent one.
Councilman Johnson: A slab of asphalt going nowhere doesn't make a lot of ,
sense. If you had the sign at least there, the property owner can't say that he
didn't know that there was going to be a park access there. Even if the sign
said future park access. Or just said park access. As long as it's a straight
shot. _Now the one on Chippewa happen to goes so far and then turn and you
really have to know, when you're walking on sodded grass, you don't know where
that turn is or you're off the city property onto somebody's private property.
Unless you bring a map.
Brian Olson: One of the recommendations here was to plat all the park area and
dedicate it over to the City. That is fine. We would prefer just to put up the
sign that would say that this is going to be a park area and it's in all our
promotional brochures and everything. And we are the only builder in there so
25
I
City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990
11
we have tighter control on what we say to people.
Mayor Chmiel: In one section of this I read two different things which is one
page 7. It says paved and/or signed and on page 10 it just says paved and
signed.
Gary Warren: Page 10 is the consolidation.
' Mayor Chmiel: That's correct. Right. I think what they're looking at is
basically having it as such. As being paved and signed. Unless Paul, do you
have any other?
Councilman Workman: Well if it's paved, why does it need to be signed?
' Paul Krauss: I guess we've fought enough of these battles over the years to
possibly indulge in a little bit of overkill. But clearly the intent is that
people know about what they're buying and if you feel the sign alone does it, we
could live with that. We want something there on the ground. That's our
preference.
Councilman Johnson: It certainly does a lot more then we're got now at some of
' these locations.
Gary Warren: I would concur Mr. Mayor that the battles that we fight, even
' though we have signs and easements when we go to pave something, usually it's
overwhelming sometimes. The surprises and the position that staff gets put into
to try to get these in. I would also opt for paving.
Brian Olson: Mr. Mayor? May I ask on some of these other parkland connections 1. _J
that are to the north. How far as we talking about pavement because once it
does get paved a little bit, you're citizens are going to want to see the rest
of the trail built. So I guess I would just like to know how far we're talking
about .
' Paul Krauss: Well we're talking about stubs. Getting past the homes from the
public right-of-way. It's the City's obligation to develop the park in whatever
timeframe the City can do that. Yeah, there may be a little bit of
disappointment that that park is not built this summer or next fall or something
but I still think that's preferable to not doing it at all and then having to
fight the issues 2 or 3 years from now when we're prepared to develop the
facility.
' Gary Warren: Once you get past the lot depth, I think that's what we're talking
about.
Mayor Chmiel: I think I agree with that.
Brian Olson: As long as we're talking about some park issues. Before we can
' price out lots out here we really need to get what the proposed uses are going
to be in this park and what the park plan is going to be. This is something
that we've requested for almost 6 months now and I realize you want to see some l
' kind of approval before you get into the real nuts and bolts on the park design.
The one thing though as part of our grading contract we've got to rough grade
the whole park. And right now perhaps we are going to site grade that whole
26
I
City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990
park, or the whole property this fall and if we have to come back next year to
1 do some grading on the park. We've got to go through mobilization again on all
the equipment, we really need to get this whole project out there to kind of• balance out by itself so we don't have to haul any dirt around. I'd really like
to I guess urge the City to get us a park plan as soon as possible. Also, what
kind of grading that we're going to be kind of talking about. That's all.
Mayor Chmiel: Have we done that in the past? '
Gary Warren: Park plans?
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah.
Gary Warren: Chan Hills 3rd Addition. Curry Farms. We have generated park
plans and I agree with Brian as far as the need to accurately define what we
mean by our grade because we've had some parks that have been left in a very
rough graded state.
Mayor Chmiel: And we should get back to them with that. '
Gary Warren: While we're getting credits, we need to make sure what we're
getting.
Brian Olson: See we will have our final grading plan into the City I think
within 4 weeks. I guess just the last comment would be on condition number 17.
This has to do with street grades at intersections and this is something that
Charles in Engineering and myself and our engineer and Dave Hempel talked about
last week. I guess Charles was willing to make some concessions to this just
based on, we have a number of intersections that are so close together towards
the south part of our property there where it accesses out onto the county road.
If you've driven by the site, you can notice that it really does kind of climb
up rather significantly. What Charles is mentioning is not any accesses to the
County that would perhaps be shortened from this condition but some of the other
ones. The T intersections. And I don't know if he's had a chance to talk to
Gary about this or not but what I'd like to be able to do is at least this
condition is just be able to work with the engineering staff on it.
Mayor Chmiel: Gary, do you have any problems with that?
Gary Warren: I don't know if I understood all of the specifics but Charles '
left me documentation on the street le has
grade issue that we were hold to the 7X%
maximum that the City has. As far as the intersection and stuff, he didn't
elaborate although on a note here he said, all streets with a reduced 3% maximum
and 200 foot landing area at street intersections.
Paul Krauss: I think I can add a little bit to that. I spoke to Charles about '
that late this afternoon. What he indicated to me is, when you have a short
stub street over here. What we're likely to do is put a stop sign over here so
that traffic coming down to the County Road and then stop, this being the thru
movement. This thru movement didn't need to maintain the 3% grade but where
traffic is coming to a stop it did so there is some flexibility in the standard.
Wherever there's a stop sign, it's on that stop traffic flow that has the
flexibility.
27 1
I
1 City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990
1 Gary Warren: We need the landing zones where the stop signs are obviously.
Councilman Johnson: I see the hardest one there is obviously the one coming off
of Powers Blvd. . What 's the grade on that one right now?
' Gary Warren: Well we're saying we would allow a 7% max. He will have to get a
permit from the County which they will enforce their landing zone requirements.
Councilman Johnson: So we don't show, there's no street grades shown on these
maps we've got here. Drawings we've got here.
Paul Krauss: There should be. There is a set.
Brian Olson: There's only about 2 places in the plat where it was 8% and there
' were no grades over 8%. So really the difference between a 7% and 8% is 1 foot
per 100.
' Gary Warren: We've gone along where we've got tree issues and some other
environmental concerns where we've gone to 10%. I sure you remember like Near
Mountain. Some of those. We didn't have those real impacts here that we felt
that it would be warranted to go beyond the 7% but I think the intersections
that Brian is asking for us to consider, we certainly can work with him and work
out those details.
' Brian Olson: The reason I'm asking this is that we are rather long on dirt on
this to make it all work. The less grading that we have in the streets and then
also in the intersections, that means we have to take down that hill even more. !
' We have even more dirt left over. Then also the County, we got an agreement
with them for 110,000 yards to remove from the site and the grading plan was
based on that and now they're renigging. They would only like to do about
80,000 yards.
Gary Warren: Have
you talked to MnDot about dirt?
' Brian Olson: No I haven't.
Councilman Johnson: Talk to Eden Prairie landfill. I hear they're still buying
' dirt.
Brian Olson: They tested us. It didn't quite have the right amount of clay
content. Almost worked out.
' Councilman Johnson: . . .buying at $4.00 cubic yard or something. Ludicrous
amount for dirt:
' Brian Olson: Now that was pretty much the only comments I had to make about it.
The last thing is just about the park. We've heard that the parks commission
didn't feel that it was suitable for any kind of park use and that was a part of
the staff report that went to parks but there was quite a bit of discussion and
I think the parks commission turned around and felt there was a lot of use for
that area. The soils that are in there are not real bad soil. They're bad for l
' building construction but not for parks. As a matter of fact, there's quite a
few of the same soils that we have in our very western part of the plat that
we've got to correct for home construction. If in fact we are allowed to have
' 28
City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 1
more than 159 lots here, we would have utilitized that central area more
. thoroughly for single family residential but since we are limited at 159 lots,
1 we chose to well let's take a look at all the best soils and then work around
all that. We've had some trouble in our first addition out there. Gary's
probably aware of a couple of the instances where there was some construction
put through some bad soils and we got a couple problems with a couple houses.
But that's all I've got .
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. The other question that I asked Paul, is there any reason
why the PE has not signed this preliminary?
Brian Olson: He signed the cover sheet though.
Mayor Chmiel: None of mine are signed. Not the ones at least I have. '
Brian Olson: Okay. Maybe in the rush of getting it in in a hurry.
Mayor Chmiel: I prefer seeing that signature on there when they take their
reviews of this.
Brian Olson: I'm sorry for that. I didn't realize that happened.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, the other thing that I see in staff recommendations was
changing the date as you had May 10th of 1990. It should be so noted that the
plans are 4-16-90. Thank you. Any discussion.
Councilman Johnson: Well I'm going to hit this one with something I've hit I
don't know how many preliminary plats with over the last 4 years. 3 1/2 years. '
Right here in Section 18 of our Code it requires that flood plain areas,
location of wooded areas. . .and all that other good stuff be shown and once again
we got another preliminary plat in here that doesn't show the wooded areas.
You're talking about these wooded areas along these ravines and I don't see it
shown on the plat. I was fairly familiar with the area. Not even the cornfield
part of the area. I didn't realize it went into any wooded areas and reviewing
this without the staff getting out there, I never would have seen it. It
continues to upset me that plat after plat comes in where they conveniently
forget and this may be, since it 's such a small area, maybe a little oversight
but in other places it's been real convenient that the other plats from other
developers, that they didn't show the woods that they're going to clear cut.
Here again they've got these ravines that we're talking about trees. I'd like
to see the requirements very plainly here in the book. I don't even like to
look at them when they don't have the minimum requirements.
Mayor Chmiel: Can you see that that's also part of it? Anything else?
Councilman Workman: Are these streets yet unnamed or are they going to be
Street A, B and C?
Brian Olson: They're unnamed as of yet.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, and that at some time should be on the plat as well. '
Councilman Johnson: Are you looking for Workman Drive now? Clark got his Big
Horn Drive in before he left. Chmiel Way?
29
•
1 City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990
Mayor Chmiel: No. No thanks. Any other. discussion? I guess I see all those
specific conditions as such with 1 thru 23 with other, the specific ones of. . .
Councilman Workman: I just have one quick question. Number 13. All building
permits will, I think it's with patio doors as part of the building plan shall .
provide a survey showing that a deck can be installed without a variance to the
setback. Doesn't it sound kind of vague? People are creative with decks.
Paul Krauss: Yeah, they can be and I guess we're not trying to inhibit design
freedom.
Councilman Workman: Are we giving them a free permit to build whatever they
want with this?
Paul Krauss: No. No. We've had a number of problems in PUD's with decks.
Pheasant Hills being a good example. Since last fall I've changed the
procedures adminstratively where when patio doors are on a house plan, we look
' at the lot survey to make sure a deck can go in there and if it can't, we tell
them to take out the patio door. But this' is just to clarify that issue and to
put the developer on notice that you have responsibility to give us this survey
' information whenever you request a building permit. A standard deck is like 10
x 12. If somebody wanted to get more exotic and do something larger, that might
not fit but as long as there was a legitimate use for that patio door, I guess
we would be satisfied.
Councilman Johnson: I mean if you only had 3 or 4 foot to the building setback
and you wanted to put in a door on there, it doesn't make sense. In fact I know 1
' one that 's that way. Put in patio doors and then only had 5 feet. Actually put
a deck to the property line behind a privacy fence. -1
' Councilman Workman: Well I'd move approval with.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, with the revisions as we said on there.
Councilman Workman: With staff working with them on number 1, 4, 8, 17 in
addition.to the Mayor's comment on the date.
' Mayor Chmiel: As a preliminary plat.
Councilman Workman: Yes.
Councilman Johnson: I'll second that. I'd also like to ask one additional
question. The storm sewer designs, there seems to be a long ways down some of
these streets before they hit an intersector like between Block 6 and 7 on
' Street 0. Water goes a long ways. I see the engineer's left here. It goes all
the way, about 10 to 12 houses before it hits a storm sewer.
' Mayor Chmiel: Okay, that's maybe something Don that you could write to have
Gary check.
Councilman Johnson: I mean that could be adequate.
Paul Krauss: In Gary's absence, it's something that we did note as well but we
will get final design specs and they will have to justify that or put in J
' 30
City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 1
additional catch basins.
r
1 Brian Olson: Just to kind of follow-up on that too. You know the engineering
department did put me on notice as far as a real complete review on this whole
plat . They are really kind of rushed on time and things so they did state that
just because of the approval as is and things, things are probably going to pop
up through the final plans and specs and things and we're aware of that .
Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to approve Preliminary
Plat on Lake Susan Hills West PUD 4th Addition for 159 single family lots as
shown on the plans dated 4-16-90 with direction to staff to work with the
applicant on conditions 1, 4, 8 and 17 and subject to the following conditions:
1. All streets that are proposed for future connection shall be provided with
a turnaround which meets city standards with a barricade and signage
stating that it is a temporary cul-de-sac and will be a future road
connection.
2. The applicant shall provide one tree per lot and additional landscaping
along the entrances and boulevards as part of the PUD approval and the
developer shall provide $150.00 per lot for landscaping.
3. The applicant shall provide a plan illustrating large areas of mature
vegetation located on the site. Areas of mature vegetation not impacted by
streets or building pads shall be preserved with tree removal plans
required as part of the building permits.
4. The applicant shall pull back the cul-de-sac servicing Lots 11-13, Block 4
to remove the building pads from the ravine areas. •
5. The applicant shall provide a registered engineer's report on soils,
footings and structural design and a registered engineer's grading and
drainage plan for the City Engineer and Building Department approval prior
to issuance of a building permit on Lots 11 and 13, Block 4.
6. An amended preliminary plat maintaining with at least 50% of the lots with
15,000 square feet or more shall be provided.
7. Designate the parkland as an outlot which will be platted as part of the
first phase.
8. All of the access points to the parkland between single family lots shall '
be paved and signed that they are public access points.
9. The applicant shall provide calculations for City Engineering Department '
approval to demonstrate that the ponding area proposed between Block 5 and
6 within the parkland meets 100 year storm requirements and that there is
adequate room for access between the north and south park areas.
10. Park Access: The approved PUD plan provided access off of both looped
streets. Such continues to be required and should be shown as parkland
dedication, not simply easements.
31 1
11 City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990
11. Trails/Sidewalks: The development shall be required to provide trails/
sidewalks as follows:
' a. Five foot wide concrete sidewalks shall be constructed along thru
streets as shown on the attached plan. Sidewalks shall be completed at
the time street improvements are constructed.
' b. A 20 foot wide trail easement along the west side of Powers Boulevard
shall be dedicated for future trail purposes.
' c. The above trails/sidewalks satisfy the City's trail dedication
requirements and therefore, no trail fee shall be charged.
' 12. The applicant will be required to pay 50% of park dedication fees. There
will be no trail fee required.
13. All building permits with patio doors as part of the building plans shall
' provide a survey showing that a deck can be installed without a variance to
the setback. ,
' 14. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and
provide the necessary financial securities to guarantee completion of the
improvements.
' 15. The applicant shall obtain and comply with all permits required by the DNR,
Watershed District and Office of the Carver County Engineer.
' 16. The applicant's engineer shall provide the City Engineer with calculations
verifying the storm sewer, watermain and sanitary sewer pipe sizing.
17. At intersections where the street grades exceed 3%, a landing zone with a
street grade of 3% or less for a minimum distance of 200 feet shall be
used.
' 18. After grading, all disturbed areas shall immediately be seeded and mulched
to prevent erosion. All slopes greater than 3 to 1 will need to be
stabilized with wood fiber blankets or equivalent.
19. Type II erosion control shall be added along the proposed silt fence
adjacent to sediment basin and ravine areas.
20. All street and utility improvements shall conform to the City's standards
for urban construction. Construction plans and specifications shall be
submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval.
' 21. The applicant shall reduce street grades to comply with City Ordinance
throughout the development (maximum 7%).
' 22. Prior to assigning street names, the applicant shall consult with Public
Safety for recommendations.
' 23. Park grading: The developer, at it's sole cost, shall grade the park areas 1
in accordance with a timetable and plans to be furnished by the City. The
' 32
City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 1
City will develop park plans when the final park boundaries have been
determined.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
RECONSIDERATION OF A FINAL PLAT CONDITION FOR GREAT PLAINS GOLF ESTATES, DON
HALLA.
Paul Krauss: On July 10, 1989 the City Council approved the final plat for
Great Plains Golf Estates which basically was designed to create three 2 1/2
acre lots which are shown down there in the extreme southern end of this plat
and several large outlots. The plat was given preliminary plat approval in 1987
under the old ordinance which allowed 2 1/2 acre lots. The applicant was
allowed basically to get his foot in the door and reserve the right to plat
those lots. As you will recall, we've done this for a few other individuals as
well and I believe he's been given a 5 year deadline to complete platting the
property. The 3 lot division which was final platted is the first phase of the
ultimate plan which was to plat 38 lots on 105 acres. I couldn't find a reduced
transparency of that plat but we do have a full sized one over here that we
could pass around. This represents the ultimate subdivision that was given
preliminary plat approval. Stemming from the preliminary plat review, the final
plat requirement was to dedicate 27 foot of right-of-way on both sides of TH 101
which was designed to allow for future road upgrading. The applicant did not
want to convey that easement and staff wouldn't release the plat so the plat's
basically sat around for some time. At this point the applicant wants to
proceed with final platting or recording the final plat and is requesting that
that condition pertaining to the right-of-way dedication be removed. Staff is
recommending that the requirement be upheld. Although no plans are in the works
to currently upgrade TH 101, both MnDot and city staff believe it's prudent to
reserve the right-of-way since road improvements are going to be necessary.
