City Council Packet 3-24-14AGENDA
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
MONDAY, MARCH 24, 2014
CHANHASSEN CITY HALL, 7700 MARKET BOULEVARD
5:15 P.M. - CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION, FOUNTAIN CONFERENCE ROOM
Note: If the City Council does not complete the work session items in the time
allotted, the remaining items will be considered after the regular agenda.
Commission Interviews & Discussion of Appointments
5:15 p.m. - Jacob Stolar, Park & Recreation Commission, Youth
Representative
5:30 p.m. - Brent Carron, Park & Recreation Commission
5:45 p.m. - David Wisniewski, Senior/Park & Recreation Commissions
6:00 p.m. - Carol Buesgens, Senior Commission
6:15 p.m. - Matthew Myers, Environmental Commission
6:30 p.m. - Luke Thunberg, Park & Recreation Commission
6:45 p.m. - Discuss Appointments
commission interviews.pdf
REGULAR MEETING, CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
CALL TO ORDER (PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE)
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS
CONSENT AGENDA
All items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the
City Council and will be considered under one motion. There will be no separate
discussion of these items. If discussion is desired, that item will be removed from
the Consent Agenda and considered separately. City Council action is based on
staff's recommendation for each item. Refer to the council packet for each staff
report.
Approval of City Council Minutes dated March 10, 2014
03 -10 -14 -cc -ws.pdf, 03 -10 -14 -cc -sum.pdf, 03 -10 -14 -cc.pdf
Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated March 4, 2014
03 -04 -14 -pc -sum.pdf, 03 -04 -14 -pc.pdf
Receive Park & Recreation Commission Minutes dated February 25,
2014 and Work Session Minutes dated March 11, 2014
02 -25 -14 -prc -sum.pdf, 02 -25 -14 -prc.pdf, 3 -11 -14 work
session.pdf
2014 Street Reconstruction Project: Call Assessment Hearing
call assessment hearing.pdf
2014 Vehicles & Equipment: Approve Annual Purchases
cip equipment purchases.pdf
Lyman Boulevard Wetland Alteration Permit: Request for Wetland
Alteration Permit for Proposed Roadway Reconstruction and
Improvement Project of the Segment of CSAH 18 Between CSAH 15
(Audubon Road) and CSAH 17 (Powers Boulevard), Applicant: Carver
County.
lyman blvd wap.pdf
Approve Resolution for Advancing State Aid Funds for Lyman
Boulevard Improvements
lyman blvd resolution.pdf
Approval of Liquor License Renewals
liquor license renewal.pdf
Approval of Collaborative Agreement with Carver County for ESRI
(GIS) Software
esri software agreement.pdf
2014 Sealcoat Project: Approve Resolution Accepting Bids and
Awarding Contract.
sealcoat bids.pdf
Item Deleted: Sinclair Gas Station Site, 7910 Dakota Avenue, Approve
Resolution of Support for Contamination Clean -Up Application
Powers Pointe: Approve Access Easement Agreement.
powers pointe access easement agreement.pdf
Approval of Arbor Day Poster Contest Winners
arbor day.pdf
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
See guidelines for Visitor Presentations at the end of the agenda.
LAW ENFORCEMENT/FIRE DEPARTMENT UPDATE
Lt. Jeff Enevold, Carver County Sheriff's Department
sheriffs report.pdf
Chief John Wolff, Chanhassen Fire Department
fire chiefs report.pdf
NEW BUSINESS
Business Impact Group: Request for Rezoning for a Minor Amendment
to the Chanhassen West Business Park Planned Unit Development
(PUD) to Increase the Maximum Building Square Footage Within the
Development; and Site Plan Review to Construct a 39,240 sq. ft.
Office/Warehouse Building on Property Zoned Planned Unit
Development (PUD); Located on Part of Lots 1 & 2, Block 1,
Chanhassen West Business Park, 2410 Galpin Boulevard
chanhassen west business park.pdf
Appointments to Commissions (refer to Report for Item A -1)
COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS
CORRESPONDENCE PACKET
correspondence packet.pdf
ADJOURNMENT
GUIDE FOR VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
Welcome to the Chanhassen City Council meeting. In the interest of open
communications, the Chanhassen City Council wishes to provide an opportunity for the
public to address the City Council. That opportunity is provided at every regular City
Council meeting during Visitor Presentations .
1.Anyone indicating a desire to speak during Visitor Presentations will be
acknowledged by the Mayor. When called upon to speak, state your name,
address, and topic. All remarks shall be addressed to the City Council as a whole,
not to any specific member(s) or to any person who is not a member of the City
Council.
2.If there are a number of individuals present to speak on the same topic, please
designate a spokesperson that can summarize the issue.
3.Limit your comments to 5 minutes. Additional time may be granted at the
discretion of the Mayor. If you have written comments, provide a copy to the
council.
4.During Visitor Presentations, the council and staff listen to comments and will not
engage in discussion. Council members or the City Manager may ask questions of
you in order to gain a thorough understanding of your concern, suggestion, or
request.
5.Please be aware that disrespectful comments or comments of a personal nature,
directed at an individual either by name or inference, will not be allowed.
Personnel concerns should be directed to the City Manager.
Members of the City Council and some staff members may gather at Brindisi's Pub,
501 West 78th Street in Chanhassen immediately after the meeting for a purely
social event. Members of the public are welcome.
A.
1.
Documents:
B.7:00 P.M.
C.
D.
E.
1.
Documents:
2.
Documents:
3.
Documents:
4.
Documents:
5.
Documents:
6.
Documents:
7.
Documents:
8.
Documents:
9.
Documents:
10.
Documents:
11.
12.
Documents:
13.
Documents:
F.
G.
1.
Documents:
2.
Documents:
H.
1.
Documents:
2.
I.
J.
K.
Documents:
L.
AGENDA CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL MONDAY, MARCH 24, 2014 CHANHASSEN CITY HALL, 7700 MARKET BOULEVARD 5:15 P.M. - CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION, FOUNTAIN CONFERENCE ROOM Note: If the City Council does not complete the work session items in the time allotted, the remaining items will be considered after the regular agenda.Commission Interviews & Discussion of Appointments 5:15 p.m. - Jacob Stolar, Park & Recreation Commission, Youth Representative 5:30 p.m. - Brent Carron, Park & Recreation Commission 5:45 p.m. - David Wisniewski, Senior/Park & Recreation Commissions 6:00 p.m. - Carol Buesgens, Senior Commission 6:15 p.m. - Matthew Myers, Environmental Commission 6:30 p.m. - Luke Thunberg, Park & Recreation Commission 6:45 p.m. - Discuss Appointments commission interviews.pdf REGULAR MEETING, CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER (PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE)PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS CONSENT AGENDA All items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be considered under one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items. If discussion is desired, that item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately. City Council action is based on staff's recommendation for each item. Refer to the council packet for each staff report.Approval of City Council Minutes dated March 10, 2014 03 -10 -14 -cc -ws.pdf, 03 -10 -14 -cc -sum.pdf, 03 -10 -14 -cc.pdf Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated March 4, 2014 03 -04 -14 -pc -sum.pdf, 03 -04 -14 -pc.pdf Receive Park & Recreation Commission Minutes dated February 25, 2014 and Work Session Minutes dated March 11, 2014 02 -25 -14 -prc -sum.pdf, 02 -25 -14 -prc.pdf, 3 -11 -14 work session.pdf 2014 Street Reconstruction Project: Call Assessment Hearing
call assessment hearing.pdf
2014 Vehicles & Equipment: Approve Annual Purchases
cip equipment purchases.pdf
Lyman Boulevard Wetland Alteration Permit: Request for Wetland
Alteration Permit for Proposed Roadway Reconstruction and
Improvement Project of the Segment of CSAH 18 Between CSAH 15
(Audubon Road) and CSAH 17 (Powers Boulevard), Applicant: Carver
County.
lyman blvd wap.pdf
Approve Resolution for Advancing State Aid Funds for Lyman
Boulevard Improvements
lyman blvd resolution.pdf
Approval of Liquor License Renewals
liquor license renewal.pdf
Approval of Collaborative Agreement with Carver County for ESRI
(GIS) Software
esri software agreement.pdf
2014 Sealcoat Project: Approve Resolution Accepting Bids and
Awarding Contract.
sealcoat bids.pdf
Item Deleted: Sinclair Gas Station Site, 7910 Dakota Avenue, Approve
Resolution of Support for Contamination Clean -Up Application
Powers Pointe: Approve Access Easement Agreement.
powers pointe access easement agreement.pdf
Approval of Arbor Day Poster Contest Winners
arbor day.pdf
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
See guidelines for Visitor Presentations at the end of the agenda.
LAW ENFORCEMENT/FIRE DEPARTMENT UPDATE
Lt. Jeff Enevold, Carver County Sheriff's Department
sheriffs report.pdf
Chief John Wolff, Chanhassen Fire Department
fire chiefs report.pdf
NEW BUSINESS
Business Impact Group: Request for Rezoning for a Minor Amendment
to the Chanhassen West Business Park Planned Unit Development
(PUD) to Increase the Maximum Building Square Footage Within the
Development; and Site Plan Review to Construct a 39,240 sq. ft.
Office/Warehouse Building on Property Zoned Planned Unit
Development (PUD); Located on Part of Lots 1 & 2, Block 1,
Chanhassen West Business Park, 2410 Galpin Boulevard
chanhassen west business park.pdf
Appointments to Commissions (refer to Report for Item A -1)
COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS
CORRESPONDENCE PACKET
correspondence packet.pdf
ADJOURNMENT
GUIDE FOR VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
Welcome to the Chanhassen City Council meeting. In the interest of open
communications, the Chanhassen City Council wishes to provide an opportunity for the
public to address the City Council. That opportunity is provided at every regular City
Council meeting during Visitor Presentations .
1.Anyone indicating a desire to speak during Visitor Presentations will be
acknowledged by the Mayor. When called upon to speak, state your name,
address, and topic. All remarks shall be addressed to the City Council as a whole,
not to any specific member(s) or to any person who is not a member of the City
Council.
2.If there are a number of individuals present to speak on the same topic, please
designate a spokesperson that can summarize the issue.
3.Limit your comments to 5 minutes. Additional time may be granted at the
discretion of the Mayor. If you have written comments, provide a copy to the
council.
4.During Visitor Presentations, the council and staff listen to comments and will not
engage in discussion. Council members or the City Manager may ask questions of
you in order to gain a thorough understanding of your concern, suggestion, or
request.
5.Please be aware that disrespectful comments or comments of a personal nature,
directed at an individual either by name or inference, will not be allowed.
Personnel concerns should be directed to the City Manager.
Members of the City Council and some staff members may gather at Brindisi's Pub,
501 West 78th Street in Chanhassen immediately after the meeting for a purely
social event. Members of the public are welcome.
A.1.Documents:B.7:00 P.M.C.D.E.1.Documents:2.Documents:3.Documents:4.
Documents:
5.
Documents:
6.
Documents:
7.
Documents:
8.
Documents:
9.
Documents:
10.
Documents:
11.
12.
Documents:
13.
Documents:
F.
G.
1.
Documents:
2.
Documents:
H.
1.
Documents:
2.
I.
J.
K.
Documents:
L.