That's true basically with everybody concerned. I would point out that the
Eastern Carver County traffic study and the draft comprehensive plan
transportation element have both identified TH 101 as a problem area. The 38
lot subdivision that has been approved will increase local traffic. It will
create three new street intersections on TH 101 and also has many lots that have
direct frontage onto the highway itself. Thus, there's apparently to staff,
there's a significant benefit to be gained from the ultimate improvement of that
highway for this subdivision. The applicant has indicated that he currently has
tree stock located in the proposed right-of-way area. There's a high volume
well in the future right-of-way and there's also a portion of a building. Staff
does not object and I spoke to the City Engineer about this. We don't object to
allowing these items to remain undisturbed within that easement area until some
point in the future that the road is upgraded and then we'd like them removed at
the owner's expense. But I'd have to point out that in all likelihood the '
property is going to be subdivided prior to the highway being upgraded so most
of these things would be removed anyway. The well possibly not but again we
don't object to leaving it in the right-of-way as long as it's clear that the
responsibility for their ultimate removal lies with the property owner. Again,
staff is recommending that the right-of-way condition be upheld. We are willing
to consider or have it approved with a condition that would allow them to keep
those facilities located in the right-of-way.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you Paul. Any discussion?
33
City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990
Don Halla: Thank you Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. I'm Don Halla. Owner
of Halla Nursery and the property owner which are separate entities. Address, `
6601 Mohawk Trail, Edina. As, you know we've been out here in the city since
1962. Seen operating the nursery business. We are actually at this point only
' proposing to begin the subdivision which is three lots. I do not have any
problem dedicating the development for the highway, the easement and so forth
adjacent to these lots that are involved in the final plotting. I do have a
' problem with giving the land on both sides of TH 101 for plotting which may or
may never be done. I don't know depending upon conditions whether will in fact
do the complete plotting. It is our intention to maintain 10 acres in the
center for the nursery operation and not move out of this site completely. That
' has always been our intention. So to give up our well which is the same size,
irrigation well that you use. 10 inch. 400 foot into the Jordan. Very
expensive. You know the cost of replacing it. You install that type of well
' yourself. To give that up in a piece of property which will be used for the
nursery seems very difficult for me to do. If we never subdivide anymore or
plot anymore in final plot program, it seems like it is asking a lot to be
' subdividing and plotting 7 1/2 acres and being asked to donate over 5 acres of
land which may or may not ever be involved with any additional subdivision. At
the time that that subdivision is done affecting those lots, I can understand
asking for that property. I have a hard time understanding it when we aren't
' even doing that area. I guess that's where I'm coming from. Certainly it does
affect our trees. It takes one complete building out plus our pump. It will go
right up adjacent, eliminate a lot of our parking at the nursery corner there.
' Any expansion to the highway I'm sure would not go to the west. It would go to
the east. There would be no reason to make that corner any worse than it is
now. So it seems at least on that corner where we want to maintain our 10 1
acres, that that's asking an awful lot. That's where I'm coming from and asking
' at least at this point where we are doing the final plot on the 3 acres, I can
understand that. But on the additional, we should take it as each area is asked
for.
' Mayor Chmiel: Thank you.
' Councilman Johnson: Where is your well?
Don Halla: It is right on the corner. Right about here.
' Councilman Johnson: On the west side.
Don Halla: It should be shown on the buildings and so forth should be shown.
' Mayor Chmiel: You're saying it's right about in here somewhere?
Don Halla: That's our pump building here. This is another building right here.
And of course if anything was to be done, the road would go this way. Now we
have reserved this outlot right here to straighten out the road in the future.
These are the 4 lots that maintain the.. .
Councilman Johnson: You don't own this side? Only up to here?
Mayor Chmiel: Right .
Councilman Johnson: So who owns the gully?
' 34
City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 I
Don Halla: It's actually owned by this house right here. I
Councilman Johnson: Significant obstacle.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. Paul, on all these accesses, has the State had a chance to
review this?
Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, that predates me but I've got to believe that they were
circulated a copy of that when the preliminary plat came through. They were
familiar with this when we raised the issue with them.
Gary Warren: The State responded with a letter. ,
Mayor Chmiel: They did? Okay. Is there anyway that we can accommodate that
well? '
Councilman Johnson: This is just going to be an easement. We're not saying you
have to take the well down unless there actually is use of that property that
the State requires it. You won't have to remove any trees. You can still have
access to the property. Use of the property until such time as the State comes
in and says we need to put a road through that area. And as you say, the
chances of the State expanding TH 101 to the west there is.
Mayor Chmiel: Very minute.
Councilman Johnson: Yeah. Ludicrous unless they move the entire thing over
which would destroy your entire nursery and there's no way that would happen.
Mayor Chmiel: No, don't ever say. . . '
Councilman Johnson: Yeah, it's the State too. There's no logical way it should
happen.
Don Halla: The original reason for giving the property. . .State requires it.
The State has changed their attitude since then about doing it.
Mayor Chmiel: The State has been trying to push this off on the County or the
City. Neither one -is accepting it.
Gary Warren: Mr. Mayor, if I could interject. There's no question I think in
staff's mind, and this is coming out of the Eastern Carver County Transportation
Study that unfortunately we're still waiting for the consultant to wrap up here
but, and the State did address in their letter about the importance of TH 101 as
far as one of our few north/south continuous roadways. Albeit with all the
deficiencies that it has so I think that there's no question, at least in
staff's mind as far as the need to have the right-of-way out there. That that
road sometime in the future the City's going to have to be upgraded. Who does
it. How long it takes, those are definite questions that we all are guessing
at. I think Mr. Halla does have a valid point as far as to extend the road to
the west would just accentuate the curvature problem in that area and to get the
54 feet for the added right-of-way and maybe take it all on the east side I
guess is something that I would want to take a look at to see geometrically if '
we couldn't survive and hold the west right-of-way line and get the additional
54 feet all on the east side.
35 II
City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990
Councilman Johnson: Yeah, but that's not part of this plat. Right-of-way on S
the east side's not involved in this except for on the northern.
Gary Warren: Well we've got a northern V there.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, on the upper portion.
' Councilman Johnson: Have we talked to the State as to what they would prefer?
Paul Krauss: The State doesn't know. You know, clearly everybody. . .
' Councilman Johnson: Or care?
' Paul Krauss: Well I think they care quite a bit . Staff does anyway. Everybody
as Gary said, acknowledges that TH 101's extremely deficient and unsafe and that
somebody should do something. That somebody's up in the air. The State didn't
' say that they didn't want the right-of-way and they thought, in fact they said
it would be a good idea to preserve the right-of-way for future improvements.
We're not sure who's going to take the bull by the horns on this one but clearly
somebody has to do it at some point.
' Jim Sulerud: My name is Jim Sulerud and I live on Vogelsburg Trail which is
just a little bit further south on TH 101. I've watched TH 101 for many years
i here and I've spoken briefly with you about some of the problems. I think this
is a classic situation where you've got a problem that confronts you with no
funds really earmarked for a 101 solution because there isn't a large
constituency down there with a problem and because there's no constituency,
' you're not moved to do anything. Or nobody's moved to do anything. In 1996
you're going to have traffic dumping off at the end of Lyman with 212
constructing ending there and as you pointed out, there is no other north/south
' and this will be a major hassle for the City at that time. I think the
opportunity is now to deal with the issue ahead of time when you have just a
very few number of property owners between Lyman and the bottom of the river
bluffs. You maybe have 10 property owners that control most of the land.
There's land available for sale down on 169 right now adjacent to 212/169 and
the Teich property is still all intact. You have not an approved overall plan
for this whole area and you're confronted with I think good opportunity to do an
' official mapping process for the City to take the bull by the horns and do an
official mapping process for Lyman to the south with just a few property owners.
I acknowledge that you don't have a lot of people screaming in here today for
' you to do that so it's easy to put it off but if you do put it off, then you
will have all those people screaming. You will have 20 more accesses onto TH
101 that you have to deal with and I think this is the time to take that action.
' I guess I would suggest maybe the alignment shouldn't be that at all winding
through there and that that easement may be sort of besides the point or
superfluous. That it really ought to be another alignment. I've talked to the
State. People at the State and it's just as everybody knows. They don't want
' to take the action and they'll keep granting accesses. I don't think they'll
deny an access onto TH 101 if there's a platted lot so the problem will continue
to compound unless somebody does something and I think it's harder for you to do
' something if you've got 100 people here screaming for a solution. . . This area I
think should be relooked at entirely.
' 36
City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 1
Mayor Chmiel: Jim, where are you located? I
Jim Sulerud: I'm in south of, just up from the railroad bridge. There's a
cul-de-sac. . .and so we've seen traffic increase over the years and I don't mind
that. It whizzes by me and it's going to continue to increase but I think
overall, that 's another gateway to the City. TH 5 sits there, the gateway to
the City from the west. Right now the gateway from the south is miscellaneous
land uses down there that I don't know what the scheme is but I think a whole ,
new approach to TH 101 would be beneficial. I think the problem is there's no
money for acquisition but if the priority were changed and their official
mapping, I think that would help the developers. Maybe the alignment is
entirely outside of this right-of-way. The preferred alignment. I know it's
hard for you to respond. To me to say well yeah, it should be this way or that
but I think the priority is going to be immediately before the Council and I
think it 's important that you be looking ahead as well as just reacting to
things that come in the door. So I'll continue to be in touch and I guess on
this one, I don't think the right-of-way is that critical because I think the
alignment should be considerably different. I don't think any improvement to TH
101 will be accomplished along that route. ,
Mayor Chmiel: Good. Thank you Jim. Do you have any comment?
Councilman Workman: Can we officially map something like that?
Councilman Johnson: We'd have to do some kind of study. 1
Gary Warren: We have to do a geometric study. That's the tough part of it .
There's an investment there to get the alignment worked out and the center line
staked.
Councilman Workman: Well you and I have kind of talked about this and how TH
101 has kind of taken care of dangerous corner at a time. And that there's
$100,000.00 or so. There was $100,000.00 designated by MnDot at 14 and 101 where
we were going to, where it's dangerous. I think I even had the discussion that
someday this would go over this ravine somehow. Everytime I drive by there I
think of that and I think about that house that it would probably end up going
through which isn't friendly either. Then I think we even talked about the fact
that that trestle, that bridge down there is going to come out. I don't know if
it's going to be replaced, widened because isn't that Hennepin County Light
Rail?
Gary Warren: That's beep, basically there's a tract useage agreement but the ,
right-of-way, the railroad basically is abandoning and it may at some future
time be a light rail corridor but with the flexibility of light rail, as far as
grades and such, they can get by without having to have that particular '
structure there so it would come down.
Councilman workman: Is there a date set when that thing might come out of
there? It probably does a good job of slowing people down the highway but
anyway, we've talked about every little segment of that thing and I don't know,
maybe we can find out, you can give us a ballpark idea of what it might cost to
do so.
Mayor Chmiel: What is a geometric for that Gary?
37
11 City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990
Gary Warren: It 's hard to guess but to do a geometric evaluation just in this t
corridor, we'd have to make some assumptions obviously at the intersection of
Pioneer is a touchdown point and maybe someplace to the south here, Dakota is
the other touchdown point. We're probably looking at something, I would say
between maybe $10,000.00 in round numbers. You could get some geometric numbers
put in there and then you're going to have to stake the alignment in the field.
Somewhere's in that range I suppose. With the preliminary plat and Mr. Halla
probably remembers this also when we were showing lots up there, we were
indicating that where the Outlot B, where it 's kind of cross hatched there in
that inside of that turn there, we were looking for an area in there to put a
restriction on that lot as far as the potential future right-of-way.
Don Halla: There is one on there.
Gary Warren: To leave that option open so we definitely all along have been
thinking, like everybody you've got to get the kink out and it's going to go to
the east. So in that regard I guess I'm not that.
Councilman Workman: So we don't need the 27 feet on both sides?
Gary Warren: Well, we need to know where we would transition. You would need
' some near Pioneer Trail. You would start with 27 but the geometric study would
tell us where would you start transitioning to the right-of-way on the east
side.
' Councilman Johnson: But Mr. Halla has to move forward and we need to move
forward. We're talking the easements and easements can move. 1
Mayor Chmiel: Easements can always move.
Councilman Johnson: Especially when we're talking easements along two outlots.
' And these outlots are part of the platting process. Even though they're not
being divided into single family lots at this point, you're platting this whole
area. These happen to be platted into huge lots. A Lot A and a Lot B. Or
' outlots. Non-buildable outlots. So they are part of this action and should be
considered. To get things going, I would think that we could take from some
point on the south side here as the curvature starts in the road and eliminate
the 27 foot on the west side up to a point where across from out from the cross
' hatched area there. I've kind of sketched a future road in there as just kind
of a seat of the pants engineering type deal. Taken where the curvature
currently turns to the west and make that a curvature starting to the east and
' then line it up with making an intersection north of that cross hatched area.
That preserves, takes away a lot of that outlot or a lot of the right-of-way on
the west and right through the area that you're most concerned about and still
preserves it on the north coming down the road quite a ways on the north. If we
could work out some kind of arrangement like that and still preserve adequate
right-of-way. I'd like to look at pursuing that official mapping process. This
is something I've liked to have looked at a long time. We looked at it a little
bit during the preliminary platting.
Councilman Workman: Well, so what can we do tonight I guess?
1
Mayor Chmiel: I think what we've got to do is to just move.. .
38
I
City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 1
Councilman Workman: The Attorney has a solution? '
Paul Krauss: No, the Attorney has a problem.
Mayor Chmiel: I don't know how we go about both at the same time. It's almost I
next to impossible.
Roger Knutson: I was just going to point out in terms of procedure. This is a
request to reconsider so your normal procedure is to vote on whether you should
reconsider it first. And if that motion to reconsider passes, take action at
your next meeting. You can take action at this meeting if you determine your
procedure that your action is not likely to affect anyone else. If you
determine it's not likely to affect anyone else, you can take action at this
meeting. Otherwise you're supposed to. . .
Mayor Chmiel: I don't think we know that.
Councilman Workman: It could affect somebody on the east. . . .plans to move the
road.
Councilman Johnson: It's taking the assumption that we're going to put a road
through somebody else's property. That's what this would be doing. We'd be
making that assumption that we're going to go through that property to the south
of the cross hatched area.
Councilman Workman: With the amount of questions, shouldn't we vote to
reconsider but pick it up at the next meeting?
Mayor Chmiel: I think that's something we should have to make a point of order I
right now as to whether or not we should have any reconsideration of the final
plat condition.
Councilman Johnson: I think we definitely should. Mr. Halla has some valid
points that need to be considered.
Councilman Workman: I would move it. To reconsider it.
Councilman Johnson: I'll second. '
Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to reconsider a Final Plat
condition for Great Plains Golf Estates at the next City Council meeting. All
voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
Councilman Johnson: Should we have some kind of proposal for our next as to
what should or shouldn't be? I
Mayor Chmiel: I think we have to review it to see whether or not there's any
impact on anyone else adjacent to there and what that impact is and that can be
a point of discussion. Once we know that, then we can move from there.
Councilman Johnson: Because we had to notify these people before the
preliminary plat, should we do a notification of the landowners within the area
that the plat's being reconsidered?
39 1
11
City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990
Mayor Chmiel: Paul? T
Councilman Johnson: I don't know if there's a legal requirement.
Paul Krauss: As Councilman Johnson points out, no. I don't think there's a
legal requirement unless it raises the issue that Roger cited but if you're
looking at shifting the road to the east, that represents a departure from the
preliminary plat and I guess this property. . .
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, I think the adjacent property owner should be notified.
I Councilman Johnson: During the preliminary plat, that cross hatched area was
talked about as an area where we planned on putting the road eventually. That's
why it's cross hatched on there.
' Gary Warren: That was a very crude estimate without the benefit of any
geometric designs. I guess I'd suggest that we consider, because that is a
I 111question here that we're all kind of sketching and guessing, that we talk to
MnDot to see if they'd be willing to give us some geometric thoughts on it . I
don't know if they would or wouldn't. If not, that we are ourselves I guess do
some crude evaluation of that area to see really what we might have to do.
Mayor Chmiel: You could even check with MnDot to see if they would or they
wouldn't as you indicated.
Councilman Johnson: Could we, just another thought to toss out to think about
over the next couple of weeks, look at approving the plat without the easement
but with the condition that no building permits would be authorized until we've
' had a chance to look at the easement and decide which easements would be
necessary for TH 101 improvements. So that he could get into marketing these
lots or you've already got a buyer.
Don Halla: Actually we can do it one of two ways. We're going on the second
way would be kind of a ridiculous way to do it. My son is moving a house onto
this lot . Okay, in so doing we are forced to take Lot 1 there and plot it as
enveloping the whole 50 acres.
' Councilman Johnson: Oh, so he's moving a house on now?
Don Halla: Right.
' Councilman Johnson: Not that blue one from TH 5 is it?
Don Halla: No. It's Kirby Puckett's house that he didn't want. It's coming
' out of Edina. It 's a real nice house. So that's going to be moved on Lot 1 but
at this point for the building permit for that, they're having to because of
delays, look at it as a 50 acre lot .
' Councilman Johnson: Put in a metes and bounds and subdivide it later?
Don Ashworth: Existing parcel.
Councilman Johnson: Oh, existing parcel.
}
40
I
City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990
Mayor Chmiel: I think we've probably moved on that portion of it. I
Councilman Johnson: Yeah. I was just giving an idea to how we could move it
along in a week.
Don Halla: Is there anything we could do along that line?