AGENDA CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL MONDAY, MARCH 24, 2014 CHANHASSEN CITY HALL, 7700 MARKET BOULEVARD 5:15 P.M. - CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION, FOUNTAIN CONFERENCE ROOM Note: If the City Council does not complete the work session items in the time allotted, the remaining items will be considered after the regular agenda.Commission Interviews & Discussion of Appointments 5:15 p.m. - Jacob Stolar, Park & Recreation Commission, Youth Representative 5:30 p.m. - Brent Carron, Park & Recreation Commission 5:45 p.m. - David Wisniewski, Senior/Park & Recreation Commissions 6:00 p.m. - Carol Buesgens, Senior Commission 6:15 p.m. - Matthew Myers, Environmental Commission 6:30 p.m. - Luke Thunberg, Park & Recreation Commission 6:45 p.m. - Discuss Appointments commission interviews.pdf REGULAR MEETING, CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER (PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE)PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS CONSENT AGENDA All items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be considered under one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items. If discussion is desired, that item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately. City Council action is based on staff's recommendation for each item. Refer to the council packet for each staff report.Approval of City Council Minutes dated March 10, 2014 03 -10 -14 -cc -ws.pdf, 03 -10 -14 -cc -sum.pdf, 03 -10 -14 -cc.pdf Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated March 4, 2014 03 -04 -14 -pc -sum.pdf, 03 -04 -14 -pc.pdf Receive Park & Recreation Commission Minutes dated February 25, 2014 and Work Session Minutes dated March 11, 2014 02 -25 -14 -prc -sum.pdf, 02 -25 -14 -prc.pdf, 3 -11 -14 work session.pdf 2014 Street Reconstruction Project: Call Assessment Hearing call assessment hearing.pdf 2014 Vehicles & Equipment: Approve Annual Purchases cip equipment purchases.pdf Lyman Boulevard Wetland Alteration Permit: Request for Wetland Alteration Permit for Proposed Roadway Reconstruction and Improvement Project of the Segment of CSAH 18 Between CSAH 15 (Audubon Road) and CSAH 17 (Powers Boulevard), Applicant: Carver County.lyman blvd wap.pdf Approve Resolution for Advancing State Aid Funds for Lyman Boulevard Improvements lyman blvd resolution.pdf Approval of Liquor License Renewals liquor license renewal.pdf Approval of Collaborative Agreement with Carver County for ESRI (GIS) Software esri software agreement.pdf 2014 Sealcoat Project: Approve Resolution Accepting Bids and Awarding Contract.sealcoat bids.pdf Item Deleted: Sinclair Gas Station Site, 7910 Dakota Avenue, Approve Resolution of Support for Contamination Clean -Up Application Powers Pointe: Approve Access Easement Agreement.powers pointe access easement agreement.pdf Approval of Arbor Day Poster Contest Winners arbor day.pdf VISITOR PRESENTATIONS See guidelines for Visitor Presentations at the end of the agenda.LAW ENFORCEMENT/FIRE DEPARTMENT UPDATE Lt. Jeff Enevold, Carver County Sheriff's Department sheriffs report.pdf
Chief John Wolff, Chanhassen Fire Department
fire chiefs report.pdf
NEW BUSINESS
Business Impact Group: Request for Rezoning for a Minor Amendment
to the Chanhassen West Business Park Planned Unit Development
(PUD) to Increase the Maximum Building Square Footage Within the
Development; and Site Plan Review to Construct a 39,240 sq. ft.
Office/Warehouse Building on Property Zoned Planned Unit
Development (PUD); Located on Part of Lots 1 & 2, Block 1,
Chanhassen West Business Park, 2410 Galpin Boulevard
chanhassen west business park.pdf
Appointments to Commissions (refer to Report for Item A -1)
COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS
CORRESPONDENCE PACKET
correspondence packet.pdf
ADJOURNMENT
GUIDE FOR VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
Welcome to the Chanhassen City Council meeting. In the interest of open
communications, the Chanhassen City Council wishes to provide an opportunity for the
public to address the City Council. That opportunity is provided at every regular City
Council meeting during Visitor Presentations .
1.Anyone indicating a desire to speak during Visitor Presentations will be
acknowledged by the Mayor. When called upon to speak, state your name,
address, and topic. All remarks shall be addressed to the City Council as a whole,
not to any specific member(s) or to any person who is not a member of the City
Council.
2.If there are a number of individuals present to speak on the same topic, please
designate a spokesperson that can summarize the issue.
3.Limit your comments to 5 minutes. Additional time may be granted at the
discretion of the Mayor. If you have written comments, provide a copy to the
council.
4.During Visitor Presentations, the council and staff listen to comments and will not
engage in discussion. Council members or the City Manager may ask questions of
you in order to gain a thorough understanding of your concern, suggestion, or
request.
5.Please be aware that disrespectful comments or comments of a personal nature,
directed at an individual either by name or inference, will not be allowed.
Personnel concerns should be directed to the City Manager.
Members of the City Council and some staff members may gather at Brindisi's Pub,
501 West 78th Street in Chanhassen immediately after the meeting for a purely
social event. Members of the public are welcome.
A.1.Documents:B.7:00 P.M.C.D.E.1.Documents:2.Documents:3.Documents:4.Documents:5.Documents:6.Documents:7.Documents:8.Documents:9.Documents:10.Documents:11.12.Documents:13.Documents:F.G.1.Documents:
2.
Documents:
H.
1.
Documents:
2.
I.
J.
K.
Documents:
L.
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
WORK SESSION
MARCH 10, 2014
Mayor Furlong called the work session to order at 5:00 p.m.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Furlong, Councilman McDonald, Councilwoman
Tjornhom, Councilwoman Ernst, and Councilman Laufenburger
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt
COMMISSION INTERVIEWS AND DISCUSSION.
The following applicants were interviewed for commission vacancies: Jean Mancini , Curt Kobilarcsik,
Tyler Kobilarcsik, Tom Doll, Jonathon Myers, Katie Mahannah, Mark Undestad, and Elizabeth Ahern.
The work session was recessed at 7:00 p.m. It was reconvened 8:10 p.m.
Council members reconvened to discuss the results of the interviews.
The work session was adjourned.
Submitted by Todd Gerhardt
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
SUMMARY MINUTES
MARCH 10, 2014
Mayor Furlong called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to
the Flag.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Furlong, Councilman McDonald, Councilwoman
Tjornhom, Councilwoman Ernst, and Councilman Laufenburger
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Kate Aanenson, Paul Oehme, and Roger Knutson
Mayor Furlong amended the agenda to delete item G(3). Appointments to the Planning Commission,
from the agenda.
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None.
CONSENT AGENDA: C ouncilwoman Tjornhom moved, Councilman McDonald seconded to
approve the following consent agenda items pursuant to the City Manager ’s recommendations:
1.Approval of City Council Minutes dated February 24, 2014
2.Re ceive Planning Commission Minutes dated February 18, 2014
3.Approve Resolutions Concurring with the County State Aid Highway (CSAH) Resolution #2014
-11: Designation of Highway 101; and Resolution #2014-12: Imposing a No Parking Zone
from the Scott County Line to CSAH 61 (Flying Cloud Drive) and on CSAH 61 from Bluff Creek
Drive to Highway 101.
4.Resolution #2014-13: Lyman Boulevard Improvement Project: Approve Concurrence of Bids.
5.Resolution #2014-14: Well No. 10: Approve Change Order for Screen Cleaning.
6.Camden Ridge, Located West of Highway 212, North of Pioneer Trail, and East of Pioneer Pass,
Applicant: Lennar:
a.Approve Minor Amendment to Adjust Side Yard Setbacks for Single-Family Detached
Housing on 36.2 Acres Zoned Planned Unit Development-Residential (PUD-R).
b.Resolution #2014-15: Approve Resolution Accepting Ownership of Outlots B, C. E and
F.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS. None.
LAKESIDE 8 TH ADDITION: REQUEST FOR SUBDIVISION OF .2338 ACRES (REPLAT OF
LOTS 1-3, BLOCK 3, LAKESIDE 7 TH ADDITION) INTO TWO LOTS, AND A SITE PLAN
AMENDMENT TO CHANGE A THREE-UNIT TOWNHOUSE TO A TWINHOME ON
PROPERTY ZONED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT-RESIDENTIAL, AND LOCATED AT
Chanhassen City Council – March 10, 2014
2
35, 45 AND 55 RILEY CURVE; APPLICANT: RON CLARK CONSTRUCTION, INC.
Kate Aanenson presented the staff and Planning Commission update on this item.
Councilwoman Ernst moved, Councilman Laufenburger seconded that the City Council approves
the subdivision creating two lots out of three lots, and an amendment to the site plan to permit a
two-unit structure in place of the three-unit structure, subject to the following conditions and
adoption of the attached Findings of Fact and Recommendation:
Subdivision
1.The development shall comply with the conditions of approval for the Lakeside 7 th Addition.
2.T h e r e d u c t i o n o f o n e l o t w i l l r e q u i r e t h a t t h e C i t y p r o c e s s a $1 ,4 0 0 c r e d i t i n p a r k f e e s .
Site Plan
1. Buildings over 9,250 square feet in area (floor area to include all floors, basements and
garages) must be protected with an automatic fire protection system.
2. A final grading plan and soils report must be submitted to the Inspections Division before
permits can be issued.
3. Retaining walls over four feet high require a design by a professional engineer, a building
permit, inspections and final approval.
4. Walls and projections within five feet of property lines are required to be of one-hour fire-
resistive construction.
5. Buildings are required to be designed by an architect and engineer (licensed in the State of
Minnesota) as determined by the Building Official.
6. The developer and/or their agent shall meet with the Inspections Division as early as
possible to discuss plan review and permit procedures.
7. The site plan shall comply with the conditions of approval granted in conjunction with
Lakeside 7 th addition.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
MUNICIPAL CONSENT AND ADOPT RESOLUTION APPROVING LAYOUT NO. 4 AND
IMPOSING A NO PARKING ZONE: HENNEPIN COUNTY HIGHWAY 61 (FLYING CLOUD
DRIVE) PROJECT BETWEEN TH 101 AND CHARLSON ROAD IN EDEN PRAIRIE.
Paul Oehme provided background information before presenting the propose d improvements and
introducing Jason Staebell, Project Engineer with Hennepin County and Darren Mielke, Assistant County
Engineer with Carver County. Mayor Furlong asked if one access point will be sufficient for
redevelopment of the Moon Valley parcel in the future. Councilwoman Tjornhom asked for clarification
of the cultural resources study and the cost estimate for the trail project. Councilman Laufenburger asked
about th e need for retaining walls and location of the road . Mayor Furlong asked about the height of the
retaining walls, vines or landscaping around the retaining walls, the number of lanes and width of the
roadway, approval process schedule, and det our routes during construction. After comments from council
members the following motion was made.
Chanhassen City Council – March 10, 2014
3
Resolution #2014-16: Councilman Laufenburger moved, Councilman McDonald seconded that the
City Council approves Municipal Consent and adopts a resolution approving layout number 4 and
imposing a no parking zone for the Highway 61 (Flying Cloud Drive) project between Highway 101
and Charlson Road. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS. Mayor Furlong informed the council that he has been invited to
address the Buy Chanhassen group at their March meeting on March 25 th at the American Legion.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS. Todd Gerhardt provided an update on the search for a new
fire chief .
CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION. Councilman Laufenburger commented on the correspondence
regarding SouthWest Transit and gave kudos to Chairman McDonald.
Councilwoman Tjornhom moved, Councilwoman Ernst seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted
in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. The City Council meeting was
adjourned at 8:05 p.m.
Submitted by Todd Gerhardt
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
MARCH 10, 2014
Mayor Furlong called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to
the Flag.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Furlong, Councilman McDonald, Councilwoman
Tjornhom, Councilwoman Ernst, and Councilman Laufenburger
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Kate Aanenson, Paul Oehme, and Roger Knutson
Mayor Furlong: Thank you and welcome to those here in the council chambers as well as those watching
at home. We ’re glad that you joined us this evening. At this time I would ask if there, oh I would like to
make one change to the agenda and that would be to remove item G(3) which is appointments to the
Planning Commission. We ’re going to defer that for this evening and likely include that on our next
agenda so without objection G(3) we ’ll remove from the agenda. Are there any other changes or
modifications from members of the council with regard to the agenda? If not, absent any objection we ’ll
proceed with the agenda as amended.
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None.
CONSENT AGENDA:
Councilman Laufenburger: Just a question Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Furlong: Yes, Councilman Laufenburger.
Councilman Laufenburger: I received correspondence earlier in the day regarding item E(4) and I ’m
wondering if, I ’m not asking that it be removed but I was told that there might be need for discussion on
that. Is that still true or not?
Mayor Furlong: Yeah at this point, that ’s the item relating to the approval of concurrence of bids.
Councilman Laufenburger: Concurrence of bids, yeah.
Mayor Furlong: With regard to the project that we approved back in November.
Councilman Laufenburger: Yeah.
Mayor Furlong: So unless somebody would like to remove it for separate discussion I don ’t.
Councilman Laufenburger: Okay.
Mayor Furlong: I don ’t know that it needs to be removed but if somebody would like to remove it for
separate discussion, this would be their opportunity.
Councilman Laufenburger: No need to.
Todd Gerhardt: Yeah I had not heard from any of the neighbors today.
City Council Summary – March 10, 2014
2
Councilman Laufenburger: Okay.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, if not is there a motion to adopt items E (1) through (6).
Councilwoman Tjornhom moved, Councilman McDonald seconded to approve the following
consent agenda items pursuant to the City Manager ’s recommendations:
1.Approval of City Council Minutes dated February 24, 2014
2.Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated February 18, 2014
3.Approve Resolutions Concurring with the County State Aid Highway (CSAH) Resolution #2014
-11: Designation of Highway 101; and Resolution #2014-12: Imposing a No Parking Zone
from the Scott County Line to CSAH 61 (Flying Cloud Drive) and on CSAH 61 from Bluff Creek
Drive to Highway 101.
4.Resolution #2014-13: Lyman Boulevard Improvement Project: Approve Concurrence of Bids.
5.Resolution #2014-14: Well No. 10: Approve Change Order for Screen Cleaning.
6.Camden Ridge, Located West of Highway 212, North of Pioneer Trail, and East of Pioneer Pass,
Applicant: Lennar:
a.Approve Minor Amendment to Adjust Side Yard Setbacks for Single-Family Detached
Housing on 36.2 Acres Zoned Planned Unit Development-Residential (PUD-R).
b.Resolution #2014-15: Approve Resolution Accepting Ownership of Outlots B, C. E and
F.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS. None.