Mayor Chmiel: I don't know if there is anything right now at this particular
time other than the fact of the adjacent property owners notifying them before
we do anything and I think they're entitled to that review and I can't see how
we could really. 1
Gary Warren: As long as Mr. Halla has an alternate plan that seems to work with
his schedule.
Don Ashworth: July 9th? Can we meet that timeframe as far as notifying the
neighbors?
Gary Warren: I'd say that would be our intent. That will depend on MnDot.
Councilman Johnson: And the notification to the neighbors, basically could very
easily describe that we're trying to change one condition of the final plat as
it refers to TH 101 easements.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. So you'll do that and take care of that notification. 1
ACCEPT FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR UPGRADE OF COUNTY ROAD 17 FROM TRUNK HIGHWAY 5
SOUTH TO LAKE DRIVE WEST, CALL FOR PUBLIC HEARING.
Gary Warren: Mr. Mayor, Don Ringrose is here from BRW who will give us a brief
presentation here. Overview of the project at your discretion.
Don Ringrose: I can be brief. I can be long. Whatever you want. -
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Let's, I think we've all probably looked at this
rather extensively and maybe you can just briefly.
Don Ringrose: Okay, I think first for a couple of questions I think we need to '
answer collectively to move on. One is you recall there's two alternatives
presented, A and B. We've recommended A. The shorter one pending some decision
on the extension of Lake Drive to the west. So with your concurrence, I would
think we would at this point move ahead only with Alternative A. There's no
purpose really served in presenting Alternative B at a public hearing and when
Alternative B becomes reality, if it does, that we'd have to go through
appropriate hearings on newly affected properties at that time.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, Alternate B is the one that's about $600,000.00 more. '
Don Ringrose: Right. The other question before you tonight, as you indicated,
is the establishment of a public hearing which is recommended for July 9th. I
guess with that I would be glad to do an overview for you if you'd like.
Mayor Chmiel: Please.
41 1
I
11 City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990
Don Ringrose: First I think you're familiar with the project area of CR 17 south of TH 5. It's basically. . . It's proposed to upgrade the existing roadway
to 4 lane divided with urban section curb and gutter. What you have out there
now basically is a four lane rural section. The existing road is deficient in a
1 number of areas. First the lanes are not adequate to. . .standards for turn
lanes. There's a super elevated section now as you drive there based on
reduced design speeds and desire to have an urban section. . .without a super
' elevations which simplifies the maintenance and drainage. . . So that's the basic
design. Alternative A roadway improvements are illustrated on this diagram for
urban section transitioning to the existing 2 lane south of new Lake Drive East.
Turn lanes. . .turn lanes would be at all major intersections. It is not
suggested at this time that any of these intersections will be signalized. That
a traffic signals and side streets will come to a stop. Those areas shaded
along the edge of the striping. . .property that are proposed to be assessed for
' roadway improvements. Again, Alternative A. This relates to the utility
improvements that would be required. They're rather minimal. No sanitary sewer
is required. The number of properties that have water services stubbed into
' them and storm sewer would generally be constructed along the length of the road
to serve the new roadway generally replacing existing ditches. I will not with
your concurrence present this same information on Alternative B. . . Cost summary
and funding summary. The feasibility suggests that assessments would be levied
1 on benefitting properties consitent with existing policies and to the extent
that assessments within those existing policies aren't sufficient to cover
costs, the deficiency would be made up with tax increment funds. . . And on the
' basis of the assumed assessments, we had calculated a preliminary or estimate of
the assessable part, in this case Alternative 8 illustrating the rates. . .
Finally, schedule as indicated this evening for the presentation of the
' feasibility study suggests July 9th public hearing. The balance of this year
would be. . .basically to the design being early in the year with the majority of
the construction being roughly a year from now. 1991 time. This works into the
proposed schedule for TH 5 improvements.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Are there any questions?
' Councilman Johnson: So we're talking about not presenting Alternative B
whatsoever at the Public Hearings?
Gary Warren: We're saying that Alternate B, it could be presented. I think
' what we're saying is that Alternate B at this point in time does not really come
into play until such time as we have Lake Drive West underway and the traffic
movements even with the further additions of Lake Susan Hills West underway and
' at that time we would bring this back as a separate element and have the
hearings and such to deal with those affected property owners.
' Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, I don't see the basic need to go with B at this particular
time.
' Gary Warren: Right.
Councilman Johnson: Unless of course Lot 1, Block 1 gets resold to somebody
else and they decide to build. Is Redmond completely out of there now or is he
just on hold?
Mayor Chmiel: It's still on hold.
' 42
City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 1
Gary Warren: They show as the owner of record. I
Councilman Johnson: Oh, they do own it? Okay.
( Mayor Chmiel: Tom, do you have any questions? '
Councilman Workman: No, but I would move approval.
Don Patton: I have a question.
Mayor Chmiel: Yes, be my guest. '
Don Patton: I thought you were still questioning the engineer.
Mayor Chmiel: No., we'll open it for any discussion right now. '
Don Patton: My name is Don Patton with the Lake Susan Partners. I did get a
chance to look at Exhibit B and the thing I guess I'm concerned about is this is
a County road. It serves more than the City of Chanhassen. I'm not going to
argue that it needs to be upgraded. The thing that I am arguing is that the
cost of the road needs to be born by the people that are right off of the road.
It to me serves the County. I think that the City should be asking the County
for money to build it. The thing that we're seeing as a part of the Lake Drive
assessment that we were here about a month ago as I recall. We're getting to
the point where you've bled people to pay assessments for projects for a long
time and they keep coming and they keep coming. I'm not trying to plead that
we're talking about trying to sink a mini Donald Trump here but there's only so
much blood in the turnip. If you were the people that were having to have
$150,000.00 assessment put at your and then I can't recall some of those other
numbers, I don't think it's reasonable and I think that you should go to the
State. I think you should go to the County and get them to pay some of these as
an area charge. I'm not disagreeing that there should be some front footage
cost but I think that there should be some cost from a greater area that's
benefitting this.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you.
Don Ringrose: In the report there's language to the effect that suggests that
assessments as presented are in a sense a first cut and we would fully expect
that the Council through this process may well modify it. In fact, the real
answer to that is something that's probably in 1992 at the assessment hearing.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. I have one specific question that I have here too relating
to the County. What response does the County have for that particular road and
are there any dollars that the County can pick up for this specific project even
though it's within the confines of the City but it is yet still County road.
Gary Warren: The response from the Carver County engineer has been basically
that he does not have the money to spend on this roadway. Was a similar
response that the City received for CR 17 north of TH 5 with our detachment
project there where that is also local funds. I received recently from the
County a list of capital improvements for the next 5 years that I intend to get
to the Council at the next meeting to give you an idea of the needs that they're
trying to address throughout the County area here. I think certainly that the
43
City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990
question should be called more specifically than just to have them casually say
that they have no money for you here. As a part of this, as I indicated in the
staff report, we have been working with Roger Gustafson, County Engineer.
Roger's aware of this. I think in all honesty, somewhat embarrassed by this.
' The fact that the City's building more county roads than he is able to these
days, although he did have a nice improvement on CR 14. So I think it would be
very appropriate for the City to petition or somehow communicate with the
' Commissioners, County Commissioners as far as participation on the project.
Mayor Chmiel: The other thing I had was, what's the time frame? Is it critical
' that we move ahead with it as it is right now?
Gary Warren: The TH 5 relationship and the fact that Lake Drive is constructed,
we did do some interim median work with the intersection of Powers Blvd. and
' Lake Drive to temporarily address the traffic movements at that intersection but
the TH 5 improvements really are the driving force for the need for this element
of the project and I guess I would say that from a constructability standpoint,
' that this would be a timely point to do this.
Mayor Chmiel: The other thing I had here too is, I was looking at it probably
suggesting that we have some additional informational kind of meetings on this.
' I think it 's coming up quick with public hearings for July 9th. I thought that
each of those people in and adjacent to the areas were all properly notified and
that they're fully cognizant of the fact that this was going to take place.
' Councilman Johnson: For both alternates.
' Don Ashworth: I think that's true and I think that when we get into those
hearings, you'll be aware that the owners do know what's occuring. I would like
to bring out that when CR 17 was initially constructed as a county project, that
was the County's responsibility to pay for that and so the bridge that is there
was paid for by the County. That's a very expensive bridge. The basic lanes,
etc. . As you move from a standard county road ditch section into urban section,
you're getting into an area that typically the County doesn't fund and yet from
' a property owner's standpoint, the useability of their property becomes enhanced
if they can not have that ditch section. Basically reuse some of those lanes.
That is the position that Jerry Carlson has used. We have met with him and
' talked with him about this. He has strongly supported the project. Empak,
Frank Beddor. The other issue is, I think it's good to go back to the County
and again restate our desire to see them participate in what is a county road.
I think what they're going to come back saying is the City is the one who
' really has more dollars available. This is within a tax increment district area
and there's been a number of complaints from the County as to tax increment and
it's useage and all the rest. I think if nothing else, we have to get down to a
' position to show the County that they are benefitting very extensively by our
stepping in and carrying out the construction that might typically have gone
back over to themself. They are the real winner out of this particular project.
' Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Don, you wanted to say something?
Don Patton: Yes sir. I guess the other thing that I'm saying, I wasn't aware
' that this was here until we saw it on the agenda tonight. It is a short fuse
thing and I guess the thing I'm proposing, if there are needs like that, the
County was able to come up and fund the grading. You know there's a part of CR
44
City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 1
17 that's being reconstructed as a part of the Lake Susan. As a part of the
good faith of the Lake Susan partners, they did dedicate the lane that CR 17 was
built on. Okay? Way back when. The County built it but the partnership
dedicated that land for that and it's, what 120 foot, 125 foot right-of-way.
Considerably piece of land for half a mile. I'm suggesting that rather than all
of a sudden we need to assess not just the Lake Susan Partners but all those
owners in there a lot of dollars, that some type of a capital improvement
timing, phasing go forward and say, County. This is when we need it. We're '
expecting you to do it. That was able to happen on this grading project. They
have appropriated, I think it's $250,000.00 to do that grading part. I mean
we've been working with Argue to do the design plan and create the surplus but
they've come up with money to do that project and I think that's fair in dealing
with the adjacent landowners.
Mayor Chmiel: Of course in the same token, I think too Don we won't dispute
that the accessibility that they put in for that is a direct enhancement for
your development. . .of the roads coming into that particular area.
Don Patton: We had to build the turn lanes to get into there any way. . . We
built those. The County didn't build those. It was the City.
Mayor Chmiel: Did you want to say something Gary? ,
Gary Warren: From the timing standpoint, if Council's more comfortable with
calling a hearing for the 23rd is it, instead of the 9th, I guess we. . .
Mayor Chmiel: I guess I'd like to see that done. Any other discussion?
Hearing none, I have a motion on the floor.
Councilman Johnson: Do you want to modify the motion to move the public hearing
to the 23rd then?
Mayor Chmiel: Right . Tom, you made the motion.
Councilman Johnson: It never got seconded did it. '
Mayor Chmiel: No, we had a motion the floor and it died so you do you want to.
Councilman Workman: I'll modify it so that we move the date so we can what, '
find other funding sources?
Mayor Chmiel: Either look at other funding sources and checking with the County
to make sure that all the people are fully aware.
Councilman Johnson: Earlier notice. Public notice. '
Councilman Workman: I would move that.
Gary Warren: And accept the feasibility study? '
Mayor Chmiel: Right.
Councilman Johnson: I'll second it.
45 1
City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990
Resolution $90-71: Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to
accept the feasibility study for the upgrading of County Road 17 from Trunk
Highway 5 south to Lake Drive West and to call the public hearing for July 23,
1990. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
CONSIDER ACCELERATED WATER RATE SCHEDULE FOR WATER UTILITY.
Don Ashworth: Jean Meuwissen and Tom Chaffee are both here. I thought that
they did an excellent job in putting together the report you have in front of
you there. It's more information regarding our utility system than you probably
ever wanted to know but it does show a number of interesting items and I think
that the primary one is that the City Council started talking about oh, 3-4
months ago and maybe even going into this past year trying to find some
' mechanism to ensure that as a community we were making a statement that we
wanted to see our natural resources, more specifically our water, preserved and
that any of the existing water schedules where you would see a reduction in
' water rates with the more water you consummed is actually counter productive to
any environmental type of efforts. I think we'll probably be tracking in some
new areas here. I do not know of any city in the State of Minnesota and this
' was again part of the thing that Deloitte had brought up, that has taken this
type of a step to put into place a rate structure that will in fact establish a
penalty for excess water useage during the summer months. As a part of that,
you've got a great deal of flexibility. What do you pick out as the quantifiers
that you're going to use. What we used was establishing, and it's a good thing
we have computers today, but the computer will go in and analyze each individual
account. Determine your. . .water consumption which is basically your winter
' consumption and will then establish a rate that produces a quantity. ; We will
provide 30% above that during the summer months but anything in excess of that 1
30% useage over your normal winter quarter would go at this higher accelerated
schedule. What has been used for, in-house purposes is a 50 cents surcharge on
that additional useage. In that process we also reduce the minimums to insure
that senior citizens, those people who were are the very low end of the schedule
would not have, right now you have certain disadvantages. Disincentives. So
' for example if you're hit into the elderly area and you can use 10 or 20,000
gallons at a minimum charge, what advantage is there for you to use less water.
So our rationale was let's cut that down to as minimal a minimum as we can and
' in fact provide some type of an incentive again for those seniors who do not use
that much water. There is a general rate increase. The general rate increase
is, if you take into account that there has not been a rate increase during the
past 5 years, is actually literally nothing in terms of the overall affects.
With the surcharge, with the rate increase, I think we're still looking and we
could go since I wrote the cover report and as mine's still on here, you're
looking at a 5% to 10% increase in their total bill. This would be for general
rates. And an average family looking at potentially $10.00 to $20.00 increase
if they maintain the same water useage rates that they did this past summer. So
for Tom's analysis, he had the computer go in. Calculate what the low quarter
would have been from a year ago. Then provide the 30%. Then analyze what you
actually used this past summer and what your actual surcharge would have been.
Those statistics are what is used to produce the averages on page 8.
' Councilman Johnson: We should have done Tom and Don's houses and seen what our
actuals would have been.
' 46
•
City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 ,
Mayor Chmiel: I said look at my bill for an example. I
Don Ashworth: One is?
Jean Meuwissen: One is your house. '
Don Ashworth: My house or Don's house?
Jean Meuwissen: You. Ashworth.
Tom Chaffee: We were going to use the term normal too. . .but normalcy. '
Councilman Johnson: Not if you had Don's included on there. How much was Don's
increase then? 1
Tom Chaffee: In order to compensate for the variances in the schedule we put in
the fact that the City Manager's bill would increase by 230%.
Eou-nc-i-i-min Joh nson-: Well o-ne—of-hi-s da-ught€-rs-is—in colleges now so t-he water
useage and phone useage is way down.
Jean Meuwissen: Except for the summer when they're home.
Don Ashworth: I'm a 3 person household? I
Jean Meuwissen: Yes.
Mayor Chmiel: Your's looks pretty much like mine. I think mine comes to about
90 something per month. Or per 3 months. Excuse me.
Tom Chaffee: These are annual figures here. '
Don Ashworth: Recognize that when I give my 5% to 10%, I am using the total
billing that goes out from the City. So we're not proposing any increases in
the sewer rates and so when I'm making those types of comparisons, I'm saying
that the average is $200.00 per year for sewer and water and so the increase in
water rate in comparison to your total bill is the 5% to 10%.
Councilman Workman: Are you saying that no other community in the State has
done this?
Don Ashworth: I'm not aware of any that •has an incentive or disincentive '
program or penalty to.
Councilman Johnson: It's an incentive to conserve. '
Mayor Chmiel: Basically to save water.
Don Ashworth: Most rate schedules still go on the older philosophy that the
more you use, the less you'd get some type of a cost breakdown.
Councilman Workman: NSP works like that. I think it's a good idea. I'd be '
waiting to hear some of the flack on it but it certainly is a good idea. I just
have one question and that is how it relates to water consumption by industry
47
I
City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990
that, like Rosemount uses I think an awful lot of water down there for cooling, _
etc.. How is that going to impact them? Are they going to go through the roof?
Mayor Chmiel: Are many of these people aware as to how it's going to affect
' their particular balance?
Gary Warren: We're taking their winter quarter use and giving them that plus
' 30% so unless they outrageously change some process or something.
Councilman Johnson: I think that they chose to. . .
Councilman Workman: But 30% of $100,000.00 water bill or whatever is a lot of
bill.
' Councilman Johnson: Rosemount uses a lot of water but in their final
development they chose to go with a recirculating system versus a once through
non-contact for their cooling which is what would have really increased in the
' summer. I don't know if they've switched back on that .
Gary Warren: We haven't seen that. The Rosemount useage was pretty up there
' the last quarter.
Jean Meuwissen: 16 million.
Gary Warren: So maybe they haven't got that system going yet but there's a lot
of water.
Councilman Workman: We're talking about a large financial impact.
Don Ashworth: But Councilman Workman, just so you understand. See you
calculate the winter quarter. Say during the summer months, the first 130% of
that would be calculated at the lower rate. So you would not pay at the higher
rate until you get to that. •
' Councilman Workman: But it's going to impact them proportionally like an
individual.
' Don Ashworth: Until you brought out the question I really hadn't thought about
it but I think you might have just the opposite situation. If you had a large
industrial type of user and you give them 30% for their winter quarter, you can
almost assuredly, they would not pay any additional for watering during the
' summer just because of the size of that account. Probably the watering would be
very minor in comparison.
' Gary Warren: They have such a large base that they're working from.
Don Ashworth: Tom, did I make a mis-statement?
' Tom Chaffee: I wanted to point out that in the process of our study, and I did
point out that there were 92 unique connections here if you will here in the
City that sprinkler meters, homeowners associations, etc. and we didn't
' specifically address to the 130% item because the example of a sprinkler meter,
you don't run in it in the winter. So typically then, depending upon the
position that the Council wanted to take, all of their useage for the second and
' 48
I
City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 '
fourth quarter could be considered excessive useage. You look at it purely from I
a conservationist standpoint. Or again going back to using our sophisticated
computers for analyzing, we can come up with a median or a means from which to
derive their 130 basis to work from for the excess useage. 1
Councilman Workman: Well we've got that same bridge to cross for the storm
water utility somewhat don't we? Who to assess, the individual or the
homeowner's association.
Councilman Johnson: We have homeowner's associations that have water meters?
Mayor Chmiel: Sure.
Councilman Johnson: So for their sprinkling it's all. . . 1
Councilman Workman: All the outdoor spigots are homeowner association
controlled and so I would then therefore have no storm water utility problem
would I?
Councilman Johnson: No.
Councilman Workman: But that's the thing.
Councilman Johnson: Yeah, because there there would be. Now Rosemount would
have an average winter useage and if they've got also a watering system that's
on a separate meter, which if they don't they should have, I would say that
their watering would be part of the 30% above their normal flow. The homeowners
association, I have no idea how to handle that because there won't be any flow
in the winter.
Jean Meuwissen: Rosemount would not be. . . '
Councilman Johnson: Yeah, but you would take their industrial use and allow
them 30%c for their sprinklers. So you add them to because they're both at
physically the same location. You could add them together.
Tom Chaffee: You add the consumption together in order to arrive at your 130%
though. ,
Councilman Johnson: Right. You could do that with the homeowner's association
except you have to add everybody's water use together throughout the
neighborhood or somehow or another.
Gary Warren: Well even like in the storm water utility district we're saying
that there's an opportunity for somebody to appeal on a rate. There are some
exceptions that maybe need to be specifically looked at and calculated but the
idea is to get at giving some credit for the fact that you've got a base useage
which everybody needs and then you've got people who can get excessive and I
think that's the policy that we're looking at.
Councilman Johnson: There are a lot of people out there, I don't know how many
in this town, but in various other suburbs that use drinking water to cool their
buildings with. They run it through a chilling system. One time through and
then dump it down the storm sewer. It's something that is wasting our ground
49
I
City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990
' water considerably. I think there's a shopping center right over there that
does a couple million gallons a day for just cooling the shopping center.
Because ground water is so cheap, it encourages that and this is the proper step
and is an example for the whole State to take. The legislature ought to be
looking at something like this in requiring this so that they discourage that
type of abuse of ground water.
' Councilman Workman: Well I would move to authorize the City Attorney to draft a
resolution which incorporates the proposed rate changes.
Councilman Johnson: What kind of public notice should we do on this?
' Mayor Chmiel: That 's one of the things my concern is. Making sure that
everybody is aware as to what we're proposing and having some kind of a public
' notice for this.
Councilman Workman: We're going to need to have something drafted.
Mayor Chmiel: And I'd like to see some comparisons rather than just one or two
or three to look at it from residential as well as commercial and industrial.
' Tom Chaffee: Would you like to see those now?
Mayor Chmiel: No. I'd like to have them ready at that time.
Don Ashworth: So you're saying probably the second meeting in July and we have
a larger notice in the newspaper.
Councilman Johnson: Did I second that yet?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes.
Gary Warren: No.
' Councilman Workman: Did you?
Councilman Johnson: No I didn't.
Jim Chaffee: Gary did.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, there's a motion on the floor with a second.
Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to authorize the City
Attorney to draft a resolution which incorporates the proposed rate changes.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
' CONSIDER PURCHASE OF BUILDING INSPECTION VEHICLE.
Don Ashworth: We did get a very excellent bid from earlier this evening. That
process did save us, I would say $4,000.00 to $5,000.00 over what we originally
looked to. I sincerely believe that we could look to again that same type of
dollar savings if we literally went back out again. That coupled with the fact
that we have both the Escort and the Lynx that are really on their last legs.
50
I
/
City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 1
Jim has gone through kind of an analysis where they're sitting. We've put 2
I : engines in the one vehicle. Harold says that it's looking bad again. Those
vehicles simply weren't designed for that type of useage. The Council in an
earlier work session had stated that staff should not look to replacing or
purchasing a new adminstrative vehicle that's actually included in the 1990
budget so we've withheld that type of bringing that item back. At the same time
we're looking to this next year, we will be coming back at least with the
request with both the Lynx and the Escort and it's my belief that we have the
dollars available. If you take advantage of those now, potentially using one of
those 2 vehicles to help in terms of the Sharmin, Jerry, Todd type of vehicle.
Put an inspection vehicle in there that properly belongs in there and not have
to look to that financial load for 1991. We probably have hit 3 or 4 different
bases including a good cost savings in that process. So the short and the long
of it is, staff is recommending that the dollars that were originally allocated
for the adminstrative sedan vehicle be reallocated to replace an inspection
vehicle and that staff be authorized to take quotations for that replacement.
You could reject those in 2 weeks or 4 weeks.
Councilman Workman: Could I make a quick ,perhaps pertinent comment? Knowing
how adamant Councilwoman Dimler is in regards to vehicles, etc. , should we maybe
delay this until the next meeting? Can we wait that long?
Mayor Chmiel: I think what we can do is go out for the bids as Don has
indicated and if there's any strong desires at that time, then it can be
addressed. She should be back by then. I
Don Ashworth: We will not put it on the agenda unless Councilwoman Dimler is
present. '
Councilman Workman: For approval of bids?
Don Ashworth: For approval of bids. I
Councilman Workman: I'd just like her to have a shot at this.
Mayor Chmiel: She has a thing with vehicles. Can I get a. . .
Councilman Johnson: I move approval. 1
Councilman Workman: Second.
Councilman Johnson moved, Councilman Workman seconded that the dollars that were
originally allocated for the adminstrative sedan vehicle be reallocated to
replace an inspection vehicle and that staff be authorized to take quotations
for that replacement. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. '
Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to adjourn the meeting.
All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 10:27
p.m. .
Submitted by Con Ashworth
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
51 1
I
r
ti;
I Planning Commission Meeting
June 20 , 1990 - Page IINEtITE 'WO
IILAND USE PLAN DISCUSSION - AREA LOCATED SOUTH OF HWY. 5 .
IIPublic Present :
Name Address
1 Curt & Jean Bruning 2381 Timberwood Drive
Gerry & Karla Alvey 1831 Audubon Road
Don White 8850 Audubon Road
I Bruce Buxton Mills Properties Inc .
Thomas W . Green Mills Properties Inc .
Bev VanderVorste 8141 Maplewood
I Mark Foster 8020 Acorn Lane
Deb Herslie 2040 Oakwood Ridge
Elizabeth Larson 81.41 Pinewood Circle
Gene & Therese Quinn 532 Lyman Blvd .
I Lois Degler 1630 Lyman Blvd .
Wilmer Molnau 8541 Audubon Road
Michael Neville 5751 Thomas Circle , Minneapolis , MN 55410
I Doug & Carolyn Barinsky 8731 Audubon
M .J . Cochrane 1751 Sunridge Court
Brad Foley 2061 Timberwood Drive
i Charles & Debra Olson 1581 Heron Drive
David Maenke 2041 Timberwood Drive
C . John Uban 101 E . Minnehaha Pkwy , Minneapolis , MN
Jim Sulerud 730 Vogelsberg Trail
I Brian Klingelhutz
Patrick Hoffman 2031 Timberwood Drive
2214 East 117th Street , Burnsville , MN
David J . Koulsky 1311 Lake Susan Hills Drive
I Mrs . Harrington P .O . Box 650 , Chanhassen
Bill Goers 1601 Lyman Blvd .
Jim Dolejsi 9260 Kiowa Trail
Jack & Melanie Gorczyce 1850 Lake Lucy Road
I Richard Vogel 105 Pioneer Trail
Jay Dolejsi 12620 Co . Rd . 30 , Waconia , MN
Don Patton 7600 Parklawn , Edina , MN 55435
I Jim Lamson
Jim Curry 7600 Parklawn , Edina , MN 55435
4817 Upper Terrace , Edina , MN 55435
Greg Sorenson 8121 Maplewood Terrace
Ronald & Carol Entinger 8851 Audubon Road
IAndrew Richardson 8120 Pinewood Circle
Dan Obermeyer 1540 Heron Drive
Tim Bloudek 1171 Homestead Lane
I Peter Olin Minnesota Landscape Arboretum
Sam & Nancy Mancino 6620 Galpin Blvd .
Russ & Elaine Chance Timberwood Property Owners
III Wm . J . Ward 4510 Bruce , Minneapolis , MN
Al Klingelhutz 8600 Great Plains Blvd .
Richard Donnay 8109 Dakota Lane
Bruce N . S 8481 Swan Court
I Scott D . Ayre 8471 Swan Court
Curt Santfer 8460 Swan Court
Todd Paguiel 2320 Timberwood Drive
I
1
1
1
11
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
II
II Planning Commission Meeting
June 20 , 1990 - Page 15
v
David Wolter 1491 Heron Drive
Craig Harrington 8140 Maplewood Terrace
I Bill & lana Miller
Chris Polster 8121 Pinewood Circle
8020 Hidden Court
Fred W . Amrhein 9350 Kiowa Terrace
Jim & Joan Brewer 9366 Kiowa Terrace
I David McCollum 2050 Renaissance Court
Stew Rud 2030 Renaissance Court
`, Conrad: The next item on the agenda and the reason you 're all here at 8:30
tonight and I thank you for attending , is to informally discuss a land use
I plan which the Planning Commission has been working on for maybe a year and
a half . Maybe 2 years . I don't know, how long but tonight what we 'd like
to do is , and some of you have been with us before , is to informally get
your comments . We 're going to have our Planning staff , Paul Krauss
II specifically introduce the direction for you . Tonight is primarily a time
where we 're looking for comments . It 's not a public hearing . There will
be a time when there is a public hearing but tonight is just an informal
I meeting where we , as a Planning Commission get a chance to show you what 's
happening and get some feedback from you . But specifically we 're looking
at tonight the development that 's occuring south of TH 5 . Two weeks ago or
I a month ago , 2 weeks ago we had a meeting where we were talking about what
we were doing north of TH 5 . Tonight primarily south of TH 5 . We 're
interested in showing you what we think Chanhassen 's going to look like 10
years from now . I guess if you do have comments , and like I say it 's not a
I public hearing but we want your comments . If you do have those comments ,
we want to limit you tonight to a maximum of 5 minutes discussion . We 'd
like to hear different points of view so before I call on somebody a second
I time , I want to hear all the other perspectives before we go back to that
person a second time . I think if you make a comment , just for our
information and I think for the record we 'd like to know your name and your
address . With that aside and we hopefully will get us out of here by at
I
the latest 10:30 tonight . As I said before , this is not a public hearing .
There will be a time when we formally present our recommendations to the
community for their input . There will be a time and it will be probably in
I a month , month and a half after we digest what we 've heard from the various
community groups . Tonight again is a time just to share with us your
thoughts and then we 're going to take those thoughts and maybe combine them
I with what we think are good planning guidelines and bring back a plan that
we think works for the entire community of Chanhassen for the next 10
years . With that aside Paul , would you introduce the Planning process for
the people that are here .
IPaul Krauss gave a description of what the Comprehensive Planning process
was and Mark Koegler presented an overview of the plan south of Highway 5 .
Conrad: Before I open it up for comments , maybe I 'll give you a brief
perspective of my own . One , we have to do this . We 're required to do
I this . Two , it makes a whole lot of sense . I think from some of your
standpoints , one of the most important things is knowing what is going to
be next to you or knowing what you 're moving in next to . I think by
putting some boundaries out there for 10 years , we give future residents a
I
Planning Commission Meeting
June 20 , 1990 - Page 16
real good opportunity to know what direction Chanhassen is going . Other
item I 'd like to talk about , this is a plan but it 's not zoned at this
point in time . It says this is how we believe we 're going to develop and
where we 're going to put different kind of developments but that doesn 't
mean that in all cases the zoning will follow that . This is our guide . We
want to know where we 're going yet the zoning will follow when there are
services available and we have been known to change that zoning . So I
guess the bottom line is , this is not a cast in. concrete . It 's certainly IL
not cast in concrete yet because we haven 't gone through a public hearing
process . We also haven 't taken it to City Council and that 's another 2 or
3 months away . The point for the meeting tonight is to get some of your
input . To share with you in person some of the directions that we 're going
and before I open it up , about 2 years ago , maybe a year and a half ago
when some of us were here on the Planning Commission , we started laying
this out with our consultant , Mark Koegler , who I think is-a real fine
consultant and our planning staff and there aren 't any perfect answers and
we 're lay people up here . We are not planners by any means but what we try
to do is lay down some guidelines to say how does Chanhassen grow . Some of
us moved out here when it was farm and we liked it that way . That 's why I
move) here 17 years ago . I enjoyed the rural nature . But reality is , it 's'
not going to stay that way . So reality really is that we do a good job of
planning . When we laid down this plan and we started the process , I think
there were some things that were real important , at least to me and maybe
to some other Planning Commissioners . It doesn 't say it 's important to
you . It doesn 't say it 's important to the City Council but they seemed ,
from some experience up here , they seemed that the community felt
comfortable with some of these directions and let me tell you what I think I
• some of them were . They were to focus development , commercial development
in the downtown area so it 's not scattered around . It 's focused . It 's in
one spot so we have a strong central business district . That seemed real
clear . It also , for lack of vision or for any other negative reason we
felt past growth patterns were appropriate . Residents weren 't calling and
saying we don 't like how we 're growing . They may have been calling and
saying we don 't like TH 5 and we may not like the neighbor that just moved I
in next door but we didn 't ,hear a whole lot about the growth patterns and
we let that dictate land use in the future . From past experience it was
real clear that the natural features that a lot of us moved out here for
were worth protecting . In the final analysis , it 's those natural features
that we talk about and it 's those natural features that make Chanhassen
different . I think a lot of attention has been given through ordinances
and through Planning to preserve those natural features . There were some
other things that I felt important about and obviously some other people
will say you 're not doing it enough but being around a while , we wanted to Ill
the residents that lived here as much as we could and you can
obviously take that statement to task and say , huh . You 're not protecting
any based on what I see but again , I think in most cases that was a
guideline . An economically sound community was also reasonable . One where'
business development helped keep our taxes in line with what our
expectations were . It wasn 't encouraging industrial commercial growth . It
wasn 't discouraging it except in terms of requiring a quality growth , we II
that that industrial component did a lot of things for Chanhassen .
Taxes was one . Jobs was another . I think related was a continued quality
industrial growth and many of us are not real wild about industrial . Some
Planning Commission Meeting
June 20 , 1990 - Page 17
of us are but many of us aren 't . I think we felt real comfortable with the
quality of our business parks and felt that they are far better , at least
in our minds , were far better than what we had seen in maybe adjoining
neighbors and -communities . We felt that was worth continuing . We weren 't
looking for industrial that was heavy . We might call it light industrial .
I like the word quality . We also , and the planners are sitting here and
saying well there 's so many other issues that we focused on and obviously a
lot of the issues are to plan where you can service the growth and we tried
to do that . So those were some of the guidelines and I think those are
1 some of the guidelines we used when we did this . At least I 'm trying to
carry those out . I think with that as a little bit of a background , I 'll
reintroduce what I 'd like to do right now and that 's open it up to
' discussion . A lot of you have been here before . Some of you have been
here before . I want to keep comments, to under 5 minutes . As I said , I
want to be out of here by 10: 30 tonight . I want to listen to people , as
many different people as possible with as many different opinions as
possible . Then we 'll open it up for people to go back if they have
additional comments . If you do have comments , I would appreciate your name
and address for the record .
Mark Foster : Mr . Chairman , my name is Mark Foster . I live at 8020 Acorn
Lane in Timberwood Estates and I have a petition here that I 'd like to
present to the Commission . It 's dated April 1 , 1990 and it is signed by 82
residents around TH 5/Galpin Road that are directly affected by the plan .