LAKESIDE 8 TH ADDITION: REQUEST FOR SUBDIVISION OF .2338 ACRES (REPLAT OF
LOTS 1-3, BLOCK 3, LAKESIDE 7 TH ADDITION) INTO TWO LOTS, AND A SITE PLAN
AMENDMENT TO CHANGE A THREE-UNIT TOWNHOUSE TO A TWINHOME ON
PROPERTY ZONED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT-RESIDENTIAL, AND LOCATED AT
35, 45 AND 55 RILEY CURVE; APPLICANT: RON CLARK CONSTRUCTION, INC.
Kate Aanenson: Thank you Mayor, members of the City Council. As you indicated this item is for a
subdivision replat. This did appear before the Planning Commission at their February 18 th meeting and
they did recommend approval of the changes. The property is located in the Lakeside Subdivision which
is on Lyman Boulevard bordering 212 and involves 3 lots. 35, 45, 55 on Riley Curve. So the subdivision
approval is to replat 3 lots into 2 lots and then a site plan review to amend the approved site plan change
to a 3 unit structure so because it ’s a PUD we also look at on multi-family the architecture too. So this is
the 3 original lots. 1, 2, 3 and now you can see where the new split is coming into two. When this
originally came in they felt strongly about getting the 3 lots. It was, it fits on the site but I think looking
at it as their market, buyers looked at it that they felt that the two lots would be better served so this is
what the new subdivision or the new plat will look like. The two lots. Grading plan. All those are in, all
the requirements meet city ordinance. Building elevation. Again meets the overall design standards so
this is that overall area in the back side that Ron Clark is, as you know changes occurred. Originally this
City Council Summary – March 10, 2014
3
was a condominium in the back and then got replatted to the Ron Clark Townhomes. So with that we are
recommending approval, as did the Planning Commission and I ’d be happy to answer any questions that
you may have.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Any questions for staff?
Councilman Laufenburger: Just one Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Furlong: Mr. Laufenburger.
Councilman Laufenburger: Kate, could you go back one slide please? So the area we ’re talking about is
the area right there?
Kate Aanenson: Yes, that ’s correct.
Councilman Laufenburger: Okay. Perfect.
Mayor Furlong: And on that slide Ms. Aanenson, the parcel with the number 2 right behind it, that ’s
remaining 3 at this point?
Kate Aanenson: Correct.
Mayor Furlong: At this time.
Kate Aanenson: Yes it is.
Mayor Furlong: Okay.
Kate Aanenson: I think these lots also had the views. If you go back, so this would be the view shed kind
of looking towards the lake side on that with the garage on the other so these have nice views on this side.
As opposed to the other one which doesn ’t have the same view shed butting up against the 212 but still
very nice.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Any other questions? Is a representative from Ron Clark here? Good evening.
Thank you for coming. Is there anything you ’d like to address the council on?
Ron Clark Construction Representative: No. Just thought I ’d be present in case anybody has any
questions.
Mayor Furlong: I appreciate that very much. Any questions of the developer on this? Do you see other
types of changes like the parcel to the north coming through or do you see this as probably more isolated?
Ron Clark Construction Representative: No, the piece to the north.
Mayor Furlong: I ’m sorry. If you could come up to the microphone and state your name and address for
the record please.
Ron Clark Construction Representative: Yeah, Ron Clark Construction Representative with Ron Clark
Construction.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you.
City Council Summary – March 10, 2014
4
Ron Clark Construction Representative: And so the question is the three to the north? Those are already
built.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Okay.
Ron Clark Construction Representative: The only vacant lots are the south that we ’re replatting from 3
lots to 2.
Mayor Furlong: Great. Okay. Thank you. Any other questions? Very good, thank you.
Ron Clark Construction Representative: Yeah, thanks.
Mayor Furlong: Bring it to council for discussion. Any thoughts or comments? No? Seems very
reasonable. Okay. Would somebody like to make a motion?
Councilman Laufenburger: Does this need a public hearing?
Mayor Furlong: This does not require a public hearing. I think the public hearing happened at the
Planning Commission, didn ’t it Kate? So, okay. Thank you though. Councilwoman Ernst, recognized
for a motion.
Councilwoman Ernst: I ’ll make a motion that City Council approves the subdivision creating two lots out
of three lots and the amendment to the site plan to permit the two unit structure in place of the three unit
structure subject to the conditions in the staff report and adopts the Findings of Fact.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Is there a second?
Councilman Laufenburger: Second.
Mayor Furlong: Motion ’s been made and seconded. Any discussion on the motion? Hearing none we ’ll
proceed with the vote.
Councilwoman Ernst moved, Councilman Laufenburger seconded that the City Council approves
the subdivision creating two lots out of three lots, and an amendment to the site plan to permit a
two-unit structure in place of the three-unit structure, subject to the following conditions and
adoption of the attached Findings of Fact and Recommendation:
Subdivision
1.The development shall comply with the conditions of approval for the Lakeside 7 th Addition.
2.T h e r e d u c t i o n o f o n e l o t w i l l r e q u i r e t h a t t h e C i t y p r o c e s s a $1 ,4 0 0 c r e d i t i n p a r k f e e s .
Site Plan
1. Buildings over 9,250 square feet in area (floor area to include all floors, basements and
garages) must be protected with an automatic fire protection system.
2. A final grading plan and soils report must be submitted to the Inspections Division before
permits can be issued.
City Council Summary – March 10, 2014
5
3. Retaining walls over four feet high require a design by a professional engineer, a building
permit, inspections and final approval.
4. Walls and projections within five feet of property lines are required to be of one-hour fire-
resistive construction.
5. Buildings are required to be designed by an architect and engineer (licensed in the State of
Minnesota) as determined by the Building Official.
6. The developer and/or their agent shall meet with the Inspections Division as early as
possible to discuss plan review and permit procedures.
7. The site plan shall comply with the conditions of approval granted in conjunction with
Lakeside 7 th addition.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
MUNICIPAL CONSENT AND ADOPT RESOLUTION APPROVING LAYOUT NO. 4 AND
IMPOSING A NO PARKING ZONE: HENNEPIN COUNTY HIGHWAY 61 (FLYING CLOUD
DRIVE) PROJECT BETWEEN TH 101 AND CHARLSON ROAD IN EDEN PRAIRIE.
Paul Oehme: Thank you Mayor, City Council members. Good evening. Tonight I ’d just like to briefly
give the council some background on the project and go over the proposed improvements. Again the,
look at the existing conditions. The project goals and proposed improvements and also review the
schedule. Tonight for this item, oh yeah I do have Jason S t a e b ell with Hennepin County. He ’s the
project engineer with us tonight and then Darren Mielke. He ’s the Assistant County Engineer for Carver
County so if there ’s any questions that come up, they can also assist in answering them as well so.
Moving on, the project is the reconstruction of County Road 61. It ’s basically from Highway 101 over to
Charlson Road in Eden Prairie, which is about 3.7 miles long. The section in Carver County is shown
here in white. It ’s about .8 miles so I ’ll focus in on that section of roadway here tonight. The project
organization, there ’s lots of agencies that are currently involved in the project. Hennepin County
obviously is the lead agency. They ’re putting together the plans and specs. Carver County is also
assisting in right-of-way acquisition and design assistance as well. Both the City of Eden Prairie and
Chanhassen obviously are involved in the design as well and actively participating in the project
management meetings that go on monthly. MnDOT is the lead agency in terms of funding the project.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, they have property adjacent to this corridor so we have to work with them
on right-of-way acquisitions and other amenities that they ’re going to be requiring us to look at. U.S.
Corps of Engineers is also involved. The DNR and BWSR for the wetlands. Recent corridor history.
Currently it ’s owned and operated by Hennepin County but prior to 2009 it was the jurisdiction of
MnDOT and that was before. Currently it was, before it was called County Road 61 it was Trunk
Highway 212 before the new 212 had opened up. Again Hennepin County currently owns, maintains the
corridor since basically September 10 th of 2010 which involved a turnback from MnDOT in the
jurisdictional transfer from MnDOT to Hennepin County. Existing roadway is part of the turnback.
MnDOT provides funding again for the County to reconstruct the road to fix deficiencies and there are a
lot of deficiencies on the corridor that I ’ll go through. Turnback funding is however limited so
reconstruction of the project usually takes place several years after the transfer has taken place to the new
agency so in this case again it was 2010 when the actual transfer took place to Hennepin County.
Existing road is right now it ’s two lane typically, undivided rural section. There ’s a few left turn lanes
out there, especially in Eden Prairie. The road condition is poor and it does need a lot of work here in the
near future if it would not be improved at this time. Traffic is interesting on this corridor. Back in 20 00,
or 1996 before 212 and 169 was opened, the average daily traffic on this corridor was in excess of 25,000
trips per day. Now it ’s down to 9,000 or 9,100 and the last count was back in 2010. That can be
attributed obviously to the new 212 being opened and 169 taking that traffic off this corridor. Carver
County does estimate that the traffic growth in this corridor however will increase about 2% annually so
City Council Summary – March 10, 2014
6
by 2035 we ’re projecting about 14,700 trips per day on the corridor. Traffic along the corridor does have
about 7% truck traffic too going into Eden Prairie and down to Shakopee. That ’s the main trips and then
crashes along this corridor are fairly low. They ’re actually lower than other corridors similar to this.
Carver County has, or Hennepin County has identified 16 crashes within the years 2008 through 2012
which is fairly low. Project goals of this are to minimize transportation disruption caused by seasonal
flooding in Minnesota River. As you ’re well aware 101 river crossing is currently going to be
reconstructed this summer and that corridor is going to be raised above the floodplain, over the 100 year
flood elevation. Likewise this corridor, the same goal is to raise a portion of this corridor that floods
seasonally above that 100 year flood elevation to protect and make sure the traveling public does not, can
utilize this corridor during those off events. Do want to improve safety so we ’re adding turn lanes.
Center turn lanes into the project. We understand the traffic and is anticipated to grow in this area and
this region of Carver County, Hennepin County is expected to grow so we are anticipating traffic so we
want to do our best to improve the corridor right now as long as the project is going to be reconstructed.
Paving condition is poor so we want to replace the existing pavement and re-build the pavement section
as well. Improve water quality. We ’re adding 3 ponds to the corridor for water treatment prior to it
discharging into the Minnesota River valley, and then creating a pedestrian friendly corridor that links
communities on regional trails and parks. So project is shown here. Some of the items, reconstructing
obviously the roadway. 3.7 miles of this corridor. We ’re going to have 2 lanes of roadways. Travel
lanes with shoulders. 8 foot wide shoulders. Continuous shared center lanes throughout the corridor as
we ’re adding right turn lanes as well. Urbanizing the roadway. Adding curb and gutter. Not just for
urbanizing it to help the pavement section but also for stormwater management and including a
stormwater piping system. Treatment system as well. Right turn lanes at key intersections that we know
of. Multi-lane trails again on the north side of the roadway connecting Carver County and Hennepin
County to regional facilities and then parks in the area as well. Raising the road above the 100 floodplain.
There will be significant retaining walls that are being proposed through this corridor and I ’ll show you
pictures of that. There are land bridges that are going to be proposed as well. These bridges are not just
for spanning voids but basically it ’s to span poor soil sections within the corridor. There are some
significant soil corrections that would have to take place to dig those out. It ’s actually potentially more
cost effective to build these bridges instead of digging out that deep muck areas. Intersection
improvements as well we ’re talking about and then stormwater quality improvements in terms of
stormwater ponds and infiltration areas. This is a cross section of what the proposed roadway would look
like so through lanes again through the corridor would be 12 foot wide. Center turn lane. Continuous
center turn lane would be 14 foot wide and then 8 foot shoulders. Reactionaries are 6 feet and on the
north side of the road we have a 10 foot boulevard plus a 10 foot bituminous trail as well and then again
we were looking at retaining walls as necessary to retain the bluff since we are widening out the corridor
in some areas. In areas where we ’re adding right turn lanes we ’re just adding a 14 foot wide turn lane and
the roadway section increases by about 6 feet or so. That ’s looking east. So this is a rendering of what
potentially the corridor would look like. Again continuous left turn lanes throughout the corridor. Trail
on the north side and then retaining walls as need be throughout the corridor as well. The retaining walls
are going to vary in height throughout the project area. There are some significant walls that are going to
be necessary. Staff and the project team did look at sloping back the bluff in some areas to eliminate or
reduce the wall heights in some of these areas. In order to do that there would have to be a significant
amount of impact to the bluff in terms of tree loss and vegetation loss and then also right-of-way
acquisition so, and just disruption to the bluff itself and potentially erosion problems so the project
management team did decide, we thought that retaining walls would be the better alternative in this
situation, however there are some fairly high walls that are going to have to be built, especially on the
Eden Prairie side. The tallest wall in the Carver County or Chanhassen side would be near the Moon
Valley property and at that location it ’ll be about 16 feet high. There are again 3 bridges that would span
poor soil areas in 3 locations. None of them in the city limits of Chanhassen or Carver County. And then
we are still evaluating or looking at, and taking geotechnical information as it comes in and we ’re refining
that design as necessary to try to reduce the amount of bridge in the project area just because it is so
City Council Summary – March 10, 2014
7
expensive to build these type of bridges. So I ’d like to just walk through the project corridor itself and
just kind of point out some highlights of the area. We are currently talking to property owners in the
project area and they are aware of potential right-of-way needs and there are some discussions and
negotiations currently going on at this time but starting from the west side of the project area. Basically
on the left hand side of the drawing here it shows the current alignment of the wye intersection at 101.
The project area that ’s currently shown here will start where the 101 project leaves off so basically in
2015 when the 101 project is complete this project, the Hennepin County project would take off from that
location after that project is complete so. This is just a plan view of what the project would look like.
Again the brown line shows the 10 foot wide trail on the north side of the road. The kind of the blue areas,
that ’s the shoulder area. The arrows indicate where the turn lane, or continuous turn lane would be. The
yellow and red are the driveway locations that are currently proposed or going back in it ’s current
location as well and then the dashed line here, if you can see that, that ’s where the construction limits
would be so there are some, there will be some necessity for permanent and temporary easements through
this project. Hennepin County has not completely located or identified the needs for the temporary
easements but I think we ’re pretty close on what is needed for the permanent easements. There are
currently no permanent takes that would be necessary for the project. However there are going to be
some strip takes along the corridor that will be necessary just for construction purposes and for right-of-
way needs and then also just for constructability sake as well. We did look at eliminating or trying to
reduce the amount of access points along the corridor as best as we can. Under this slide, under this
section of the roadway we have identified three access points that are currently driveways that we ’re
looking at eliminating. Throughout the corridor there ’s actually 4 that we ’re looking at. Right now
we ’ve identified that we can eliminate and Carver County ’s actually talking to other, to the property
owners about eliminating a potentially a few more as well. So again the permanent easement is not
shown here but, or the temporary easement ’s not shown but we figure that there is going to be you know
in this location there will probably be another 20 feet of easement that will have to be necessary to
construct this section of roadway and potentially retaining walls as well. Next section over is basically
Erie Avenue area. At just west of Erie Avenue there is a wetland that ’s going to have to be mitigated for.
There are, there is a smaller retaining wall that ’s kind of shown here in yellow that ’s going to be
constructed. On back of that the dashed line again is the construction limits that are currently identified.
There will again, there will have to be some temporary easements that will be acquired for that and that
would be negotiated by Hennepin County and Carver County. There will be some tree loss associated
with that construction work as well. To the east of Erie Avenue again there ’s some wetlands and there ’s a
culvert. Some drainage improvements that have to take place here. Again on the south side there is, this
is a pretty significant muck area that ’s going to have to be dug out so on the south side I think this is U.S.
Fish and Wildlife property. I think that area is going to have to have some temporary easements that
would have to be acquired to make those soil improvements as well. The auto salvage yard, there ’s going
to be some grade changes to the entrance drive there so Carver County, Hennepin County we ’re looking
at taking a little bit bigger, larger easement to improve the grades and the access to that property at this
time. This layout is the section right in front of Moon Valley. The aggregate business that ’s currently in
operation right now. There ’s one access point. There ’s actually two access points to the property right
now. One of those access points is currently being looked at to be closed for this project. There is a right
turn lane into the property on the westbound corridor into the property. This parcel has been identified
for redevelopment of a more of a multi-use development in the future. We feel confident that the access
point at this location will be the one necessary to facilitate and to access that future development if and
when it does take place.
Mayor Furlong: Excuse me Mr. Oehme, if I can interrupt for questions since you ’re here.
Paul Oehme: Sure.
City Council Summary – March 10, 2014
8
Mayor Furlong: Do we think one access point for that property is going to be sufficient based upon the
current guiding?
Paul Oehme: Yeah I think it ’s, this property is going to be challenging to gain additional access points
for at this time. There might be opportunity to gain access to the west side of the property in the future.
However as I mentioned before on the south side of the property here there ’s a big retaining wall, about
16 feet tall in some locations that will have to be built to facilitate this construction. This improvement so
I don ’t think there ’s going to be opportunities for another access point along the corridor on 61.
Mayor Furlong: Without significant grading …
Paul Oehme: Without some significant grading and some significant challenges to get down to, down to
61 at this point.
Kate Aanenson: Can I just add to that? Yeah I was going to say there ’s a creek on the western part of
that. There ’s only one underlying property owner of the property immediately to the west.
Paul Oehme: Yeah, so I think the creek is right here.
Kate Aanenson: Correct.
Paul Oehme: If I ’m not mistaken so there ’s a creek here. This is the east side, or I guess the west side of
the Moon Valley property. There ’s a fairly steep ravine right here I think that would have to be crossed.
Some challenges in terms of topography and getting access to that point so it ’s, it ’s going to be
challenging I think to find another access point.
Kate Aanenson: I think that ’s one of the things we ’ll look at with the study too to see how, if we can tie
those parcels together because it ’s under one ownership underneath so.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you.
Paul Oehme: So that ’s the layout again for the Moon Valley property and the property to the south again
I think this is U.S. Fish and Wildlife property. This area is significantly going to need to be mucked out
so additional easements to the south here are going to be necessary to achieve the soil improvements for
the project. Environmental work is currently going on too. The Environmental Worksheet is being
drafted and drainage improvements are being designed as we speak. There are many environmental
challenges associated with the project. Those include wetlands. Wildlife crossings to the wetlands and
up the bluff. State listed plaint species within the corridor that we have to be mindful of and try to avoid
as best as we can. And then bluffs obviously on the north side of the road …showed the Watershed
District. The Riley-Purgatory are going to be reviewing these plans and obviously the City of
Chanhassen too. We are proposing to construct two, I think two ponds within Eden Prairie ’s borders and
then the existing or the proposed pond within, for the 101 project at the wye. That would take a majority
of the water runoff from this section of roadway within Carver County and treat it in the regional pond at
101. And then replacing all existing drainage structures and culverts that are currently out there. Cultural
resources. Study is currently going on as well. There has been a Phase 1 completed back in September of
last year. There was a need for a Phase 2 that was performed back in fall of last year, November, 2013
and there is potentially a need for a Phase 3 within one of the sites here and U.S. Fish and Wildlife, or
actually U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is currently looking at the need for looking at that Phase 3 study
as well. As council may recall the Phase 3 study was needed for the 101 corridor study along Highway
61, more by Bluff Creek Drive and that study is currently going on. I think there ’s still a little field work
yet to do on that project as well so, but this, this study is moving along quite consistently right now.
City Council Summary – March 10, 2014
9
Project as it moves forward, like I said the EAW, the Environmental Worksheet is currently being drafted
and it ’s scheduled to be published in, this month. Right-of-way acquisitions is if municipal consent goes
forward would start in June and then also final design would start shortly thereafter. By June we figure
that all the easements, the easement needs would be identified and then we can start talking to the
property owners about that, those acquisitions. Bid opening is currently scheduled for June of next year.
June 30 th of next year and then construction start would be in the fall of 2015 so right after the Highway
101 river crossing project is proposed or is planned to be completed. The construction length is right now
estimated to be between 2 to 3 years depending on weather and how much work they can get done in the
wintertime. Full closure will have to be, is needed just because of the muck operations. The amount of
volume of material that ’s coming out of the project. Plus with all the bridge work that has to go on, the
project management team hasn ’t looked right now at staging the project but I think that ’s one of the things
that we ’ll definitely have to look at. This project can be done in phases to try to you know get traffic
through the corridor to a certain point so it doesn ’t, so we ’re not impacting the whole corridor all at once.
The schedule as we ’re being proposed is a little bit different than what we ’ve done with other projects in
Carver County. Hennepin County likes to have the municipal consent or the approvals for the project
approved prior to starting the final design and the right-of-way acquisition so the council ’s aware of what
the project consists of so with that costs. Again it ’s going to be funded by mainly by the turnback account
at the State. Again that project is being advanced through basically the 101 project and some other
projects so this project is being advanced quicker than had been anticipated through the turnback funding
list that MnDOT has or, yeah. MnDOT has, especially in the Carver County section of the project.
Carver County will need to potentially upfront the turnback costs that are eligible for the portion that ’s in
Carver County since that ’s really not programmed at this time since again the project is being advanced
because of the 101 river crossing project so that ’s still under negotiation or study. The costs associated
with the City are relatively small because the corridor, the pavement, or the roadway section that ’s being
proposed fits in with the current deeds of the corridor so 100% of that corridor would be funded by the
turnback account. There are trail improvements that are being proposed for the project. However those
are not turnback eligible so the City would participate in those costs concurrent with or associated with
the current Carver County cost share policy. So we ’re estimating about $150,000 for the trail
improvements for this corridor. So with that if there ’s any questions that the council may have, I can try
to address them and again representatives from Hennepin County and Carver County are here to answer
any questions that you may have as well.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you Mr. Oehme. Appreciate the report. Any questions? Councilwoman
Tjornhom.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Paul, can we watch the cultural, was it cultural study was that what it was?
Resources.
Paul Oehme: Sure resources, yeah.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: What is the acronym? What does that stand for, for the NRHP? And I don ’t
mean to put you on the spot, sorry.
Paul Oehme: The National Registry of Historical Places.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Okay.
Paul Oehme: So it ’s looking at buildings or structures or different other things that are potentially would
be on the Historical Registry or eligible for Historical Registry.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: And do we know what those are?
City Council Summary – March 10, 2014
10
Councilman Laufenburger: Aren ’t they the digs?
Councilwoman Tjornhom: And if they are the digs, do you want to explain that a little bit?
Jason Staebell: My name ’s Jason Staebell. I ’m with Hennepin County. Thanks for having me tonight.
The cultural resources that we have found on this project are in Eden Prairie, what they found was a axe
head. It was probably about that big. It ’s a hand axe and then they did a Phase 2 and they found some
other various little pieces that indicate there was some people that hung out there at one point. Well it ’s
not a very technical term right there but.
Councilman Laufenburger: It ’s called inhabited.
Jason Staebell: There we go.
Todd Gerhardt: A few years ago.
Jason Staebell: And.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: And before you go on. So what does that mean for the project overall?
Jason Staebell: It means we will have to minimize, mitigate or, we mitigate the impacts to that area so
either by, if there ’s ways we can avoid it we will but it ’s looking like we ’ll probably be very close to this
area.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: And I ’ve got to say, why? I mean what ’s the purpose of mitigating?
Jason Staebell: The reason we have to mitigate is that we ’re impacting U.S. Fish and Wildlife property
and that is a action of the Federal government so we have to bring into the cultural resources aspect of,
it ’s called the 106 process and so we ’re required to see what ’s out there for cultural resources and then
mitigate or minimize. It ’s, this is not a, you probably wouldn ’t even notice what this site is if you went
out there.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Right.
Jason Staebell: It ’s potentially eligible, it meets the requirements of the, to be eligible. It ’s up to the
Army Corps to see if they agree, concur that it should be listed.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: And because that mitigation, will there be any increase in cost to the project?
Jason Staebell: Potentially there might be but that will be turnback eligible.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: And then one more question for Paul.
Mayor Furlong: Sure.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Paul you said the cost estimate for us where it comes to the trail part is
$150,000. Is that correct?
Paul Oehme: Correct.
City Council Summary – March 10, 2014
11
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Is that an estimate by today ’s standards or was that estimated a long time ago
for this project?
Paul Oehme: No I think the last estimate that Hennepin County gave us, we ’re still within that estimate
so, and that ’s.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: So there shouldn ’t be many surprises?
Paul Oehme: I ’m not anticipating any with the trail costs.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Okay. That was it.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Other questions? Mr. Laufenburger.
Councilman Laufenburger: Related to Councilwoman Tjornhom ’s question, what ’s the source of those
funds? Is that park dedication funds?
Paul Oehme: Currently we have in the budget trail funds to pay for that.
Councilman Laufenburger: Okay. I have another question for you since you ’re here, and I expect that
you already have an answer to this so you ’d be disappointed if I didn ’t ask it. These retaining walls that
you build, why do you build those?
Jason Staebell: Why are we building these? To minimize the impacts to the bluffs. It was thought that
you could construct this but it ’d be a significant impact to those bluffs so it ’s a concern for staff at
Chanhassen and it was a big concern for the council and the staff at the City of Eden Prairie so it ’s a way
to minimize the impacts to the bluffs.
Councilman Laufenburger: Okay. So isn ’t it also possible to minimize the impact to the bluffs by
moving the roadway away from the bluffs?
Jason Staebell: It is possible.