I 'd like to read it quickly if I may . It says , Chanhassen is growing . '
Residential development exceeds projected expectations . Family units come
' here to live in the houses , not the factories . More housing will become
available as the MUSA line shifts west and south . We the undersigned raise
these objections to industrial , commercial or high density zoning change
for lands on either side of TH 5 from Audubon to TH 41 and for land north
of the railroad tracks . Our position number one is Chanhassen has spent
hundreds of thousands to perhaps millions of dollars on the downtown area
to revitalize it . Allowing any commercial zoning past the downtown area
will only draw people away from downtown Chanhassen . Any commercial
enterprises that would compete with existing small town businesses would
only hasten their death . And we also need to be courteous of the
surrounding towns , Victoria , Shorewood , Chaska , Excelsior , Waconia . They
have struggling businesses as well . Point number 2 , stringing the length
of TH 5 with factories , offices , industrial and high density living units
will produce an eyesore . Examples are available by driving through Savage ,
Columbia Heights , Shakopee to name a few . Poured concrete or concrete
block buildings with flat roofs containing condensers , pipes and tar and
visually unaesthetic . Not to mention large parking with countless cars ,
glaring lights at night . The rear of the buildings often contain trash
containers , machineries , parts storage bins , all of which is typically
visible eyesore to the surrounding neighbors . Number 3 , with commercial
and/or industrial come noise and odor , pollution . Presently the fans of
Qual-Tek in Chaska are heard at night in houses in Timberwood . Odors also
permeate the air from nearby industrial uses and are an offense to the
residents all the way up to the north side of TH 5 . Four , traffic
congestion will increase- when we are trying to find ways of reducing truck
and car traffic along an already congested road . It makes no sense to
aggravate the problem . More industrial or office uses will only draw more
11
Planning Commission Meeting
June 20 , 1990 - Page 18
traffic . 5 is that it is a significant departure from the Comprehensive 11
Plan which the speculators are proposing . This or similar changes would be
contrary to the expectations of homeowners and adjacent landowners when
they made a decision to purchase and locate in this area . There would be a 1
negative impact on permanent owners that live in Chanhassen . 6 , the
contribution to the tax base is only a future item as evidenced by the
HRA 's redevelopment TIF districts and with economical development
districts . How many more of these EED districts would be created with new
industrial leaving us with only 8 years of no present tax relief? What
happens 8 or 15 years from now? Do we wind up having to renegotiate with
these businesses to keep them from moving out? Is tax benefit only a
distant future issue again? Point 7 , there would be a future land
available along the proposed TH 212 near CR 17 interchange . Also , future
land could be zoned along present 169 '212 as the traffic will decrease when
the freeway is built . Does all industry need to develop in the next 10
years? If we continue our rapid residential growth in the next 10 years ,
is it not probable the MUSA line would head south? And our final point is , "
the vacant farmland in the areas in question would make ideal residential
sites with many possibilities for walkout lots . There are a few creeks .
Some trees although these are not necessary for marketing residential
subdivision . This is evidenced by numerous housing developments with no
outstanding amenities . One such is Saddlebrook sandwiched between two
major traffic arteries in Chanhassen . We the undersigned raise the above '
major objections to zoning the land for anything other than low density
residential and some limited medium density residential and it is signed by
84 residents . I 'd like to present this to you . Thank you .
Conrad: Sure . I 'd like to stay on the Timberwood issue or the concerns
from that neighborhood if I could so instead of different groups talking , I
sure would like to stay on Timberwood . So yes . I
Mary Harrington: I have a procedural question . In light of the fact that
there are 84 people who have uniformily gotten together to state a
position , they don 't all want to spend 84 times 5 minutes saying something ,"
maybe we could be so gracious as to allow a spokesperson to present an
alternate plan with maps and some positions and some points for
consideration being we allowed on March 14th an hour and 20 minutes of
someone else to present for some other landowners and we have waited for a
long time to be able to present some information which we think might be
helpful for you folks . Not only , it doesn 't just narrowly consider
Timberwood. It also considers Sunrise Ridge and West Lake Susan Hills -
development down there . It considers those neighborhoods as well and
instead of 84 people getting up , can we shorten your life by saving 84
breathes and shortening this to about 15 minutes? I 've got maps and some II
diagrams and some explanations of some logic behind that and I would ask
for your courtesey to be able to spend 15 minutes to be able to do that and
save 84 people standing up saying the same thing .
Conrad: Well we really don 't want 84 standing up and I preface . . .
Mary Harrington: Okay , so could we have a representative so that we can I
save the breath of 84 times 5 minutes?
Planning Commission Meeting
June 20 , 1990 - Page 19
Conrad: Well there are multi points that we want to hear tonight from
different communities .
' Mary Harrington: And you will find some multi points will be covered . The
schools will be covered . Industrial . Sunrise Ridge will be covered . Chan
Estates . Lake Susan West will be covered . Numerous points will be covered
which affects a number of residential people and we would ask for your
courtesy to be able to allow us for a representative of the 15 minutes .
Resident : Mr . Chairman , we also have different neighborhoods here tonight
and we don 't really think that this lady represents our neighborhood .
• Mary Harrington: We do not propose to totally represent your neighborhood .
Conrad: See the point of this meetinb was to get a variety of things and I
reall/ don 't want to dominate it with Timberwood tonight .
Mary Harrington: I agree with that fully . We are trying to dominate with
Timberwood . We are trying to look at Chanhassen as an overall because it
covers areas in the towns beyond Chanhassen . Timberwood is not just
concerned about Timberwood . Timberwood 's concerned about Chanhassen as a
whole and the quality of life of other residents besides us .
Mike Cochrane : I live on Sunridge Court and the factories and commercial
that you 're proposing is in my front yard . Literally . I can throw a
football and hit where you want to build the buildings . I thought maybe
that would be of some concern .
Conrad: If I give the floor to this presentation , I don 't believe we 're
going to have time for any other Timberwood comments so are you
11 representing the entire Timberwood organization tonight and there will be
no more comments after?
Resident : Mr . Chairman , I 'm from Timberwood and she 's not representing
everybody .
Mary Harrington: I don 't think that would be valid to say that we 'd be
representing everybody but I don 't think that 's fair to say that 82 people
who we represent can 't have sufficient time . . .
Resident: Why don 't you let her represent 3 people . That 's 15 minutes . I
think that 's fair . She can represent me . If somebody else wants to be
represented by Mary as far as the material that we have , why don 't you just
stand up right now .
Mary Harrington: Most of the people that are involved with representation
stayed home simply because they didn 't think it was necessary to send us
11 all to say the same thing . . .
Conrad: I think what we 're going to do then is put you towards the end of
the meeting .
Mary Harrington: This may solve a lot of people 's problems though .
Planning Commission Meeting
June 20 , 1990 - Page 20
Conrad: And it really may not . Let 's move off of Timberwood .
Mike Cochrane: What about me? I 'm the guy , this is where you want to
build your buildings in my front lawn . Right here . That 's where I sit.
every night with my wife . I just thought if you haven 't been out there to
see that , maybe you should and I invite you out for a glass of lemonade or
something . Okay? t�
Conrad: And your name sir?
Mike Cochrane: Mike Cochrane at 1751 Sunridge Court.. We also have a bunch'.
of guys here today and we 'll probably be having a formal statement later
with signatures of the homeowners in that entire area also . But I guess
I 'd like to point out something that maybe is so obvious that people are
overlooking it because they 're looking at all these issues and so forth and
so on . If you put commercial/industrial buildings on the top of a hill ,
what you 're going to have is commercial/industrial buildings that you can II
see for miles around and it 's going to be a sore thumb that sticks out . If
you ever go out there and for instance stand on the rural area there or in
my driveway , you 'll note that you 're higher than anything else around . Andll
if you 're higher than anything else around , what 's going to happen is
everybody 's going to see the building or buildings that are put there .
That to me doesn 't make sense . If you want to maintain the integrity of
Chanhassen and it 's natural beauty . As you all know , industrial and
commercial things aren 't exactly beautiful things to behold . The other
thing that I 'd like to note is that the zoning to me , I mean I think it 's
fine that we have industrial and commercial and I think we have to have it I
and I realize you people want a good tax base and will help bring it . But
what I don 't understand is putting an industrial/commercial zone boom ,
right in somebody 's or neighborhood 's front yard literally where this is no ll
buffer zone . I mean it 's , I can throw a football there and I 'm not in
shape . I mean you can look you know . That doesn 't make sense and if I look
at other neighborhoods in other communities and I have been a lot lately , 11
there 's one thing I 've noticed in communities that look very well planned
and are attractive is that they always have large spaces . Whether you call
them buffet zones or vacant spaces , there 's always something there . But
here , there is nothing . I mean zero and it just doesn 't make sense to me . '
Obviously I live there but I don 't think it makes sense to anybody . So I
was very concerned . Quite frankly I came out here just like you said to
enjoy the rural setting and in fact I was so concerned about that that
when I purchased the land , I had a contract with the person I bought it
from which says there will be no commercial or industrial buildings or
medium or high density and I would like to make that a part of public
record . I have enclosed here for your review Ladd and whoever else wants II
to see the revisions of this purchase agreement . It says a valid and
binding agreement drawn up by Faegre and Benson , by attorneys and I really
don 't want to use that type of thing but I would like it known that that I
does exist and there 's one other thing I would like it known is that I
think there is a solution to this problem . I mean you have people here and
they don 't want the industrial/commercial as I understand it in the areas .
Mary Harrington: Or yours .
I
Planning Commission Meeting -
IJune 20 , 1990 - Page 21
•
lMike Cochrane: Okay , that 's great . And I know at least 15 of my neighbors
don 't want it either so that leaves me with who the heck does want it one .
And two , is that there should be a solution where Chanhassen wins and
nobody loses . I know that I am certainly willing to help anyway I can to
accomplish that . Enough said .
Conrad: Thanks for your comments Mike . Are there other people?
t „ Non-Timberwood .
Resident: Would you just show on the map where they 're talking about?
Conrad: Mike , would you show on the map? Some people are wondering where
you live .
Mike Cochrane: Oh , you can 't see it from back there but I live on Sunridge
Court . I live right there . They want to put the industrial/commercial
1 right here . It 's within , I mean I don 't know how far . Maybe measure it .
It 's so close , as you can see in those pictures , it 's . . .
(Kraus: The existing industrial zoning comes up to the railroad tracks ,
down here and then goes back up to McGlynn 's .
Don White: I 'm Don White . I live at 8850 Audubon Road . I 'm Mike 's
1 neighbor to the south . I 'd like to expand a little bit on another
dimension of what Mike 's talking about . I think there 's a lot of concern
by pco le that abut the proposed development area but I 'd like to speak
from a perspective of a person who 's maybe one step back . I currently can
view from my house out to the west and although I 'm considerable distance
from the Chaska development Pies , Incorporated , there 's a considerable
amount of light pollution that comes onto my property and I can certainly
envision looking up the hill a much shorter distance where these buildings
that are going to be sticking up above any surrounding structures that now
exist will provide at least potentially the same sort of problem . I agree
with Mike and I agree I think with some of the others that there are ,
solutions to this and I think the planning process has to take those into
account . Look at some alternatives . Certainly there 's a need for
industrial/commercial development but I see nothing wrong with development
consistent with what seems to be working in other places along the major
arterial highways such as TH 5 . In places where it already exists and
perhaps expanding a little bit but to put it into an area that almost is
surrounded by residential development presently I think creates some
additional problems that could well be avoided . Thank you .
Gerry Alvey: Good evening . My name is Gerry Alvey . I live at 1831
Sunridge Court . I have pretty much the same concerns as peopl6 that you 've
already heard . I 'd like to show you on the map where I live . Right here .
Bluff Creek runs right through the bottom portion of my, lot here and then
up into this area . I have a quick picture that I would like to present to
the members of the Planning Commission . It 's a shame that everybody can 't
see this . This is the Bluff Creek looking just east . What you 're looking
at is this area here . If you notice . . .
Emmings: From where?
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting
t . June 20 , 1990 - Page 24
cwnership be converted into actual development and we think that 's an
important element to consider . So we support that . We also would like to
encourage you to quicken the pace for sewer to that area so that area can
develop . TH 5 will be improved shortly . TH 41 is scheduled for a variety
of improvements . The property has direct access to both highways and it
does not depend upon other circulation systems to serve it so I think it 's
really a piece of property well located that is adjacent to other (, i
industrial areas . Has natural buffers from other areas and is a good place ,
for this type of development . Thank you .
Resident : Excuse me , who is the owner of this property?
Jcohn Uban : It 's an investment group called Gateway Investment .
Resident : And which property is this?
: ohn Uban: It is 180 acres . I 'll point them out .
Conrad: Okay , thanks John . •
Peter Olin: My name is Peter Olin . I 'm director at the Arboretum . I did I
speak at the last meeting and I think you know what my concerns were
sine ' I read about them in the paper . I don 't like to disagree with
colleagues and especially old friends but I take great exception to what [
'ohn Uban just said . I would like to put up the regional map but I 'm not
quite sure what he means by a commercial development . I understand it 's a
shopping center but I would like , could I put up another map? You have
already a commercial center in downtown here and we have commercial centers,
here and you have commercial centers over here and you have a commercial
center in Victoria and you have one in Chaska and there really is no need
for further commercial centers . Further , I think if you do some studying a'
little bit further , the answer , the panacea for increasing your income from
taxes is not solved by having either commercial or industrial . After all ,
as someone already pointed out , it will be many years before these
industries are paying their full tax load and there are a lot of services
associated . They 're not schools but they 're all the other services and
there 's a heavy load on those . Especially with commercial and that 's your
utilities , water and sewer and fire and police and so on and those are the
types of things , and highway construction and highway maintenance and those
are the things that add up and really cost in a town so someone pointed out
in the last meeting , they lived in a town which is even more residential l
than this and they were paying lower taxes . That 's totally believeable .
Especially if you have large lot development . I would like one question
which I wasn 't answered last time . I would like to know if the topography I
and the soils and the drainageways were considered in this plan and how
they were since the one little commercial spot just conveniently north of
this map on TH 5 is slated for a 35 foot or more , just an estimate ,
depression . It doesn 't seem like a totally logical place for . . .
Conrad: Paul , do you want to respond? �1
Krauss: Well Mr . Chairman , one of the first things we did is to try to map
the locations of wetlands , drainage basins , significant tree stands , poor
U
Planning Commission Meeting
IIJune 20 , 1990 - Page 25 .
scils and any other information that we had . The particular neighborhood
commercial site in question is surrounded by a stand of trees that falls
off into a wetland . It was assumed that if commercial development were to
occu- , it would occur in the flat upland side of that adjacent to the
intersection . The balance of the area was presumed to be off limits to
development . It was a very fundamental concern that factored into the plan
from the outset .
Peter Olin: Just looking around the town it 's quite variable landscape and
it seems to me that in terms of just topography , that there are some
creative solutions and they 're out there already having to do with PUD
developments and agricultural land , preserves and so on and they 've been
around the country for years and I think they haven 't really been
' ron.=idered in this plan . I think it looks to me , and I don 't want to make
te: many judgements because I have not studied it but it looks to me that
ft 's essentially a rezoning effort and not a planning effort .
Conrad: Just a quick comment on one of the things you said and I think it
ray, be a challenge to somebody who 's here that knows more than we do but
`auially what we 've been told and the data that we 've gotten says that
residential that comes to town doesn 't pay for it 's services , and ypu
cen challenge that and we 'd welcome that and we 've asked for information
City Adminstration and we 've got information . Basically residential
:units cost more than we take in in revenue and therefore that 's why you 're
seeing a plan up here that has commercial in it and industrial in it td
balance the tax load . And the other thing- that was important I think in
t. -- last city election , and we 're not really a political body here . The
political body are those that you elect to City Councils and they 're the
ones that have to make the final decision but a lot of their decision
me '.ing is based on keeping the tax burden sensitive to what property
owners , and all 10 ,000 of our residents are willing to pay . So you 're
saying on one hand it costs , you 're saying that the services for
residential don 't cost . . .
Peter Olin: Oh not . As much .
Conrad: Well you didn 't say that . You 're saying that they 're a money
maker when residential comes in and what we know , the facts are is that
when residential comes in , there are more costs in terms of education ,
streets , utilities , than what that taxpayer pays into the community and
therefore we 're trying to develop a -fair tax base out there . Not an
aggresive , not one going out saying we want humongous industrial
development . As I said before we were trying to say , based on past
' indication , here 's what our growth has been and it 's fair to say that we
might have that continued growth and we didn 't change that growth pattern .
We didn 't say that we wanted to increase industrial/commercial by 20% over
what it had been . We didn 't have that goal . We said let 's find space that
accommodates the past trends because we hadn 't heard any comments from
residents and again the 10 ,000 that are here now or whatever the number is ,
their comments were more keep the tax base fair . We don 't want to pay any
I more taxes . That 's what we heard and I wanted to respond a little bit to
your comments Peter .
II
^lanning Commission Meeting
June 20 , 1990 - Page 26 II
•
Peter Olin: If I could respond back just briefly . Certainly it costs I
money to service residential units and I 'm not trying to say it doesn 't and
it can be very expensive . It depends on the kind of development that you II
put in but , and that 's primarily the big cost is going to be schools but in II
the commercial and industrial development , the reason that that 's shown as
being so great in returning tax funds is based on their paying their full
way and that 's way down the road . Right now there 's lots of money going t ,
out and there 's all kinds of things happening between now and 10 years from
now or whenever they get to their full tax load . Someone pointed out , by
that time they 've amoritized everything and they can sell out and leave if II
they don 't like the high rates of taxes which are going to be paying . -
That 's happAned elsewhere and that's what 's not taken into account with
come of those considerations . I think when you do , there 's a fair amount
o leadwR' in there for saying well , maybe it isn 't quite a rosy as it
look: .
:,:a/n.,.: Gongard: I 'm Wayne Bongard and I happen to live on 8831 Audubon Road I
G I support the other people that were talking . Relative to this
oentlerr,an , I 'm an industrialist . I pay taxes to the tune of , in the
Ch ;:haeaen area , about $360 ,000 .00 a year . My residence I pay $13 ,120 .00 '
and I 'm wondering what you guys are contributing up there .
''titer Olin: The' Arboretum?
;.,Jayne Bongard: Yeah . What are you contributing to the tax roll?
P_ter Olin : We 're not . We 're a public entity . I
: ayne 2c.r,gard: Okay , then you should not be up here talking about what my
contribution might be . Thank you . I
Craig Harrington: I 'd just like to ask a couple of questions . I 've been
here many times before and I think you all know my views .