Councilman Laufenburger: And why wouldn ’t we do that?
Jason Staebell: There is significant amount of wetlands on the south side and we would have to mitigate
those impacts to the wetlands and pretty much right now we ’re centering the proposed road on the
existing road.
Councilman Laufenburger: Okay.
Jason Staebell: The more we move to the south, the poorer the soils. The more cost it will be to build the
road.
Councilman Laufenburger: Okay. So it ’s a trade off.
Jason Staebell: Yeah.
Councilman Laufenburger: It ’s a trade off. If you keep it there then you ’re going to spend money on the
retaining wall. If you move it you ’re going to spend money on mitigating the wildlife.
City Council Summary – March 10, 2014
12
Jason Staebell: Wetland.
Councilman Laufenburger: Or the wetland. Impacting the wetlands.
Paul Oehme: And also acquiring more right-of-way as well if you move it farther to the south.
Councilman Laufenburger: Who owns the land?
Paul Oehme: U.S. Fish and Wildlife owns a majority I think of the property.
Jason Staebell: Yep.
Councilman Laufenburger: Can ’t you cut a deal with them?
Paul Oehme: Well.
Jason Staebell: We ’re trying.
Councilman Laufenburger: That was it.
Todd Gerhardt: And avoidance.
Paul Oehme: Avoidance, right.
Mayor Furlong: Other questions? I have a few in no particular order. The retaining walls, since that was
brought up already. You said the highest was 16 feet in Chanhassen. 25 across the border I think I saw.
Paul Oehme: Correct.
Mayor Furlong: Help me with some perspective there. We just did the project up at 101 and Pleasant
View. Some retaining walls going in. How high are those retaining walls, do you recall?
Paul Oehme: Yeah, I believe.
Mayor Furlong: …at 62.
Paul Oehme: I believe the wall that wraps Bandimere Park on the south side, I think the highest it was 28
feet.
Mayor Furlong: Okay and that ’s, that dipped down for the trail underpass, right?
Paul Oehme: No I ’m thinking the one on the, more or less on the south side. On the curve.
Mayor Furlong: On the curve?
Paul Oehme: Right. You ’re coming down around the curve there so I think that ’s the highest wall that
was in that corridor. That ’s right around 28 feet I believe.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Other end of 101 north end, up by Crosstown 62 with the Pleasant View Road
intersection there were some, where we added the trail in on the west side north of Pleasant View.
City Council Summary – March 10, 2014
13
Paul Oehme: Right. Yep.
Mayor Furlong: West side of 101 we did some retaining walls there.
Paul Oehme: Yeah I think the highest there was maybe 12 feet.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Are we doing some landscaping or vines or shrubs or something there to kind of
soften the look of these walls?
Paul Oehme: To be honest with you Mayor we really haven ’t gotten to that level.
Mayor Furlong: I appreciate it …thank you.
Paul Oehme: Yeah that level of detail yet but you know we try to mitigate for some of that and then have
some plantings as much as we can. Unfortunately this corridor is really tight with the clear zones that are
going to have to be required for the roadway improvements just for safety issues so basically between the
trail and the roadway there really can ’t be any improvements there or.
Mayor Furlong: Landscaping.
Paul Oehme: Landscaping there. I mean we probably can talk about vines or doing something up there
on the walls but in terms of plantings or trees along the corridor, it ’s going to be very tough I think.
Mayor Furlong: Alright. And maybe we should take a look at that and maybe that ’s something you do …
Paul Oehme: Yep, exactly. And we ’ll talk about that during final design.
Kate Aanenson: Yeah I think also we could probably include that when we ’re looking at, those properties
are all going to be redeveloped. There ’s no irrigation down there now.
Mayor Furlong: Right.
Kate Aanenson: Yeah so I think what we would incorporate into our long term planning that we have a
theme. Kind of we look at that as we look at the corridor. Some design themes of landscaping, whatever
so that may be something we ’d want to incorporate into the.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Design standards.
Mayor Furlong: Yep. That sounds good and let ’s keep that in mind as we. The number of lanes. The
width of the road. I think we talked about this at our work session as well. It ’s being built and striped
for two through lanes with turn lanes currently but also wide median, pavement median. It has the
capacity I think with some adjustment maybe to the existing curb lines to add in and to make it 4 lanes if
necessary. The reason I ’m asking is the new bridge coming across the river and 101. It ’s going to be 4
lanes each way. We ’re going to have 4 lanes of traffic. Or 2 lanes each way.
Paul Oehme: Right.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. And then this narrows down to one lane and it will be the same thing to the
west so eventually I think the traffic will be there and so how do we deal with that when the traffic
demand increases? Or increases the demand for that.
City Council Summary – March 10, 2014
14
Paul Oehme: So Hennepin County did do a traffic analysis and a projection of traffic needs and estimates
for I think 2035 and currently right now the traffic on this corridor is right at 9,100 trips per day and
they ’re projecting about 14,000 or between 14,000 and 15,000 trips per day by 2035 so.
Mayor Furlong: And that ’s assuming the river crossing is in place?
Paul Oehme: That ’s assuming the river crossing and I think up the bluff too if I ’m not mistaken was also
included in that.
Mayor Furlong: Okay.
Paul Oehme: In that analysis so you know Hennepin County, Carver County are fairly confident that
15,000 trips per day this corridor can handle that.
Mayor Furlong: Okay.
Paul Oehme: In the future you know, if it does get above you know I think right now about 18,000 trips
per day we need to look at maybe doing something else and the curb lines as they sit today potentially can
be restriped to 4 lanes. However at intersections it might have to widen out and add right turn lanes and
some other improvements at that time too so.
Mayor Furlong: And there ’s width within the existing right-of-way and the existing trail to do those if
it ’s warranted?
Paul Oehme: If it is, yeah.
Mayor Furlong: Okay.
Paul Oehme: At those intersections.
Mayor Furlong: And were those traffic counts, did they include development, at least within Chanhassen
along that corridor as well under the current guiding?
Paul Oehme: Yep. Exactly and those, those trips in the traffic analysis always takes into account future
growth in the, just not in the corridor but in the region as well.
Mayor Furlong: In the region as well, okay. Alright.
Todd Gerhardt: Paul I think you had a slide that showed 1996 was kind of the peak at a little over 24,000
trips. 25.
Paul Oehme: Let ’s see if I can find that slide. Oh yeah, here we go. Yeah so, yeah so back in 1996.
Mayor Furlong: Before the 169 bridge. River crossing.
Paul Oehme: Yeah.
Todd Gerhardt: Yeah, 169.
Paul Oehme: 169 and 212 yeah. I mean this corridor was level of service D and F at that point in time
and as you can recall the intersection, especially the wye intersection that was always broke down during
City Council Summary – March 10, 2014
15
peak hours traffic so we ’re planning for growth and I think the proposed design can handle it for the
foreseeable future.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Alright. With regard to the timing of why we ’re here tonight with this approval
at an earlier stage than typically when we see these when it might be final.
Paul Oehme: Right.
Mayor Furlong: What happens between now and if there are changes to the plan or if we ’re doing a
corridor study down there right now.
Paul Oehme: Right. Yep.
Mayor Furlong: There might be something that comes from that that say hey, we want to do some things
now at this time.
Paul Oehme: Yep.
Mayor Furlong: How do we deal with that?
Paul Oehme: So as new information comes in we ’re going to be looking at putting that information into
the final design package so the council ’s still going to have opportunity to review the final plans and
specifications before we go out to bid and approve us to go out for bid so there ’s joint power agreements
that have to be approved by, between the counties and other improvements. We ’re probably, we ’re going
to have to concur with the bids as well so there ’s a lot of approvals that the City, the Council ’s still going
to have to work through prior to this project actually getting off the ground so there ’s a lot of checkpoints
I think along the way that, not just staff but the council ’s going to be working through.
Mayor Furlong: So what that tells me is, tonight we ’re being asked for municipal consent as the plans
currently are but as those plans get developed and improved I mean.
Paul Oehme: Right.
Mayor Furlong: We believe, what we ’re being asked to say is, based upon what ’s here today we approve
it but there will be other opportunities if there are some things that come up, especially any material
changes.
Paul Oehme: Yep. Absolutely. Like I said we ’ll talk about landscaping too and we ’re going to talk
about, we ’re still talking about access issues throughout the corridor for driveways and then is there an
opportunity to talk about staging the project a little differently then just reconstructing the whole section
of roadway all at one time so, those are the kind of things that we still have to get more detail and design
towards but you know Hennepin County would like approval at this time just so they can start going
through the right-of-way acquisition process and working, start working on final design so just kind of a
check in to say okay at this point in time you know right-of-way, we know there ’s some needs out here
but it ’s something that ’s not, that the council can understand and it ’s not going to be too impactful for the
residents at this time so, just kind of a check in that it ’s, you know it ’s something that, it ’s a workable
project basically.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Alright. And with regard to, you mentioned the closures and I know that ’s
something we ’ve talked about and I know you don ’t want to close a road any longer than you have to.
Current detour routes. What is the expectation there for the detour? You had the map of the area. Can
City Council Summary – March 10, 2014
16
you go back to the, or do you Mr. Oehme?
Paul Oehme: Okay I ’ll try to.
Mayor Furlong: With the white and the gray. There you go.
Jason Staebell: Yeah, we would like to minimize the closures.
Mayor Furlong: I ’m sure you would.
Jason Staebell: To as short as possible.
Mayor Furlong: Yeah.
Jason Staebell: The detour for the project for full closure would be up 101 to Pioneer Trail and then back
over to, tying into 61. Kind of over by Flying Cloud airport.
Mayor Furlong: Pioneer Trail and 61?
Jason Staebell: Yep.
Paul Oehme: I mean from a staff ’s perspective we do have concerns about that detour route just up the
bluff, 101 right now just because it ’s current condition.
Mayor Furlong: But I don ’t know that there ’s a better one.
Paul Oehme: Well there isn ’t but I mean that ’s something we ’re going to have to take a look at,
especially MnDOT and Carver County and us are going to have to take a look at and see if, you know
right now I think there ’s 6,000 trips per day on that corridor. If we ’re having another 9,000 trips per day
to that corridor you know we ’re going to have to see what, see if it ’s going to be feasible or not so.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Okay, thank you. Any other questions on this? This doesn ’t require a public
hearing does it?
Paul Oehme: No.
Mayor Furlong: And I don ’t know if anybody here wants to make any public comment but we ’d certainly
be open to public comment as always on these items. Seeing none let ’s bring it back to council for
comments, discussion and a motion. Thoughts and comments. Mr. Laufenburger.
Councilman Laufenburger: Yeah I just, Mayor Furlong I appreciate your clarification that we ’re, what
we are giving consent to right now is that, that Hennepin County move forward with their plans but if
these plans change substantially in any area that you know city staff have the responsibility to work with
Hennepin County to bring that back to us for review. I see some issues on this. I think that closure is an
awfully long time and I think about the 101 crossing of the Minnesota River is going to happen in one
year. Is that correct? One summer. It ’s going to be open at the same time so I guess I would implore the
organizations involved here to consider how they can change that from 2 or 3 years to 1 or 2 years or
maybe just even one year. I like the notion that this is happening. I think that in spite of the opening of
169 and 212 I think this corridor has a good bit of traffic on it and what we ’d like, what we in Chanhassen
would like to have happen down in the 101/61 area, there might even be more so I ’m certainly in favor of
the project and I ’m in favor of giving our, giving consent at this time but I do have concern about that
City Council Summary – March 10, 2014
17
closure.
Mayor Furlong: I hate to go back to questions but can you address that a little bit more. I know you said
you want to keep it shorter but obviously it ’s an issue.
Jason Staebell: Yeah the closure ’s necessary because of the muck that we have to excavate and then the,
there ’s a significant bridge that we ’ll have to build and as we ’ve discussed it ’s a very tight corridor.
Bluffs on one side and the wetlands on the other. I wanted to give you the worst case scenario.
Hopefully we can bring that down to be less than 2 years of closure.
Mayor Furlong: So by saying worst case, do you think it ’s the most likely case at this point based upon
what you understand or is there really a worst case that it be no worst than that given some, are you
building in weather delays and such as a function of that timeline?
Jason Staebell: We haven ’t built in weather delays.
Mayor Furlong: I ’m sorry, have or have not?
Jason Staebell: Have not.
Mayor Furlong: Okay.
Jason Staebell: It ’s.
Mayor Furlong: So with weather delays under the current plan it could be longer?
Jason Staebell: Could be but one of the benefits of muck excavation is during the winter is a better time
to muck so, and then building retaining walls can happen during the winter also so this year was kind of
an extreme winter but I think according to my construction folks it ’s, the 2 years is about a good number
at this point. For what we know at this point.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. And that ’s 24 month period when you ’re saying 2 years?
Jason Staebell: Yep.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Okay, thank you for clarifying. Does that help clarify Mr. Laufenburger?