II
Conrad: Why don 't you just give us your name .
Craig Harrington: It 's Craig Harrington , 8240 Maplewood Terrace ,
II
Timberwood . The question I have is , and it kind of just popped into my
mind as I was thinking about Cochrane 's property being the highest point in
the City . Where are we going to put the water tower for all this MUSA line ll
that 's going to be coming out? Have we got some sort of proposals where
this is going to go? Or how many it 's going to take , if any or is there an
existing water tower that we just put in here several years back , adequate?
Conrad: What we 're reviewing tonight , as Mark said , is one section of the '
Comprehensive Plan . One out of 10 so if we put this on there and say
that 's how we 're going to develop , we have to support it . And you support II
C it with schools and utilities and roads and parks and all those other nice
things . So part of our sections are done . Part of the sections we 're
workinj on in terms of if that is what it 's going to be , we have to know
how to support it and if we can 't , then it doesn 't happen .
II
•
Planning Commission Meeting
rune 20 , 1990 - 'Page 27
Craig Harrington: I mean do we have it on some sort of , we 're doing a
study right now as far as how many water towers we may need to support thi:
amount of area?
Warren: Relative to the utility aspect of the Comp Plan , that is being
worked on . As far as water towers are concerned , I guess the location of
them is quite flexible I guess . We just added , as you recognized here , a
new 3 1/2 million gallon reservoir at CR 17 and Lake Lucy Road . That is
the highest point in town topographically . But that location of the water
tower is not significant . It can be basically put anyplace . It 's just the
structure that supports it will have to be higher or lower depending on the
topography . We 're currently sinking a new well right now near Lotus Lake
and the City has plans for adding another well and these things are based
or the City 's current consumption records for water useage and we as a part
of the comprehensive plan will be making forecasts as far as when the final
area is established . What the potential consumption uses will be and we
' F-aa trunk system already that we intend to implement at some point in
tie to service those areas so that all fits together .
11 Craig Harrington: Some of the things , you know along that same line , is
like do we know at this point where we 're going to be putting lighted
int- sections as far as with semifore signal lights . Let 's saying if
tF:ey 're an intersection , are we going to have one at the intersection of
Audubon or the intersection of CR 117? Of course we have one at TH 41
and TH 5 . I 'm also wondering because of the industrial use , are we going
to also have signal lights then maybe on Lyman coming down there along 18
an well because of the industrial use maybe coming off of there going
to ,ar:as CR 117 to the south . Things like that . Are any of these things at
t?- v _ point proposed?
' Co,-ara ': I don 't think they 're really in concrete at this point in time . I
thin!, we know where the roads are . We know where the , and if there are
we know what kind of traffic they 're going to contain . Based on
that traffic pattern , we have a pretty good idea of what it requires in
terms of lighting , semifores , that type and it also depends on the
jurisdiction under which that road comes . Whether it 's State , County ,
community because those all come from what we 're looking at right here .
Craig Harrington: To a certain extent we end up dealing with a moving
target for some of us , and I know some of these things as they get approved
change Ladd and we talked about that before but the question I have is ,
some of these people may have different views . May speak more adamantly or
strongly towards some view if we knew , had more of our cards on the table
perhaps as far as what you foresee . Like the area of the water tower ,
somebody 's going to have a water tower put on their site . That may have a
significant impact for them . If somebody 's going to be fronting right here
a signaled area , they may not like that kind of thing and the resulting
traffic and the stop go type situation and perhaps what 's go in with it
s o . . .
' Conrad: I don 't know . Our cards are on the table when you see this . I
think this is where we start and yeah , there are going to be some other
negatives that people may not like but that 's where we 've got to start .
1
7'fanning Commission Meeting
Jana 20 , 1990 - Page 28
That 's why we 're talking here tonight .
Craig Harrington: That 's all I had . I just kind of wanted to find out
what we were facing in that area . Thanks .
Carolyn Barinsky : Good evening . I 'm Carolyn Barinsky . My address is 87;1 '
Audubon and I will point it out to you on the map in just a minute
because I have a few other places I want to point out on the map also . The
first thing I would like to read from page 4 of your goals and policies of
the Comprehensive Plan because I feel I have something to point out that
yet has not been brought up in this meeting . The rural service area shall
be preserved as agricultural zone or used to support very low density
development . It is the City 's policy to ensure that this area is not
prematurely developed . The City will ,discourage the expansion or
construction of commercial and industrial facilities in this area .
C -. -L, c
,_ u;,��Q.�ser, will encourage the preservation and adaptive reuse of structures
o` is oric anc.' architectural significance . On Audubon Road there are 4
Chaska !rick farm houses which are of historical significance to the City
of Chanhassen . I will point you out where my house is which is one of them
and the 3 other ones . I am right here at 8731 Audubon . Just north of me
is Wilmer Molnau 's property . Across the road from me and what is being
proposed industrial is Ron Gram 's property and down south is Michel 's
p ty which is also a Chaska brick farm house . I
Conrad: Do you live in the old Ryan household?
Carolyn Barinsky: Yes . It was originally built by Beukowsky 's in 1885 . III had considerable contact with Minnesota Historical Society because my
h,ouc_e has been proposed for historical register . I have with me and I
woJld like to give each of you a copy of a letter from the Historical
Society which I would like to read tonight . The letter is addressed to thell
Mayor Chmiel . The State Historical Preservation Office has been contacted
Li a resident of Chanhassen and asked to review the eligibility of her
Chaska brick house for nomination to the National Register of Historic
places . The property is one of 4 Chaska brick houses located on Audubon
Road in Chanhassen . As you are aware , the early settlement and
agricultural history of Carver County and the Chanhassen area is highly
evident in the farmsteads and brick houses which give Carver County a sense
of place which is like no other in Minnesota . The Historic manufacture and
use of Chaska brick gives Carver County a historical idenity which sets it II
apart from other metropolitan counties . For these reasons we encourage the
City of Chanhassen and others who are involved in the future planning
efforts for the City to take into consideration the preservations of these
irreplaceable historical properties and landscapes which combine to make
Chanhassen unique among Minnesota communities . If the City of Chanhassen
is interested in establishing a preservation commission which can assist in
the development of a preservation plan , please do not hesitate to contact II
C this cffice for information . If we can be of further assistance , please
contact us . Sincerely , Susan Ross , National Register Historian , State
Historic Office . Preservation Commissions are currently in place in Carver"
and also in Bloomington . Eden Prairie is currently looking at one if you
a-e interested at all in doing that . A few other things that I wanted to
note . Of the 4 Chaska brick houses on Audubon Road , one is proposed
Planning Commission Meeting
June 20 , 1990 - Page 29
' ..:estrial zoning on the west side of Audubon . Zoning the house industrial
world surely mean it 's destruction . The 4 houses are unique in the entire
' county because of their close proximity to each other and the linkage
between the German families which built them in the late 1800 's . The cretin
colored Chask brick cannot be duplicated today . The brick houses have
maintained their cream color because of the lack of pollution in the
Chanhassen area . Zoning the land on the west side of Audubon industrial
would bring more pollution and particularly from trucks and have an adverse
affect on the color of the brick . The historical properties and their
sel; nunding landscape must be given more consideration than the current
p . c; sal does in order to preserve the historical significance for our
town . Thank you .
_ : for your comments . , Any other non-Timberwood issues?
�'C.� c.., Thank you y Y
Scmidt : My name is Roger Schmidt . I live at 8301 Galpin outside n
' ,i r' wc,d . I guess I can show you where it is . I guess to start with , I
p -cLately take a little bit of exception to one of your opening statements
In that ,;ust because you haven 't heard any negatives about the way
?t ,-,}r _.a..co is developing that you should assume that 's the way you want to
cc -;t.inue to develop . I haven 't had anybody come to me as a resident of
: La,-.`-a a.sen for some time and ask you know with any kind of an audit or like
al.ina me how I 'd like to see the City develop so I think I would have
ee-'e,--Ed to have somebody kind of a little bit more proactive in that area
< .d poll their citizens and see what they might decide . 'I for one would
W mind paying extra taxes if we had less industry in the area . I find
rust that just being put inside that MUSA line , whether I 'm hooked up or not
will p,ebably double my taxes . Or actually more than double them . Now I
don 't mind paying the extra taxes but the thing is I don 't like to pay the
c ,.tr,7, taxes and then be surrounded by industry at the same time . In fact
I 'd probably pay more if I figure I could stay halfway rural the way it has
h<=en . I think too that I would specifically , I would wish that you would
give us a little bit more consideration to TH 5 and try to develop that
I more into a variety of development as opposed to industry or probably
office buidings or something like that . It looks like it 's a gateway into
the City . Actually it 's a good gateway with the Arboretum starting it and
I would like to see it kind of continue . As a matter of fact , we have had
people coming in seeing us over a period of several years remarking about
poor development along TH 5 and how it 's getting to look pretty commercial
and actually probably not all that well kept . It 's particularly coming in
from the western area and I guess I can't disagree with them but anyway
that 's my point is I don 't think , I would just as soon not be included
within the MUSA line if I had my choice . I also think that we probably
' should look at TH 5 and look at some other alternatives . How we can break
that up a little bit instead of having it as solid as it is commercial ,
especially going west out of the City .
Emmings : Can I ask a question?
Conrad : Go ahead .
I/ Emrings : I 'd just like to ask the source of your information that your
tares would double if you 're included within the MUSA line .
II
Planning Commission Meeting
ne 20 , 1990 - Page 30
Ro,,er Schmidt : They would more than double . I called over to the County II
courthouse and talked to the Assessor from Chanhassen .
ETmings: And that 's what his name? 1
Roger Schmidt : Is it Carpenter or something .
Ir
Krauss: I spoke with Orlin Schaefer who is the Carver County Tax Assessor
and according to him the MUSA line being relocated has absolutely nothing
to do with property taxes . I
Emmings: We 're getting some real conflicting information 'here , that 's
,, I asked .
II
"rau__.: He offered to attend one of our meetings to convey that .
Schmidt: I called on Monday so that 's up to the minute and this is II
due to , number one . There are two things . First re-evaluation of the
property because of it being within the MUSA line , it automatically creates
a M.gher valuation of the property and that 's a certain percentage
Inereane . And then in addition to that , he says depending upon where the
City moves us from a rural to an urban area , that again would add another
percentage to it . But regardless it 's going to be , well I figured out
a.omev, ere between 110% to 118% .
II
Emin,I,s :: And the person you spoke to was the. person who does the assessing
Chanhassen? II
Poser Schmidt: For Chanhassen , yes .
Ermings: Okay , thank you very much . 1
Conrad: In the future we 're going to bring that Assessor to our meeting . II
Roger Schmidt: I wish he were here tonight . This is the information he 's
given me .
Conrad: We really do have a significant difference of opinion in what you 1
just said versus what we 're hearing so we 'll bring him in and we 'll know .
The other thing is , most of your property that 's right outside the MUSA II line right now is really selling as if it was within the MUSA line . The
developer 's have already assumed that it 's going up in value and it is . I
know that , I 'm fairly familiar with valuations of non-MUSA property right
now and those values are , it 's anticipation. It 's speculation but it 's
probably accurate speculation that is forcing land prices up and therefore II
you valuation but we will bring the Assessor here and there are some
issues that I 'm real concerned with and we 're going to hear him talk to us . 1
Emmings: Will that be at the public hearing?
Conrad: Yeah , I 'd like to bring it to the public hearing . Is that 1
possible Paul?
1
Plan:-ing Commission Meeting
'unc 20 , 1990 - Page 31
K -aus_. Sure .
Conrad: Yeah , he will be here at our public hearing .
11 Roger Schmidt: I might just add one more thing because it 's been earlier
tonight too that there are odors as well as illumination and so forth from
the Chaska industrial park and we happen to be northeast of there so we g - �e
a
the southwest winds that blow and we can probably once or twice a week we
can go out , sit out in our yard and notice that there 's not ordinary ,
' natural odors out there . I think the more of that we have , the more
industry we have , the most that we 're going to have that . In addition to
the trucks . When I moved out there , again I 've been here 17 years and '
:roved out there , that was a nice quiet little road . Now it isn 't but I
' r�.&lize things have to change but the, thing is , I do think we as a city can
ccrtrof that change to some extent . I mean we can at least control the
of the change and I think we should do this . Now I quite frankly I
' .. . ' think that Chanhassen has been known as putting very good controls
o ,er change up to this point . I mean I 've got some , the feelings I get is
people think that developers kind of have Chanhassen in their back
11 p3ck.ot in a lot of respects .
Conrad : You ought to listen to the developers .
Roger Schmidt: I know . There 's two different ways . Now the thing is
that , and I happen to know firsthand , over the years I 've been here , that
- r delopment was here , whether it came in legally or illegally ,
hL - h<- _sen makes essentially no effort to police it . I don 't want to get
nt`, specifics right now but I can out in my own neighborhood and I can
show /ou 2 o- 3 , 4 instances of that . And so I don 't have an awful lot :f
faith in what Chanhassen says about development . Okay , that 's all .
Conrad : Thanks for your comments Roger . Non-Timberwood comments .
'
Scott Ayre : Hi . My name is Scott Ayre and I live at 8471 Swans Court in
the new Lake Susan development and I am a very new and wiser and somewhat
scared resident of Chanhassen from what I 'm seeing here this evening . While
I 'm new to Chanhassen I 've lived in the area for probably close to 25
years . I grew up in Minnetonka off Vine Hill Road and made it into
Chanhassen quite often . When we purchased a house in Lake Susan Hills
' we 're in the court right by the park . Right up in this area right here .
We were told by our real estate agent that that was going to be light
industrial and we all have , this is where I get wiser , ideas of what light
industrial is assuming small office park , that sort of thing . No problem .
' I can live with that . I know there has to be commercial development to
keep taxes down . Shortly after getting in , there 's a proposed project that
I read about in the newspaper . Almost a 500 ,000 square foot project after
office and warehouse and everything else is included almost in my backyard .
It 's a little disconcerning . No buffer zone whatsoever . No trees in there
t`-.at are really going to stop anything . Across to the west of where we
live , across Audubon Road , there 's no trees . It's wide open farm fields
I right now . I have no idea what it 's going to be like for all of us in
there . Right now there 's not many people in here . I see a few of my
neighbors here this evening but the bulk of the building is yet to occur .
11
Planning Commission Meeting
June. 20 , 1990 - Page 32
Vhat is the effect on those people?
Conrad: Thanks Scott .
Dave Koubsky: I live in Lake Susan Hills and it 's enlighting to see some
other guys came because , well they don 't even have sod yet . I 've got sod
but I moved in the area last September and have been reading the Villager
and the Sailor and I 'm starting to become aware of what 's going on I 'm a
little bit better off . I 'm on the eastern side of the park there but
I guess what I 'd like to mention is , it is all flat up in that area and I II
saw the numbers initially where there 's going to be 1 ,700 acres of
redantial and 500 acres of industrial . I 'm wondering where the
residential land is . It 's a lot of purple up there and it doesn 't seem to
'_ k_ any consideration of the peaks and valleys .
ad:
You 're only looking at the bottom half of the plan. There 's a lot "
o� esidertial up north .
Dove !"cubsky : Yeah , I should have moved up north . I guess I 'd just like
t � consider , one suggestion was the school to link the two communities
It seems like we have an island to the north side of the tracks and
an island to the west side of the tracks and the freeway 's a no man 's zone
down there and that 's yet to be battled over but I see two communities and
lct of industrial land without any sense of topography . It is all flat.
out there . There 's no trees . It 's going to take a lot of time . I 'm not
su/ e what the green dots with the buffer zones actually represent . But 'm
co• - .ned and I 'm going to start keeping track , if it 's not too late , of
come of this . Hope you keep some of the comments in mind . It 's not zoned II
yet but I 'm glad to see people around .
CoM a.d : Thanks .
`or Michel : I just have one quick comment .
Conrad: Your name sir?
Tom Michel : Tom Michel and I live on Audubon Road . I 'm looking at the
same thing everyone else is . All the purple . But what I see is in some
areas there is a sort of a buffer or at least something between where
residential is light or medium or whatever . I think the heavier the
density the more you would expect to be in a more urban area . But there
doesn 't seem to be anything projected along , I 'm specifically talking about
the Audubon Road piece now where it just abruptly cuts right off into 11 residential as well as farther up where the Lake Susan Hills , that
development that abuts Audubon up there , unless somebody would dictate that
the road would be a buffer which I certainly couldn 't agree with . I think
there should be something along there to separate that stuff . The only
other comment I 'm thinking of is how do you secede from the City of
Chanhassen .
Jim Delacey: My name is Jim Delacey and I live at 9260 Kiowa Trail . It 's
really , I live on a farm . It 's about a 52 acre farm in the southeast
corner of Lyman Blvd . and TH 101 . I guess I look at the map and I see
Planning Commission Meeting
:Tune 20 , 1990 - Page 33
IIpurple and I see yellow and then the color I see the most of is green .
That 's parkland and we 're talking a lot about taxes or public lands and
we 're talking a lot about taxes and you 're not generating much tax base
there . I guess the other thing I see , I look at my farm and I see half of
it is green and that 's the first notice that I have of half of my farm
being platted as parkland and I guess I kind of wonder how that process
1 goes about . I 've got two neighbors . One of them just build a house 3
years ago that is parkland as well and I 'm just kind of wondering how th;t
gets designated without the landowner being involved at all .
IConrad: In terms of parks Paul .
ra,_,ss : Well possibly , could you point that out?
I :im Delacey : I 'm this piece right het`e .
I rs: On : of the things we 're trying to do here is anticipate future
• for recreational facilities . Bandimere Park is one of the parks
tbet 'a been slatted for expansion at some point in the future and I
, __ _, I 'd like Mark to fill us in . Mark 's been working with the Park Board
II or that .
;,-.)(7 - : " That is a subject of discussion in the Park Chapter of the plan
,TnJ just to rive you a little bit of background . The City within the last roughly year did acquire approximately 33 acres which is about the south
half of that green area there for a future community park . That will be in
II e Bence a youth oriented active park under the current plan . At the time
• Hat that was approved and it was , the funds for that incidentally came
from a referendum that was approved by the voters . At the time that
7. art: eula - site was approved and the final agreements were made , there was
II a desire expressed by the Park Commission , which I believe was reaffirmed
by the City Council , to eventually expand that site to be about 60 acres in
total size . It was felt that 60 acres was a better community park size
II overall to accommodate the facilities than half that amount . The green
thc.t you see on that map is representative of a desire to expand that park
to the north in the future because literally that 's the only way it can go
II of roughly approximately 30 acres in size so it 's not necessarily going to
in the future going to be indicative of the shape you see there precisely
but the public policy that 's been set over the last couple of years clearly
has indicated that the extent is to expand that park roughly the same size
I again further to the north . Now it may weave in and out of some
residential development that may happen there in the future . It probably
in all likelihood will not happen until that property develops just because
II I don 't think the financial resources are going to be there . So that 's
kind of a long winded explanation . One other comment on that addressing
the statement the gentleman just made , there is a lot of green up there and
the recreation section of the Plan does recognize that there is a lot of
II careen up there and focuses the attention of the park planning efforts in
this community over the next 10 years to implementation of park plans
rather than acquisition of new property . The one exception to that was
II acqui'-ing land in the rural area which was rural at the time for this
community park in the Bandimere area .
II
rr lc. ,,nines commission Meeting
t. ne 20 , 19'30 - Page 34
• ..alacey : I guess that referendum that came out was presented to the
people . There was no talk of expanding it . I guess when I read the
referendum and looked at it , it appeared to me as we were going to buy , as
a community buy 33 acres . Put a park on it and develop it . Now to realizc.
that we really need twice that land and that referendum is really going to
cost more than twice what was voted on as a result of expansion .
IL
Conrad: This is a 10 year plan and trying to anticipate needs . It 's not
that way right now . If there are monies needed to purchase the plan ,
that 's a different issue . We 're doing this really without the economics
:saying it can be done . If there 's a referendum needed , that 's what 's going
to "'ave to happen .
Certainly economics here are involved and I guess.. _ ... �Q�.4%y' y gae�.� one
suggestion that I would have is , when we put acreages up for residential
and ' n.:Ju trial , we also put acreages up for park and public lands so people "
car see what 's on tax rolls and what 's off tax rolls and get a better ,
:cause don 't typically see that . Thank you .
Okay , thanks for your comments . ,
• Entinger : Good evening . My name is Ron Entinger and I live at 3331
.'‘1 Road . It 's right about here . I 'd just like to bring up that I 'm all
ccroercia?/industrial electrician so I get into a lot of these plants
throughout the metro area and it seems inconceiveable to me . I can 't eve--
to eiber driving into any of these towns , look the for the highest point of il
• own and that 's where I 'm going to work for the day . I can 't
understand that you would put an industrial park on the highest point of
l,. n:1 so that when anyone coming in from the four different directions , the
fi-st thing they see is the industrial plants . I guess that 's all I 'd like ll
to let you know . I can 't ever remember where I would drive into a town and
go to work on the highest point . It just didn't make sense to me . Thank
David Wolter : Hi . I 'm new to the area . I just moved here from Wisconsin .
I used to live in a rural town in Menomie Falls which is just north of the
City of Milwaukee . I 've just moved to Chanhassen about 4 months ago and I II
just bought a home in Lake Susan West , 1491 Heron Drive and I have some
other neighbors here that are here also with me . What I 'd like to say is I
enjoy looking at the sunsets every night when I first moved in and I look II
up over the hill over there , across Audubon and what do I see . I see
McGlynn 's Bakery . The factory which is part of the industrial park that 's
being built there and I think, that ruins the sight of that sunset that you
see off to , the beautiful sunset to the west and I thought well why isn 't
there some way that they can 't have some kind of a connection between Lake
Susan Hills West and that other yellow area over there and have that all
residential . Then have a buffer zone to the north of that and then to the
Eout of there and that would preserve the historical parts along Audubon
Road which is the Barinsky 's and the other people mentioned along there .
That would be , you 'd be preserving that and you 'd also have some kind of a 11
buffer zone between all the people in those residential areas and I think
that would be , that 's something that we should really look at . I think
it 'd probably make everybody a lot happier . Thank you .
Plar•r;ing Commission Meeting
20 , 1990 - Page 35
'
C,. - rad: Thanks . I think the Audubon Road situation is something that we
wart to look at and we will . I think we 've heard most of the issues and
think they 're real good issues so we 'll take that under consideration . If
' som hndy else lives there and has a different comment , I 'd listen to it
hut I guess we 're getting close to a time when , well we 're getting close to
when I want to end the meeting . We do have to talk about Timberwood ,
1 .4e 've got them here . Are there any other specific issues that we haven 't
talked tonight about? Any other neighborhoods? Anything else?
Therese Quinn: My name is Therese Quinn and my husband and I own 10 acres
o f Lyman Blvd . . We 're right here . Again , we 've been coming to quite a
few cf these because for one thing when we moved out here in 1977 , 212 had
c'i4f.erent alternate route and now it 's come behind us and it 's going to
' take 3 1/2 of our acres . Then lo and behold like 2 years ago , next to us
was zoned as medium density and at the last couple meetings ago we found
oat that we 're now being zoned next to us is commercial . Thank you .
Can I speak to that Ladd? Jim Curry . I 've owned that
ir'_..::; =.ection for about 20 years . Just for a point of clarification here .
rtire area here is 75 acres but 45 of it goes to the highway . I have
erc survey map which I would be glad to give to Mark . I think it would
helo'ul because it does refine it somewhat . There 's actually only 22
acr, :'own here which is called mixed use . This is 7 up here which is now
dark 5-own which would be higher density . I think that the consultants and
thin:. F. t,iff who came up with this recommendation, came up with kind of as-good
idea because it leaves all the options open . As time goes along and' this
finally gets built , and by the way I 'm 62 years old but I really do plan on
' Y` ring that road someday . I mean I 've been waiting for it for 20 years .
really an anxious to drive that . All the way down . I 'm going to drive
it someday . By golly it 's going to be fun . Anyway , I think to keep the
•
options open , what will happen as this goes along . Once this piece gets
close to being done , the staff and the Council will ask the person who 's
doing this area to come up with a master plan for that whole area . For the
' 22 acres . Not 75 but just 22 acres . That 's what 's down here . And as far
as that goes , for this piece here . At that time , there will be public
input . There will be Planning Commission . There will be public hearings .
There will be Council . Everybody will have their say and it does mean at
this point in time as well as you people . I mean whoever 's here . It means
that something fine can be done there . It 's the major entrance into
Chanhassen off the freeway and I think mixed use comes out really well . It
will be a tax boost certainly for the taxpayers and it isn 't as large as it
looks in this blob . It 's 22 acres of mixed use . The rest of it is
highway . Would this be helpful Mark if I gave you these and then you could
' mail them back to me or Paul because these were surveyed and measured out .
It would be a little more specific up there and I 'd be glad to give you
these . Have you any questions of me with what I have here? Or as far as
that goes , anybody else here . I think it 's a fine use and it does leave
all the options open and it will be heard at a later date .
Conrad: Any other issue before Timberwood . There is one more .
11 Jim Brewer : My name 's Jim Brewer and I live at 9366 Kiowa Trail . I guess
I just have one little comment on all of the plans and all of the
I
Planning Commission Meeting
June 20 , 1990 - Page 36
development that 's being planned . It seems like every little inch is
getting gobbled up one way or the other . I know you have to plan that way
but with the highways coming through . This 212 and other things that are II
going on , I 've read where wildlife , wetlands and habitat -will be lost and
I just want to express my concern that for everything that 's lost that
maybe there 's something in the plan for replacing it . That 's all I have tc
say .
Conrad: That 's nice to hear that . First time we 've done in our
Comprehensive Plan a section simply on natural resources and how we 're
going tc preserve and protect . Anything else?
Cularud: I 'm Jim Sulerud . I live farther south on TH 101 . I had
c,,_,e' io;- about the study area . What seems to happen with major road
c ., aloi.-pent is that commercial development , heavy commercial development
fc' lows . whenever cities have competed for freeways and major roads and
. Len that happens , there 's a lot of pressure for real high density use and
it s,oms the alignment for 212 seems to presuppose , especially the
there that is in the middle of the study area , presupposes
major development there of hotels , restaurants , traffic related items
initially around there and then a large service area . So I would guess the
c : tv , certainly City Council and the Planning Commission anticipates that
and I guess I 'm going to ask you if that 's correct and therefore the color
of a large portion of that study area will probably be mixed use and light
industrial with maybe some residential around the fringes of that . Is that.
sort of the direction you would guess?
Conrad: With a major highway , that 's a typical development pattern . In
f tct before this meeting tonight , we don 't want this plan to be deceptive .
Ir other words , the best thing a plan can do is tell people how area is
anticipated to develop so that realtors aren 't really out selling something !!
that 's , to new residents that 's really not going to happen . So prior to
our meeting tonight we 're talking about indicating what we think might I
happen in those study areas . They are study areas . We don 't have all the
information in right now . The best time to start looking at that we felt
was 5 years off but on the other hand , we have a gut feel what those are II going to turn out to be and we 're talking about some similar uses to what
you just suggested , especially in that lower study area . It 's around a
major highway . That 's where you'd prefer to plop your industrial , or even
commercial areas . 1
Jim Sulerud: I guess I 'd ask , and I don 't think many people here have a
common interest but in the south, TH 101 needs attention . I know the City
wants to pass it onto the State and the State wants the County .
Conrad: Nobody wants TH 101 .
f JIm Sulerud: Whatever , but I think those needs have to be addressed and
! there 's a lot of white area down there that I would hope would not be
ignor€d . Thank you . I
Conrad: Thanks for your comments .
t
P a nin Commission Meeting
Jung 20 , 1990 -- Page 37
Schmidt: You say you have a gut feel for these white areas . You
have a white area north of TH 5 and I know we 're not talking about that
tonight . What 's the gut feel for that area?
' Conrad : You just take a look and .it 's on a major intersection . Being a
rcajo', intersection , you 're really talking , to be realistic , you 're talking
aho..1t a commercial . That 's what 's typically put there .
Roger Schmidt: So you plan to extend , break away from the Arboretum and
that development that 's just west of there gradually?
Ccnr, d: If there 's a better idea I think for that intersection , we 'd sure
lie to play around with it but to be very honest at this point in time ,
'
w
hat would happen is a commercial use and then some buffering up
.. r y -y' :me residential on the outside that buffer into the residential that 's
t -e study area . That would be a gut feel . Again , we were talking
w'_-:c .:t that before the meeting . We don 't want to say or to indicate to
' _ac bod; that there 's not a possibility of that being there because there is
- al strop,; possibilty as you try to figure out where stuff goes .
ha 's real some strong logic to keep that there so we have to deal a
little bit with that adminstratively , even though we 're not going to , '
think we want to bring it into our MUSA area right now . There 's some
good reasons for not doing that but on the other hand , we feel that
they-. 's some good reasons to communicate what we think it might be and we
d_ 't know how we 're going to do that yet . Other issues? Al , you 're going
to ke.-p us here late .
Al Klingelhutz: You 're talking about south of TH 5 , it sort of affects a
piece of property that I own down there . I 'm a little bit concerned . A
Major intersection and most of my land is zoned medium density right up to
TH 5 and I 'm wondering if that is really the best use for that land at a
major intersection like it is .
' Conrad: Where are you talking about Al?
Al Klingelhutz : I 've got some commercial right here on the corner and this
is my land and I 've got another strip of land along here . This is single
family . Here comes a four lane highway interchange . Thru traffic and
we 've got this all in medium density abutting right up to TH 5 . I was
wondering if , at least as far as the intersection went up to this wetland
here , couldn 't be put into something else besides medium density .
Conrad: Like what?
' Al Klingelhutz: Like mixed use or commercial .
Conrad: Okay . Anything else . Timberwood . The plan for the community .
M ry Harrington: Not really . Just some things to think about guys . I
apologize the map 's not as big as the City but I don 't have $7 ,000 .00 to
' hire a planner . No plan , whether the City presents it or anybody else
presents it is going to satisfy everybody . Everyone 's going to be unhappy
and I understand that . After listening to the City 's Planning Department ,
•
Planning Commission Meeting
ne- 20 , 19'30 - Page 38
it seems they are bent and determined bringing commercial/industrial in
this town and I don 't know how we 're going to do it but we 're going to try .
What 's on here is not any final piece of information or anything . It 's
just some ideas in trying to come up with a compromise with what they were
proposing for putting in here . Basically our personal opinion on 82 people
is we would prefer to see the town did not change . We do not wish to see
la -ge lot residential and/or acreage to stay the way it is but facts of
life it 's going to change .
Emmings: Could I ask a question? You keep tallting about 82 people . The
same 82 people that signed the petition that you 're speaking for?
Mar; arrington: Yeah . 84 , correct .
n;s : 84? Okay . Just so I know .
ry Harrington: Anyway , these were some things that we thought up like
mrybe these are things to be considered . I am not saying we want this . I 'd
-ether see that there 's , you know forget anymore industrial . That would be
m, personal viewpoint on it . As Chanhassen continues to develop , the AI
residents are concerned about how new development will be directed and
c - nt-olled . . . .have chosen the semi-rural city of Chanhassen rather than
( t." trendy metropolitan suburbs because of Chanhassen 's small town
atmosphere . Creativeness for planning for future zonings is a must if
we 're going to avoid the unappealing look which characterizes so many cf
o r metro suburbs . To allow TH 5 . . .any further more industrial business or
'ice zoning is going to have a negative impact on Chanhassen and we 're
: ing to talk just about here . We 're going to talk about down here and
here and also areas that you need to consider instead of just the one
Visual pollution . Visually , unappealing city or highway corridor
,-e the result of placing commercial or industrial uses along the entire
L,ichway corridor . From Interstate 494 west to Audubon Road , most of the
-ig'hway is or will plan to be industrial/commercial . This brings lights ,
advertising signs , asphalt , parking lots , buildings , eyesores , pipes , 11
condensers , etc . . These are unattractive factories can take up to 7C% of
the site leaving very little green space . It can also be 4 stories high .
Often there 's minimal landscaping which is done to shield the adverse views"
of parking lot , truck bays and the like . The character of our town will
take on a very unaesthetic look . Chanhassen residents desire a more
pleasing views of grass , trees , archtecturally appealing residences which
would be a more pleasing view along a highway . Social isolation . To place
industrial/commercial uses adjacent to or around existing residential
neighborhoods results in a sociologically cutting off the area . II Neighborhoods such as Timberwood , Sunrise Court , West Susan Hills , get cut
off from the social environment of a continuous neighborhood . This can
have a negative psychological , social and value impact . Nothing is solved
providing a small strip of residential land along one side of . . . In
C fact that only socially isolates the new area which as it does not have a II
larger uniform neighborhood to interact with . There 's also . . .runoff .
Chanhassen is presently trying to create a service water management utility
to deal ,ith problems caused by runoff . Commercial land uses have a
negative impact on our area lakes with an addition of sediment , nutrients ,
and pollutants . Chanhassen proposals include assessing a graduated fee on
Planning Commission Meeting
11 :Tune 20 , 1990 -- Page 39
properties that contribute most of this problem . The problem types of
properties are the commercial buildings , the industrial , the apartments ,
the :c.hcls and the parking lots . The holding ponds are only temporary
' mandates to the situation as they do not harvest the nutrients . Traffic
congestion again has been noted . Many of the employees of Chanhassen 's
four largest industries commute to our city . They are not residents of
city . Industrial/commercial uses bring increased truck and car traffic
which further aggrevate the congestion . We should look for ways to reduco
the congestion rather than to create zoning that creates and aggrevates the
' problem . Please note that MnDot 's and Carver County 's projection of future
traffic assumes that TH 41 and TH 5 will have industry , office and other
con,mercial uses that is generating this traffic . Minimal tax relief .
t`°cse of you who do not understand , most of our town is presently in HRA
TIP and EED districts which means that their tax dollar goes into the HP'.
to further benefit more industrial but it does not benefit the
`-col.= , the City , the County or the Watersheds which we do not get an;
� W'• fr so they are not helping out our tax base at this present time .