Councilman Laufenburger: Well we can ’t predict the future.
Mayor Furlong: I know, no.
Councilman Laufenburger: Just in my mind I ’m balancing what ’s the length of the 101? Is it 1.7 miles?
No.
Paul Oehme: Sorry.
Councilman Laufenburger: What ’s the length of 101.
Mayor Furlong: River crossing.
Councilman Laufenburger: The river crossing.
City Council Summary – March 10, 2014
18
Paul Oehme: The river crossing. It ’s right in that ballpark. Yeah I think it ’s 2 miles almost.
Councilman Laufenburger: Yeah. You know in fairness they ’re building an entire new structure adjacent
so it ’s not like they don ’t have to move a lot of muck until the causeway needs to be removed and then
there ’s no, we don ’t care how long that ’s going to take. Or we do but, I didn ’t mean to say that we don ’t
care. I mean we care but the highways …but well we ’re talking about inconveniencing people and like
you Paul I ’m thinking of that 101 so.
Paul Oehme: Yep.
Councilman Laufenburger: I think it ’s the best they can do.
Paul Oehme: Yeah there ’s still a lot, like I said there ’s a lot of work that has to be done yet to really dial
in this design and see what we can do to really try to shorten up that construction length as much as we
can.
Councilman Laufenburger: Let ’s hope they don ’t find any more cultural resources.
Mayor Furlong: Any other comments? Questions? Mr. McDonald.
Councilman McDonald: Yeah I guess you know in thinking about this and everything, I just I have a lot
of concern about 101. I mean now you ’re looking at diverting truck traffic down that hill. You ’re talking
right now 9,000 something trips. I don ’t think the hill can take 9,000 trips. Especially in the wintertime.
Over a 2 year period. I think you ’ve got to find another route instead of going, using the 101 hill because,
either that or you ’ve got to fix it so that it could sustain that kind of traffic because otherwise I think
we ’re just looking at having a lot of problems.
Mayor Furlong: I mean long term 101 is something that we do want improved.
Councilman McDonald: Right but it ’s the gap.
Mayor Furlong: And we know we ’re working with the County to do that I think.
Councilman McDonald: Yeah.
Mayor Furlong: As bad as we all envision it will be, it ’s the best route that goes north and south within
that proximity at this point so.
Councilman McDonald: I hear you but again.
Mayor Furlong: The best in this case may not be very good.
Councilman McDonald: It ’s not very good because you don ’t see that many trucks right now on 101.
They ’re all going either up and down that way or they ’re over on 212. Now when you try to put some
trucks on that road.
Mayor Furlong: Well I ’m not sure how many trucks come across the river right now. I ’m sure some do
but.
Paul Oehme: 7%.
City Council Summary – March 10, 2014
19
Mayor Furlong: 7%. And how does that compare to normal traffic on a county or state highway? I mean
are the trucks already avoiding the area?
Jason Staebell: In general for Hennepin County our normal truck traffic is about 5% for county roads.
It ’s a little bit more than your normal county road but within reason.
Mayor Furlong: I mean effectively what will likely happen is people will change their driving habits to
the point that it becomes as manageable as possible.
Councilman Laufenburger: And my guess is.
Mayor Furlong: Which will be an inconvenience. I ’m not …
Councilman Laufenburger: Sure but my guess is some of those trucks that would have difficulty
navigating 101 are likely going to go east on whatever the road is in Shakopee/Savage. Head over to 169
and come back along Pioneer Trail or Anderson Lakes Parkway if their destination is Eden Prairie
probably which is a longer trip but.
Councilman McDonald: Okay I guess I would just like to see some better planning from the city
standpoint because we have to maintain that hill and that would not be the place to have a lot of accidents.
Mayor Furlong: It ’s a concern but again I think the best solution is minimizing the duration you know so.
Don ’t get too comfortable. You might be coming back the way this group is going. No.
Councilman McDonald: No, I ’m done.
Mayor Furlong: Any other comments or questions? My thoughts are similar. It ’s great to see the project
happening. Obviously concerns about some of the aspects but it ’s, it seems to be a function of you know
where the road sits and the length. You know what needs to be done and so just, I think we ’ve expressed
our concerns and probably nothing that you haven ’t heard from other organizations and councils as well
so I think that ’s where we need to keep working together even though we ’re going forward with our
consent this evening as far as moving forward with this project, and it is a good project I think in
conjunction with the new river crossing and the improvements. The County 61. Removing the wye.
Including roundabouts and stuff. There will be, you know long term it ’s going to be a great improvement
to the transportation system in our region and so that ’s, that ’s very positive. It ’s just going to be rather
disruptive during the process so as much as we can do to get it done as quick as possible I think will be a
benefit to all. If there are no other comments, Paul do you have a proposed motion? Is there one on the
power point? If not there is one in our motion. Would somebody like to make a motion? Mr.
Laufenburger.
Councilman Laufenburger: Sure. Mr. Mayor I move that the City Council approves Municipal Consent
and adopts a resolution approving layout number 4 and imposing a no parking zone for the Highway 61
(Flying Cloud Drive) project between Highway 101 and Charlson Road.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Is there a second?
Councilman McDonald: Second.
Mayor Furlong: Motion ’s been made and seconded. Any discussion on the motion?
City Council Summary – March 10, 2014
20
Resolution #2014-16: Councilman Laufenburger moved, Councilman McDonald seconded that the
City Council approves Municipal Consent and adopts a resolution approving layout number 4 and
imposing a no parking zone for the Highway 61 (Flying Cloud Drive) project between Highway 101
and Charlson Road. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you everyone. Appreciate your help so far and all your work coming forward.
Appreciate it.
COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS.
Mayor Furlong: Just a notice for members of the council and the public too, I ’ve been invited to address
the Buy Chanhassen group at their March meeting on March 25 th , which is a Tuesday so that ’s coming up
in a couple weeks. 11:30 at the American Legion so I ’m looking forward to that. Give an update on
some of the things that are going on in the city. If there ’s nothing else, Administrative Presentations.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS.
Todd Gerhardt: Busy doing the search for our new fire chief. We have interviews next Tuesday with
several panels of department heads and some of our volunteers to get some feedback from them on our
two candidates and help me in making my decision.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Very good. Any questions for Mr. Gerhardt or his staff? No, thank you. We ’ll
look forward to the outcome of that process.
CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION.
Mayor Furlong: Any discussion? Any items in that? Mr. Laufenburger.
Councilman Laufenburger: Yeah I, kudos to SouthWest Transit.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you.
Councilman Laufenburger: And the chairman. I just think that this is a, this is a showcase for this
community. And not just Chanhassen but Chaska and Eden Prairie and now you ’re moving into Carver,
is that correct? Down by the Jonathon Carver Parkway. Anyway this is a, this is a real success story and
I would hate to see anything interfere with that success story so Mr. McDonald keep your pedal to the
metal.
Councilman McDonald: Well if I could, you know one of the things that happened last week was we did
have a meeting with the Met Council about what we ’re going to do with Eden Prairie and you know as I
said before the meeting there, I have been real pleased with the cooperation that we ’ve had with Met
Council. We made a lot of suggestions. We have now come up with a plan that is independent of where
the light rail ends. Before the first couple plans, the plans for the site varied based upon where the light
rail ended. We ’ve since compromised and we ’ve come up with a plan that ’s totally independent so we ’re
out of that mix. Also the plan that we came up with only requires one taking. At this point the Culver ’s
is probably in jeopardy but we ’ve saved Anchor Bank and we ’ve saved all the other spots around there
and so that has.
Councilman Laufenburger: Just to clarify, you ’re talking about the Culver ’s which is next to SouthWest
Station in Eden Prairie.
City Council Summary – March 10, 2014
21
Councilman McDonald: Right, in Eden Prairie. Right. Yep. Not the one here. That one ’s fine but yeah,
we ’ve reached agreement and they compromised and we compromised and we ’ve actually come up with
some pretty good designs and everybody was very thankful so that problem is over. Now the only
problem we have to worry about at the end of the line is where do they end and they ’re not going to make
that decision for another couple of weeks but it won ’t be dependent upon the design at Eden Prairie
station.
Mayor Furlong: Well there are some few questions further east along the proposed line too in St. Louis
Park and Minneapolis.
Councilman McDonald: Well we won ’t, at least at the end they ’ve got a place to put their tracks and it
looks pretty good. Connecting that further east that ’s not our problem.
Councilman Laufenburger: So they haven ’t picked a golden spike spot, is that right?
Councilman McDonald: Not quite yet.
Mayor Furlong: Alright.
Todd Gerhardt: Mayor and council.
Mayor Furlong: Yes.
Todd Gerhardt: Just to add to the correspondence packet. I did schedule Len Simich to come to our work
session. Our last work session in April to give you an update.
Mayor Furlong: Great.
Councilman McDonald: Just one more thing that I did, City of Chanhassen and Chaska are going to have
a say in this because the cities will have to agree to these plans once they ’ve been finalized. The Met
Council thinks they only need municipal consent from Eden Prairie but because SouthWest Transit is a
joint powers, they need it from the other two cities so what Chaska and Chanhassen are looking at is,
what ’s in the long term best interest of SouthWest Transit so to Denny ’s point, yeah. We are trying to
make sure it stays viable and continues to grow. So we will have a vote in all of this.
Mayor Furlong: And what ’s the timing of that?
Councilman McDonald: It ’s going to be in the April-May timeframe because all the decisions need to be
done by the end of June as far as what they ’re going to do so I think Len coming here is part of all that.
We ’re going to get the resolutions out. The Memorandum of Understanding will be approved by the
SouthWest Board. The detailed contracts will go to the cities for approval.
Mayor Furlong: When is the commission plan to consider the Memorandum of Understanding? This
month?
Councilman McDonald: Right now it ’s, no it ’s not for this month. It ’s on the schedule for next month.
They ’re finalizing it this month and our next meeting ’s going to be like April 10 th and we ’re going to
review it at that point.
Mayor Furlong: We should probably look at, with Mr. Simich coming out our last meeting in April. To
the extent that there will be council action required of that, we should get that in front of us as quick as we
City Council Summary – March 10, 2014
22
can. And I ’m not saying reschedule Mr. Simich but if that Memorandum of Understanding is available
sooner, perhaps we should look at seeing that in our work session if we ’ve got time. I wouldn ’t mind
taking time at multiple work sessions if necessary so that we ’re fully informed of what ’s taking place.
Was that the purpose of his?
Todd Gerhardt: That was the first time he was available.
Mayor Furlong: And that was the purpose for him coming? Not just a standard update?
Todd Gerhardt: Probably to talk about that but some of the other things that are going on too.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Okay.
Todd Gerhardt: I think he wanted to let you know that that was coming.
Mayor Furlong: Yep.
Todd Gerhardt: And what was the deadline Jerry?
Councilman McDonald: Well everything ’s got to be done by the end of June because of where the timing
for money ’s at and all of those things so yeah the Memorandum of Understanding is only going to be
used as the blueprint to do the final contracts for what we ’re going to do there so it ’s going to be a high
level document. It ’s not going to have all the details of who ’s going to pay what or who ’s going to do
what and those kind of things. That will be developed once we have that put together. But yeah as soon
as we ’ve got it I ’ll make sure Mr. Gerhardt gets a copy of it and then what he can do is send it out via
email to all the council members.
Todd Gerhardt: Yeah I would think that he would probably lay out a schedule at that meeting.
Mayor Furlong: Okay.
Todd Gerhardt: So we ’ll try to make room for future meetings for it.
Mayor Furlong: And maybe what would be helpful, if you ’re, if the commission ’s having a meeting on
the 10 th of April, obviously the packet for that meeting will be going out in advance of that meeting.
Councilman McDonald: It ’s going to be very close.
Mayor Furlong: Right.
Councilman McDonald: We already know it ’s going to be very close.
Mayor Furlong: Depending whenever it ’s ready I ’d be interested in seeing that. I ’m sure the rest of the
council would be as well.
Councilman McDonald: Make sure you get a.
Mayor Furlong: It ’s a very accelerated timeframe. Great, thank you for all your work on that. For
keeping the interest of our city and SouthWest Transit in the forefront. Any other comments or
discussion on the correspondence packet? Seeing none we will continue our work session discussion
immediately following this meeting in the Fountain Conference room. If there ’s nothing else to come
City Council Summary – March 10, 2014
23
before the council this evening, is there a motion to adjourn?
Councilwoman Tjornhom moved, Councilwoman Ernst seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted
in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. The City Council meeting was
adjourned at 8:05 p.m.
Submitted by Todd Gerhardt
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
SUMMARY MINUTES
MARCH 4, 2014
Chairman Aller called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Andrew Aller, Mark Undestad, Kim Tennyson, Maryam Yusuf, and Stephen
Withrow
MEMBERS ABSENT: Steven Weick and Lisa Hokkanen
STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director; Bob Generous, Senior Planner;
Terry Jeffrey, Water Resources Coordinator; and Stephanie Bartels, Project Engineer
PUBLIC PRESENT:
Rick Dorsey 1551 Lyman Boulevard
PUBLIC HEARING:
BUSINESS IMPACT GROUP-PLANNING CASE 2014-07: REQUEST FOR REZONING FOR A
MINOR AMENDMENT TO THE CHANHASSEN WEST BUSINESS PARK PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT (PUD) TO INCREASE THE MAXIMUM BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE
WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT; AND SITE PLAN REVIEW TO CONSTRUCT A 3 9 ,240
SQUARE FOOT OFFICE/WAREHOUSE BUILDING ON PROPERTY ZONED PLANNED
UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) AND LOCATED ON PART OF LOTS 1 AND 2, BLOCK 1,
CHANHASSEN WEST BUSINESS PARK (2410 GALPIN COURT).
Mark Undestad recused himself from the Planning Commission for this item.
Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Chairman Aller asked about meeting requirements
for parking and stormwater . Commissioner Withrow asked for clarification on the type of traffic
associated with the site. Chairman Aller opened the public hearing. Peter Larson with Waytek asked for
additional screening of the loading dock area and more trees along the north ern wall. Chairman Aller
closed the public hearing.
Withrow moved, Tennyson seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends the
City Council approve the minor amendment to the Chanhassen West Business Park Planned Unit
Development (PUD) to increase the maximum building square footage within the development; and
the Site Plan Review to construct a 39,240 square foot office/warehouse building subject to the
following conditions and adopts the Findings of Fact and Recommendation:
1.The developer shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City.
2.The developer shall pay the park fee of $23,121.00 with the building permit.
3.The developer shall install a pedestrian access to the Galpin Boulevard trail.
4.The developer shall provide benches and/or picnic tables for employees.
Planning Commission Summary – March 4, 2014
2
5.The developer shall provide detail of the bioretention areas is provided showing:
a.Any soil amendments and corrections,
b.Pre-treatment practices to be employed and these shall be shown on the plan view and in
the detail sheet (It is highly recommended that something similar to the Rain Guardian
developed by Anoka Conservation District be used.), and
c.Steps that will be taken to prevent compaction and siltation of the area resulting from
construction activities on the site.
6.Hydrologic calculations demonstrating that the features will draw down in 48 hours or less
are provided.
7.Hydrologic and water quality calculations demonstrating the features will treat 1-inch water
quality volume from impervious areas is provided.
8.An exhibit showing pre- and post-development drainage is provided.
9.Calculations shall be provided demonstrating that no increase in runoff rates will result at any
point leaving the site after build out.
10.The SWPPP shall be modified such that it is a standalone document which includes all
elements required by the permit. At a minimum this shall include the following elements:
a.A narrative of construction activity per Part IIIA 1.
b.A listing of the chain of responsibility for oversight of SWPPP implementation per Part
IIIA 2.
c.Training documentation for those involved in the design and implementation of the
SWPPP per Part IIIF.
d.Designs and calculations for meeting Stormwater Discharge Requirements although it is
understood that this project was originally permitted under different rules so design
requirements will be to that approval as administered by Carver County WMO.
e.Estimated preliminary quantities tabulation for al erosion prevention and sediment
control BMPs per Part IIIA 5.
f.Impervious coverage pre-development and post-development per Part IIIA 5.
g.Site map showing soil types per Part IIIA 5.
h.A map of surface waters and wetlands within one-mile of site which will receive
stormwater. The SWPPP must identify if these are special or impaired waters. Lake
Hazeltine receives runoff from the site and is listed as a 303D impaired water.
i.The SWPPP must indicate who is responsible for the maintenance of the permanent
stormwater management practices on the site and a maintenance plan to assure
performance of the practice as listed in Part IIIA 5 k.
j.The plans must show all elements required under part IV.C of the permit.
11.The existing Storm Catch Basin identified as ST CB on sheet C5.01A shall either be
abandoned and have the conveyance eliminated or shall have inlet protection provided prior
to disturbance within the area tributary to the CB. This shall be shown on the plan sheet and
Planning Commission Summary – March 4, 2014
3
included within the Sequence of Construction.
12.The bioretention area must be designed and constructed following the guidelines set forth in
the on-line Minnesota Stormwater Manual.
13.Because the site connects to city infrastructure, the City and/or their representatives shall be
represented at the pre-construction meeting and shall approve the installation of BMPs. The
Sequence of Construction shall be changed to reflect this.
14.Bioretention areas cannot be brought on-line until all tributary areas are stabilized. The
Sequence of Construction shall reflect this.
15.Inlet protection shall be called out at all curb cut areas and the practice shall be included in
the details. The Sequence of Construction shall reflect this need.
16.The swale areas must be stabilized with ditch checks, erosion control blanket or other
approved best management practice.
17.Silt fence or other acceptable perimeter control practices shall be extended to protect all
down gradient areas including the entire frontage along Galpin Court and shall be shown on
both C5.01A and C5.02A.
18.The Sequence of Construction found on Sheet C5.02 A shall have “if required by contract ”
removed.
19.On sheet C5.03A, the city does not allow for the use of wooden posts for silt fence. The silt
fence detail must be modified to reflect this.
20.On sheet C5.03A, change Maintenance Note 7 to include compaction and sediment
protection from all construction related activities.
21.The plans must meet all requirements set forth by other agencies with authority over the site.
The applicant is responsible to procure all necessary approvals and permissions. This
includes, among others, the MN Pollution Control Agency and the Carver County
Watershed Management Organization.
22.The developer must submit a soils report to the City.
23.The engineer shall revise the proposed grading plan to show the existing and proposed
elevation at the corners of the proposed building.
24.The plan shall be revised to show locations of proposed stockpile areas.
25.The plan shall be revised to show the top and bottom wall elevations at points along the
wall.
Planning Commission Summary – March 4, 2014
4
26.The engineer shall show the truck turning movements in the loading area on the plan.
27.The plan must follow all applicable State and Federal guidelines, including ADA standards
for the sidewalk reconstruction.
28.Sanitary sewer and water main to be installed for this project shall be privately owned and
maintained.
29.The applicant shall work with staff to develop a revised landscaping plan, which shall
be submitted for review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit.
Additional landscaping shall be installed along the north property line. Suitable
species for the area next to the building include arborvitae, such as Techny, and
columnar trees such as Apollo or Sugar Cone maple. To block views of the truck
loading docks, the applicant shall install a hedge along the property line north of the
loading docks. The shrub materials selected should provide year round coverage to a
mature height of at least 5 ’ – 6 ’.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0.
Mark Undestad re joined the Planning Commission at this point.
PUBLIC HEARING:
LYMAN BOULEVARD WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT-PLANNING CASE 2014-05:
REQUEST FOR WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT FOR PROPOSED ROADWAY
RECONSTRUCTION AND IMPROVEMENT PROJECT OF THE SEGMENT OF CSAH 18
BETWEEN CSAH 15 (AUDUBON ROAD) AND CSAH 17 (POWERS BOULEVARD).
APPLICANT: CARVER COUNTY.
Terry Jeffery presented the staff report on this item. Chairman Aller opened the public hearing. Mark
Anderson with MFRA and representing P P B Holding s highlighted the three concerns outlined in their
letter delivered to Mr. Jeffery on March 4, 2014 . Chairman Aller closed the public hearing.
Undestad moved, Yusuf seconded that the Planning Commission recommends the C i t y C o u n c i l
approve Wetland Alteration Permit #2014-05 and WCA Permit Number 2013-01 to impact
1.88 acres of wetland and the replacement plan under MN Rules Chapter 8420 which
utilizes the purchase of 3.34 acres of wetland credit from bank #1392 and 0.66 acres from
the BWSR Road Replacement Program for the purpose of the reconstruction of the
proposed County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 18 (Lyman Boulevard) Roadway
Improvements Project, Phase 3; and authorize the Water Resources Coordinator to sign
the joint notification application for approval of wetland replacement a s s h o w n i n p l a n s
d a t e d F e b r u a r y 1 1 , 2 0 1 4 s u b j e c t t o t h e following conditions :
1 .Wetland replacement shall occur in a manner consistent with the Minnesota Wetland
Conservation Act (MR 8420). The applicant shall receive the City ’s approval of a wetland
replacement plan prior to any wetland impact occurring.
2 .A n a p p e a l h a s b e e n f i l e d o n b e h a l f o f M r . R i c k D o r s e y . T h i s i s a n a p p e a l o f s t a f f
d e c i s i o n t o d e n y a r e q u e s t f o r a N o -L o s s d e t e r m i n a t i o n f o r W e t l a n d 1 A . A n y a p p r o v a l o f
Planning Commission Summary – March 4, 2014
5
m i t i g a t i o n q u a n t i t i e s s h a l l b e c o n t i n g e n t u p o n t h e o u t c o m e o f t h i s a p p e a l . T h e c o u n t y m a y
h o l d a n y a d d i t i o n a l c r e d i t s a n d a p p l y t h o s e c r e d i t s t o f u t u r e p h a s e s o f t h e L y m a n (C S A H 1 8 )
r e c o n s t r u c t i o n p r o j e c t .
3 .I f i t i s d e t e r m i n e d t h a t s e c o n d a r y i m p a c t s w i l l o c c u r t o w e t l a n d 1 A a s a r e s u l t o f t h e
p r o p o s e d i m p r o v e m e n t s , t h e s e i m p a c t s w i l l n e e d t o b e m i t i g a t e d f o r a t a 2 :1 r a t i o .
4 .W e t l a n d b u f f e r a r e a s s h a l l b e p r e s e r v e d , m a i n t a i n e d , a n d /o r c r e a t e d around all existing
wetlands in compliance with Sections 20-401 – 20-421 of Chanhassen City Code.
5 .T h e a p p l i c a n t s h a l l a p p l y f o r a n d o b t a i n p e r m i t s f r o m t h e a p p r o p r i a t e r e g u l a t o r y a g e n c i e s ,
e .g . M i n n e s o t a P o l l u t i o n C o n t r o l A g e n c y , M i n n e s o t a D e p a r t m e n t o f N a t u r a l R e s o u r c e s ,
M i n n e s o t a D e p a r t m e n t o f T r a n s p o r t a t i o n , M i n n e s o t a B o a r d o f S o i l a n d W a t e r R e s o u r c e s a n d
A r m y C o r p s o f E n g i n e e r s a n d c o m p l y w i t h t h e i r c o n d i t i o n s o f a p p r o v a l .
6 .T h e a p p l i c a n t m u s t s u b m i t a B i l l o f S a l e f o r W e t l a n d B a n k i n g C r e d i t s t o t h e M i n n e s o t a
B o a r d o f W a t e r a n d S o i l R e s o u r c e s s i g n e d b y b o t h t h e b u y e r a n d s e l l e r o f d e s i g n a t e d w e t l a n d
c r e d i t s .
7 .T h e a p p l i c a n t m u s t o b t a i n , a n d t h e c i t y m u s t h a v e r e c e i v e d c o p y o f , a n A p p l i c a t i o n f o r
W i t h d r a w a l o f W e t l a n d C r e d i t s f r o m t h e M i n n e s o t a W e t l a n d B a n k s i g n e d a n d a p p r o v e d b y
t h e M i n n e s o t a B o a r d o f W a t e r a n d S o i l R e s o u r c e s p r i o r t o a n y w e t l a n d i m p a c t s .
8 .A s i g n e d L a n d o w n e r S t a t e m e n t a n d C o n t r a c t o r R e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r m s h a l l b e p r o v i d e d t o
c i t y p r i o r t o c o m m e n c e m e n t o f a c t i v i t y .
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Tennyson noted the verbatim and summary Minutes
of the Planning Commission meeting dated February 18, 2014 as presented.
COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS. None.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: CITY COUNCIL ACTION UPDATE AND FUTURE
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA ITEMS.
Kate Aanenson noted there were no planning items on the last City Council meeting agenda before
reviewing the schedule of upcoming Planning Commission meetings and work session.
Undestad moved, Tennyson seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion
carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. The Planning Commission meeting was adjourned at
7:45 p.m.
Submitted by Kate Aanenson
Community Development Director Prepared by Nann Opheim
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MARCH 4, 2014
Chairman Aller called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Andrew Aller, Mark Undestad, Kim Tennyson, Maryam Yusuf, and Stephen
Withrow
MEMBERS ABSENT: Steven Weick and Lisa Hokkanen
STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director; Bob Generous, Senior Planner;
Terry Jeffrey, Water Resources Coordinator; and Stephanie Bartels, Project Engineer
PUBLIC PRESENT:
Rick Dorsey 1551 Lyman Boulevard
PUBLIC HEARING:
BUSINESS IMPACT GROUP-PLANNING CASE 2014-07: REQUEST FOR REZONING FOR A
MINOR AMENDMENT TO THE CHANHASSEN WEST BUSINESS PARK PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT (PUD) TO INCREASE THE MAXIMUM BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE
WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT; AND SITE PLAN REVIEW TO CONSTRUCT A 3 9 ,2 4 0
SQUARE FOOT OFFICE/WAREHOUSE BUILDING ON PROPERTY ZONED PLANNED
UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) AND LOCATED ON PART OF LOTS 1 AND 2, BLOCK 1,
CHANHASSEN WEST BUSINESS PARK (2410 GALPIN COURT).