It is hoped in the future that they will be doing that . So adding new
i -djetry , they will probably be put into EED districts because they cannot
afford to pay for the sewer and water so they 'll probably request to be in
it ..hich will mean that we will be taken off of circulation from tax
JJist : ict for another 8 to 10 years . Noise pollution has been addressed and
cl 4c) pollution has been addressed again and there seems to be a market
sat u. ation and negative competition if we encourage more commercial out
We sp ent over 15 million dollars to revitalize this area which ate
hove 't even got it built and if we 're talking more commercial , we 're gain;.
to shoot ourselves in the foot over here and that 's a lot of money to be
you know , for when we need a very healthy downtown and we need to encourage
.,ecple to support that area . To zone , whether it 's over here at Sunrise
RidvE or whatever for industrial , lowers property values . And homeowners
wHo , if we zone and provide the areas and people see it on a map and they
_? , oh I wish to build over there and I want to build next to it . People
would volunteer to build next to highways and freeways and industrial uses
but they like to know about it ahead of time . You and I may not be the
people who want to do that but there is a market segment out there that
will do that . What can be done with the land? A plan for zoning must
' address the needs and desires of the current residents of Chanhassen for
they are the town . A well planned , visually appealing residential
community should be the major thrust of planning . Families move here to
live in the residences , not the offices . More low density residential
acreage is needed . And like the City of Orono , Chanhassen could benefit
from providing more large acre residential zoning . The westward shift in
the MUSA line will not provide much residential land on the north of TH 5
as many of these people do not wish to subdivide . However , buildable
residential can be planned for south of TH 5 and that plan is most suitable
for residential . Now the residential is the blue spaces on this particular
map that you 're looking at . We would like to see a lot more of the blue
I! spaces but I. don 't know how to compromise with these folks who want to put
it into purple . The blue space on the map shows owner occupied residential
use . Each area has been made large enough to interact and socially relate
with one another within the blue space . I realize this pink thing is in
here which I 'd like to see out . This guy . Okay . But we kind of chopped
some of it out of here . The farmers who want to stay in business and stick
daring Commission Meeting
June 20 , 1990 - Page 40
a-od:od for the next 35 years should be able to do so and the MUSA line ,
this stuff should not force them to have to sell because their neighbor
wishes to develop and they have to start paying for part of the land . We 'd "
like to encourage residential whether it 's residential farm or whatever .
T",e attached map shows possible solutions , things to think about to provide
various uses . Along TH 5 there 's a green strip up here which you probably
cannot see . A green strip space . This could be a bermed area with closely !1
planted spruce trees intermixed with hardy deciduous trees . This would
give us a very pleasant feeling viewpoint down TH 5 instead of cluttered
iith signs and industry . A 35 mph frontage road could be constructed . A
strip of medium density could be zoned for twin homes that could have their
back yards backed up to the frontage road with rear yards facing a berm in
"lei :.It:,y ow r( yard . So it 'd be highway , berm , frontage road , 35 mph , berg; and II
n we start with twin home . Right across the street from it , planned fel-
acJlar low density housing . These people would provide more grass . More
t e , etc . . Large acre and agricultural again should be encourage . This
:onc =pt maes it so that no one is facing the highway . Noise is decreased
by alm:st 50% from MnDot by the use of berms and walls . There 's a segrncrt
c.f i±e housing market who is willing to purchase on highways and busy
-trects and this is no longer an issue of being forced . A look at any
or freeway presently will reveal housing currently being built
afte.- the highway has gone in . Forcing only occurs when existing
residential along the land being rezoned has been rezoned for negative
uses . A highway is not an ideal neighbor but it appears to be the lesser
of two evils when compared to non-residential such as industry . VA and FHA
approved loan applications for homesites subject to noise without rejection
_•p tc 75 decibels , according to the HUD noise specialist . Even so , he 's
not aware of any freeways that even generate that kind of level of noise in
r: ny of their studies . Again , most of the noise comes from the trucks so
let 's plan for zoning that does not generate truck traffic . Safety was an
that was brought up . Families with children that reside on low
traffic streets often fail to teach their children street safety . The
children play ball , skateboard , mill around and bicycle on these streets .
In contrast , families living on busy streets are diligent to teach children
safety and a healthy fear and respect of that street and don 't allow their
kids to play in the street or mill around . . . Safety is not a major issue
with the street . A service road is also a mitigating factor . Green space . II
Chanhassen 's environment is in need of more green space . Residential
building takes up an average of only 50% of a lot . Residential uses also
provide more grass , more trees and more appealing landscaping . A business
can take , an industrial business in this town can take up to 70% of the
land and go up to 4 stories high and not to mention parking lots , sidewalks
and the like . Businesses with their large buildings , asphalt and concrete
contribute to surface water runoff and do not provide much green space .
The school provision . That 's become an issue also . We are eventually
going to be needing one and on the map there 's a possible location for a
middle school which is otherwise known as a junior high , on the southeast 11
corner of TH 5 and TH 41 . Now we have , you know one here a possible site .
One there . Somebody wants to put it over here . You know , delighted . Put
the thing there . I mean it 's not locked into cement . I 'm saying here 's a
possible site . Here 's a possible site . I like that idea putting the site
down there too . Let 's see . There 's adequate green space around this
particular site to be used for the school and for park facilities .
II
Planning Commission Meeting
Juno. 20 , 1990 - Page 41
II
II n1ocement here has these advantages . It has suitable topography . It has
rov. - way access for bus traffic . It is a pleasant compliment to the
Arboretum and provides more green space . It is more centrally located for
access for students who are bused from Chaska and Victoria . Schools have
II
visual appearance that is similar to a large office or flat top industrial
building . This location does not force the building to be backed up to
a existing subdivisions . Future residents can volunteer to build with full
knowledge of it 's existence . It 's noted at this present time that this
site was not shown to the school district to take advantage of during it 's
site finding report . A possible second alternative would have been the
I southwest corner of TH 5 and CR 17 which again is this little site here .
It 's part of that orange area up there on the highway . Presently District
lacks any funds to do anything about a school but it 's possible in 1995
I thro!gh a loophole in the HRA process that the school could be a recepient
Y' _.ogle money but this money must be used for capital improvements which
re ns buildings . The industry proposals . Land is needed for future growth
II i the industry which is what they keep telling us and Chanhassen , if You
will , belongs to the residents . Any addition to non-residential must be
planned concerning the quiet , peaceful enjoyment of an owners amenity . . .
i
w'- ch, happens to be his property . Non-residential uses should be a service
to �. �.
I t , the residents and should serve a requested need . Making money is
_.Jelly a motivating reason for business ' existence . Hence , their caring
( the community is not going to be the same as that of a resident .
I a dents should be given priority concerns in zoning plans . The industry
plscement . Stop the westward encroachment of non-residential at
t' me-...Glynn border with the exception of a little .2 1/2 parcel as the
_,n ; Y t that spruce
' r e �al e. vice road comes along ong at that point . T Then require tha
t.r. e, Le planted every 10 feet apart with deciduous trees interspersed .
-t-ic next step block for medium density homes which mean like twin homes
h-h,-ave their rear yards back up to the berms . Finally the low density
I residential , preferably large acre . Preferably leave it a farm across from
the street from the twinhomes but we know that farms are probably going to
si, 'bby the wayside . A change in the zoning law could be made for all
II future , should be made for all future construction of office , commercial
and industrial . Presently it allows the back of an industrial office to
come 50 feet to a residential lot . This should be changed to a minimum of
125 feet , preferably farther away . The yellow strip seen on the map
II
accomplished this to some extent without putting the large blocks of
townhouse developments around . The larger yellow sections would provide
townhouse locations as a transition like a townhouse location . A townhouse
I location . A townhouse location . You will note that we are also
considering the north end up here on the map which townhouse , townhouse ,
and this is supposed to be yellow up here . A change in the zoning law
I should be made and the larger yellow sections , again are for townhouse .
This has been done in areas where the land is vacant and future purchases
of homes could volunteer to move in next to the non-residential and in any
market there is a segment of a purchasing market that will purchase that
II kind of a site . You and I may not do it but there is a market for it .
Future possibilities for industry and business . The most logical location
fcn these uses would be near the proposed highway 212 . It 's true the sewer
II and water will not be available for 10 years or more . Chanhassen can grow
at a controlled , orderly pace . It does not need to install all possible
nen-residential industry business in the next 10 years . We need to look at
II
Planning Commission Meeting
June 20 , 1990 - Page 42
this area along TH 212 now so that we can make better decisions in other
areas of our town . The strengths of a highway 212 location are this . One .
the efficient freeway transportation to the destination . There are no stop
signs . TH 5 is inefficient . It 's covered with stop lights which serve the
purpose of slowing traffic down and discouraging traffic . The land does
not contain residential subdivisions per se . There are farmers who live iris_
here and I am all in favor of ditching this section for the gentleman who
lives here . I don 't want this over here . I don 't even want anything pink .
Please understand that . I mean if we could chop that off and whatever , put
a little line over here but I 'm saying let 's look at 212 . I 'm not saying II
this is the final end of looking at 212 . The farmers appear to be
gradually retiring from farming and selling their property to the highest
bid*ing investor . Placing industry near 212 will disrupt the fewest
permanent residents . The farmer may have sold and left in 10-15 years .
APeir; , it could be planned for in advance thus giving people purchasing
s-
•��<<,�_
prior warning of it 's existence . Thus they choose to make the
:lur,tary choice if they wish to make at that location . The office
provisions on the map at TH 41 and 82nd Street which is over here , this
little chunk up here are the two pink sites . This would be a reluctant
w: anise for additional office space . Again , we 'd not rather see any hut ,
it ,culd need to be controlled so not be an unaesthetic problem for the
Arboretum . The additional pink that is located on this map is the are: of
the Gedney Pickle section here and then also some scattered commercial
that 's already in existence and I just put this on here for a possible
thinking about . I 'm not saying we should do it but let 's think about it .
• There is this area down here also that we could think about if we need more
acreage for this . It 's possible to look at that area . Progress is going
go on and maybe someday most of the farms will be gone so today we can
plat to set aside the land for residential use for that the present and
future residents can make an informed housing choices . For those of you ,
is industrial . The blue is residential . The green space was
picked off the City 's map . I was not aware that this was not an existing
p rk . I just picked this off their map . This is the highway 's green space
here that they will be putting into ponding . This area puts it right up to
Chaska 's industrial park right in this area and it also puts it along the
freeway . In our books , this would make maybe the least disruption .
Getting rid of let 's say the south half of it . They are in favor of II putting it below here but I 'm in favor of protecting these houses here and
these houses here from sitting on top of any of this business or industrial
stuff by shielding . These people shielding and these people and not just
Timberwood . You can 't just sit and think about Timberwood . Then also this I
corner here , not for commercial as it is slated for turning into medium
density because it 's all of the town and the least amount that we have of
this industrial sitting on top of existing subdivisions I guess the happir.: 11
a lot of us would be but I don't have the final answer . These are things
to think about that we 'd like to give you some thoughts on . Thank you .
Conrad: Thank you . That 's a good presentation . Other Timberwood people .
We 're a little bit past our hour but I want to give .
Fill Miller : I 'll be real brief , I promise . Just something I 've thought II
about since last week which relates to just planning . I 'm Bill Miller . I
live at 8121 Pinewood in Timberwood . It seems like Timberwood today has
Planning Commission Meeting
.T_.ne 20 , l9g0 -- Page 43
become a big issue with the Planning Commission that sort of presents
somewhat of a challenge or difficulty and in looking at it , you 've got to
figure out how to buffer it now. You seem to sort of like a little buzz
word now , non-Timberwood , Timberwood type stuff . I was just thinking about
what happened last , 2 weeks ago I guess at that meeting . It seemed like
there were some things done on the north side of TH 5 that a lot of people
that were here , I didn 't live in Chanhassen back when that happened 'but
they were talking about what they were going to do on the north side of TH
5 and a lot of people here said we never wanted that and now you 're telling
' us we 're going to have to develop because of it . Okay , so there was some
kind of decision made where the residents weren 't , it appeared to me at the
meeting 2 weeks ago that not everyone was in favor of this happening and
1-0-.) they 're going to be affected . Then we have Timberwood and I guess the
r `,: nt. about Timberwood is , you know not you maybe but somebody put
r erwood there . The people that moved in and bought houses that were
c ? d by people that are here and things like that , that was there . You put
it re . It 'E not like we 've developed this problem . I want to make that
clear because I get this sense like Timberwood 's a dirty word or something
like that . What I wanted to say about that was , when we 're doing this
p' 3nning now , so 10 years from now we don 't have this same thing , it seems
' like there are an awful lot of people here who aren 't happy with what
•cou 'rte putting u there and there were people here that 10 years ago said
y .. up
want it . They were told not to worry about it and now they 're
having to pay some kind of price for that . Early on you said it 's going to
happen . There was an assumption that we are going to have progress and all
s types of things and I that 's g� just wondered if that really true . What if ,
'
who controls the process I guess is the question? What if 90% of everyone
in tb:s town came in and said we don 't want another square inch of
ind._s.t ial? What if 94% said that? Is it a fact that we 'd still have to
have: it and we 'd still have to go with this plan? I mean how is the exact
process that comes through I 'm just wondering because it seems like we have
all these assumptions made that we are definitely going to go a certain way
and ': don 't understand how the planning process came through but it seems
' we do make mistakes and it seems like we do make a. lot of unhappy residents
and I imagine there are some people here who are sitting around wishing
they didn 't live here because of these things . I just think that sort of
' has to be addressed because I get a sense that the planning process and
I know it 's not perfect and it 's difficult and all those things but there
are some major mistakes being made and it really seems like a lot of things
are set in motion or on the role and we make all these assumptions there 's
' any citizens input . I just think maybe you should appreciate people that
put in all this time and effort rather than making it seem like a thorn .
t Conrad: I think we do . I 've been in this process before and I think in
the previous process , very few people showed up so I 'm rather impressed
with how many did show up and are tracking the issues . I think that 's the
process . It 's the process of having , this is not a public hearing . This
is a process tonight where we get the input . We 've heard input from a
variety of folks and we still have to , and it 's not a perfect process by
any means . You 're not talking to a bunch of professionals up here that
' know planning backwards and forwards . We try to hire that advice and then
the ultimate end , you know you mentioned that if 94% of the citizens didn 't
want industrial growth or commercial growth , I think the City Council would
I
Planning Commission Meeting
June 20 , 1990 - Page 44
be really sensitive to that . I think if that was their feelin g that the
taxes , that they felt that they just . . .the City Council level for things
like that . I think it 's real tough . It 's real easy to take shots at the
plan . I could be out there and I could shoot a ldt of holes in it because I/
I was here before you were and I liked the cornfields and I like the farms
and if you take a look at our old comprehensive plan , there were a lot Of
nice things about that . We were preserving the ag district . We were doing
some things that I thought we were probably the best community in terms of
protecting the natural habitat in the metropolitan area and probably a
l€ acre;- in some other areas so we 've done a lot of things and I think it 's
easy to shoot holes but the reason we had the meeting tonight was to get
your input . I 'm appreciative of the effort in just showing up and the
effort in the plan in here . And I think there were some real valid prints
na e . Let me tell what the process is . It 's like I 'm closing the meeting
down . I probably am and I hope I 'm not cutting off somebody else from
Tir ._e•-v:ood with maybe a different opinion or something that we should know ,
"id you have something before my concluding comments? Yeah , come on up and
`.-i k to us .
James Leerdahl : My name is James Leerdahl and I live at 2350 Timberwcod .
I guess what I 'd like to say , I back right up to that asterick okay where
the proposed middle school is . Looking around there . It 's all yellow . My
perspective is , it 's not a real problem . I like what you 've done so far .
I knoU. a lot of people aren 't going to like to hear that but and I know a
lot of other- people , I feel for what they 're talking about but I 've got a
berm behind my house . I 'm not going to see that middle school . It doesn 't
look that bad to me . That 's all I have to say .
Conrad: Thanks for your comments . -I paid him to show up tonight .
Drew Richardson: My name 'is Drew Richardson and I live at 8120 Pinewood
Circle in Timberwood also . I agree with the middle school . I liked that
idea when it was first brought up . It 's a large green area . I had one
question . I see four types of residential . Commercial and then simply
office/industrial . I think one of the things that 's scarey to me about
that is that office/industrial can go anywhere from the McGlynn Bakeries ,
the 4 story big cement building to an electrical type , computer type place .
I mean a small office park . Something like you 've got up on 494 there . Is
it possible to split that up to , the area along TH 5 , make that low slung
type buildings . One story type buildings . Is it possible to do that?
Thanks .
Conrad: Thanks for your comments . Anything else? '
Todd Paquick: Todd Paquick from 2320 Timberwood Drive . I 'd also agree
wit± my next door neighbor over here . I don't have a problem with what
you 've done for our neighborhood . It seems like we don 't have a reason to
complain . There 's quite a bit of buffer space around the Timberwood Drive
neighborhood and I also don 't have a problem with the middle school in my
backyard . I
Conrad: Thanks for your comments . Anything else? Okay . I ' ll try to wrap
this up again . I really do appreciate you being involved . What the
11
Planning Commission Meeting
r c: 20 , 1990 -- Page 45
Planning Commission is going to do now is try to digest some of , there are
some really valid issues brought up . Some of them we might have discussed
even before you got here tonight . I think we want to take a look at them
and we 're going to do that over the course of the next month and we 're
going to bring them back to you in terms of a public hearing . Those public
hearings Paul will be?
Krauss: We 'll have to put articles in the newspaper but we 're anticipating
either the end of August or the first meeting in September . If you 're
' curious from time to time , feel free to give me a call and I can update you
on where we 're at .
Conrad: I think that 's it . We 've got another meeting that we 're planning
to review all the things that we 've heard from this meeting and the meetir
'°efoce . I thank you for your attendance and there 's always room for more
people on the Planning Commission . Remember how much fun this is and stay
touch .
^atzli moved, Conrad seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor
' and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 10:45 p .m . . •
Submitted by Paul Krauss
r_ er,rirg Director
"reared by Nann Opheim
1
1
1
I