Mark Undestad recused himself from the Planning Commission for this item.
Generous: Good evening Chairman Aller, commissioners. As you stated this is the public hearing for the
proposed development and amendment to, a minor amendment to the Chanhassen West Business Park
PUD standards as well as site plan review for a 3 9,240 square foot office/warehouse building. Basically
we ’re increasing the overall square footage of the development that was initially estimated at 350,000
square feet. Previously it was amended to go up to 365,000 square feet and now it ’s going up to 377,000
square feet. This is still well under the 450,000 square feet that would require a mandatory Environment
Assessment Worksheet. We did, as part of the original review traffic was a big concern and we looked at
what the potential ultimate trip generation numbers would be with this change and it came to a total of
153 trips a day so that would not create any significant impacts on any of the roadway improvements in
the project. Again the second part is for a 39,240 square foot office/warehouse building. The eastern end
of this building would be a two story office space. 6,000 square feet total. The rest of the building would
be for warehouse uses. This property is located at 2410 Galpin Court. It ’s at the northwest corner of
Galpin Court and Galpin Boulevard. It ’s just within the Chanhassen West Business Park. There are only
two lots that are undeveloped in this project and this is one of them. The one to the west of it has site plan
approval already and is just waiting for the building permit process to go forward. This area is guided for
office/industrial uses and the planned unit development is for a business park. Again the PUD
amendment revises the total square footages of the buildings within the development. We ’re increasing
each of them by 6,000 square feet for office and also for light industrial warehouse space. For a total
square footage of 377,000 square feet. Within our report we did show the breakdown of the original
estimated square footages for the developments and then what has actually been built or approved within
the development. Therefore we need to increase the total square footages. Now the site plan for this
building is, this is the, the 36,240 square feet is the first floor footprint and like I said on the eastern end
Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 4, 2014
2
of the building there is another 3,000 square feet of second floor of office space and so that brings us to
the 39,240 square foot building. The total building height to the top of the parapet is 35 feet. It ’s within
the 40 foot that was permitted within this development. They have two access points. The primary one
would be just across from the business access to the south. The existing big Snap building and then
there ’s a truck entrance on the west end for, mostly for exiting purposes because they ’ll be pulling in on
the first driveway and then having to pull over there and back up into that. Building material consists
primarily of exposed aggregate. This is what the material looks like. However it will be dark brown when
they actually build it so, but this shows you how there ’s a lot of texture in the primary building material.
It will be tip up panels that are used for the project. Accent will be provided through the use of these
stone veneer and these are, they have faux columns that they ’re creating at all the overhead window
elevations and then in the corner of the buildings they ’ll have full columns that go up to the roof elevation.
Again there ’s a nice picture. The primary entrance is in the southeast corner of the building. This is the
office space for the building. They ’ve taken the entrance feature that ’s in the existing building to the
south and then relocated it in this location. It does provide a lot of articulation in that. The building does
step back, or as you go, or step out as you move farther to the west so you ’ll see a lot of articulation in
that elevation and then with the landscaping we believe this will be an attractive building. Again this is
just the elevations on all four sides. There ’s not a lot on the north side. It ’s at 10 feet from the property
line. They will be providing some landscaping to help soften that elevation. The eastern elevation is full
of lots of windows in the office space and then you have that southeast corner that has the, major entrance
feature. Grading on the site. They will be putting a small retaining wall in the southeast corner of the
parking lot. The site jumps up to Highway, or to Galpin Boulevard. The one condition that we do have is
that they create a pedestrian access. There ’s a trail on Galpin Boulevard so from this site to that trail.
We ’ll leave it up to them and as part of their building permit process to come up, whether they ’ll put in
something closer to the building or come out into the right-of-way and make a short sidewalk segment out
there. I should, one of the things that they did have to do is provide some stormwater improvements on
the site. Rain gardens are located in the two, in this area. In the landscape island and then also in this
area, and then it connects into the overall project. There is a stormwater pond that ’s located in the
southwest corner of the entire development that all this water goes to before discharging downstream.
They met all the requirements for site landscaping. It will be a nice addition to this area and actually
provide some permanent parking for the users of the site. Staff is recommending approval of both the
amendment and the site plan and adoption of the Findings of Fact and Recommendation and with that I ’d
be happy to answer any questions.
Aller: Any questions from anyone this far? I think the report ’s pretty complete. I ’m glad to see the trail
access in there. Something that I think that we ’ve continually worked on in attempting to make sure that
our great trail system is connected to all our office buildings and people have an opportunity to move
freely around and through those buildings and enjoy them. With the parking spaces, is there the required
minimum? Do they meet the required minimum on parking spaces?
Generous: They meet the required. 52 spaces are required and that ’s what they ’re providing. They did
have 53 originally but because of the stormwater improvements they lost some, a couple spaces.
Aller: And they ’re using both the pond and water garden?
Generous: Yeah the water, rain garden on site and then downstream there ’s a stormwater pond that will
treat the entire, that treats the entire development.
Aller: Good variety of stormwater treatment. Anyone else?
Withrow: I had a question on the additional traffic.
Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 4, 2014
3
Aller: Sure.
Withrow: Will that be commercial or delivery? Heavy delivery type things or more of a customer retail?
Generous: Well it ’s more for the building uses because it ’s mostly warehouse space. We use a business
park as the generation number.
Withrow: Oh, okay.
Generous: So it accounts for all, it could account for all of that. You could have some people come and.
Withrow: So it ’d be a mix.
Generous: They ’re just averages but it was a quick way to look to see if there would be significant
impacts to the street system.
Withrow: Okay.
Aller: And then water and sewer and electric, we ’re good to go with that?
Generous: Everything ’s available on this property.
Aller: Anything further from anyone? Okay, we ’ll hear from the applicant if the applicant wishes to
come forward.
Brian Houwman: I ’m the architect. If you have any questions I ’m to answer but otherwise.
Aller: Okay. Just for the record so people know, Mr. Houwman is here from B rian W. Houwman
Architect AIA made himself available for purposes of questions. At this point I don ’t have any questions.
The report seems fairly complete so and those of you at home that are not present or even those that are
present, don ’t have access to these materials, they can be found on the website. The city website does
have the packages there for everyone to review. With that I ’ll open it up. Yes sir.
Peter Larson: I ’ve got a couple questions if possible.
Aller: Okay.
Peter Larson: Hi everybody. Peter Larson at Waytek. We ’re their neighbors.
Aller: Okay.
Peter Larson: They ’re a great company and we have no objections whatsoever.
Aller: Let ’s do this. I ’m going to open the public hearing.
Peter Larson: Okay, sorry.
Aller: Because you ’re a member of the public. That ’s what I was heading to.
Peter Larson: Okay, thank you. And we ’re their neighbors and they ’re a great company and they do a lot
of great things for the community and we ’re happy to be their neighbors. We got no objections
Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 4, 2014
4
whatsoever to their amendments or for the amendment. One thing we ’d like to see though is, if possible
by the loading dock door have, is there any way I could go up there and pin point on it a little bit? Well
anyways on that northwest corner where the loading docks are, is it possible if they could put a wall that
goes along where the trucks would back up. It would just make it a little softer and it would create a
barrier you know between the trucks and the property line between Waytek. We have a couple walls like
that right now and if they want to see any examples that would be you know a screen or a wall type of
situation so. And then.
Aanenson: I was just looking at that grading plan just to see if there ’s, there ’s not a lot of grade change.
I ’m just wondering if there ’s another, if you ’re, are you trying to get some screening? Is that what your
objective is?
Peter Larson: Yeah just, just between the loading docks and our parking lot. Just make it a little softer.
Aanenson: When you use the word wall I ’m just saying maybe there ’s another term that we could use.
Fencing. Screening.
Aller: I was thinking buffer.
Aanenson: Buffer.
Peter Larson: A buffer. Screening. Yeah that type of.
Aanenson: Okay.
Peter Larson: You know that would be nice and it just would break it up a little bit and you know, and
the second thing is if, on that north wall, it ’s just a pretty long wall and I ’m just wondering if there ’s any
way to get a few more trees up along the part of the north wall. It ’s a beautiful building and I know it
looks just like the one across the street that they ’re in. I know Mark did all that so it looks great so, but
just something to consider too.
Aanenson: Yeah we can look at that. I think one of the things is have the City Forester look at that too.
Whether or not being how much room there is to grow.
Peter Larson: Yeah it ’s pretty tight.
Aanenson: Too tight. Whether or not they ’d survive so, but understand the intent.
Generous: …back side it ’s sort of they don ’t get the light so.
Peter Larson: Yeah.
Aanenson: We can look at something.
Peter Larson: We ’re just thinking maybe like evergreens or you know arborvitaes that would be a little
bit more screening because in the winter the, what is it? The maples that would be there, they would
probably not have much coverage so.
Aanenson: Yeah, right.
Peter Larson: Not, you know just something to consider so. Okay. Alright, thank you.
Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 4, 2014
5
Aller: Anything else?
Peter Larson: No.
Aller: So it sounds like the concerns you ’re bringing forward are really a buffer along the north side.
Peter Larson: Yes. Yes. Alright, thank you.
Aller: Thank you very much. Would anyone else like to come forward and speak either for or against or
make any comments regarding the matter before us? Seeing no one come forward I will close the public
hearing and open it up for commissioner comments and discussion.
Yusuf: I ’m good.
Withrow: I ’m good.
Aller: Looks like a great project. I would just make the comment that perhaps the City can work with
them and take a quick look a t potential buffering keeping in mind that obviously the type of trees and
things that are used, they ’re going to have to look. Will they survive? Will it be a good buffer?
Anything else? Alright, I ’ll entertain a motion.
Withrow: I ’ll move to, that the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends the City Council approve
the minor amendment to the Chanhassen West Business Park Planned Unit Development to increase the
maximum building square footage within the development; and a Site Plan Review to construct 39,240
square foot office/warehouse building subject to the conditions of the staff report and adopts the Findings
of Fact and Recommendation.
Aller: Okay I have a motion. Do I have a second or any discussion? Or I need a second.
Tennyson: I ’ll second.
Aller: And then any discussion. My only discussion would be that we ’ll add, if possible just the
recommendation at the end but it won ’t be, I ’m not making it an amendment to the motion. So with that
all those in favor.
Withrow moved, Tennyson seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends the
City Council approve the minor amendment to the Chanhassen West Business Park Planned Unit
Development (PUD) to increase the maximum building square footage within the development; and
the Site Plan Review to construct a 39,240 square foot office/warehouse building subject to the
following conditions and adopts the Findings of Fact and Recommendation:
1.The developer shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City.
2.The developer shall pay the park fee of $23,121.00 with the building permit.
3.The developer shall install a pedestrian access to the Galpin Boulevard trail.
4.The developer shall provide benches and/or picnic tables for employees.
Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 4, 2014
6
5.The developer shall provide detail of the bioretention areas is provided showing:
a.Any soil amendments and corrections,
b.Pre-treatment practices to be employed and these shall be shown on the plan view and in
the detail sheet (It is highly recommended that something similar to the Rain Guardian
developed by Anoka Conservation District be used.), and
c.Steps that will be taken to prevent compaction and siltation of the area resulting from
construction activities on the site.
6.Hydrologic calculations demonstrating that the features will draw down in 48 hours or less
are provided.
7.Hydrologic and water quality calculations demonstrating the features will treat 1-inch water
quality volume from impervious areas is provided.
8.An exhibit showing pre- and post-development drainage is provided.
9.Calculations shall be provided demonstrating that no increase in runoff rates will result at any
point leaving the site after build out.
10.The SWPPP shall be modified such that it is a standalone document which includes all
elements required by the permit. At a minimum this shall include the following elements:
a.A narrative of construction activity per Part IIIA 1.
b.A listing of the chain of responsibility for oversight of SWPPP implementation per Part
IIIA 2.
c.Training documentation for those involved in the design and implementation of the
SWPPP per Part IIIF.
d.Designs and calculations for meeting Stormwater Discharge Requirements although it is
understood that this project was originally permitted under different rules so design
requirements will be to that approval as administered by Carver County WMO.
e.Estimated preliminary quantities tabulation for al erosion prevention and sediment
control BMPs per Part IIIA 5.
f.Impervious coverage pre-development and post-development per Part IIIA 5.
g.Site map showing soil types per Part IIIA 5.
h.A map of surface waters and wetlands within one-mile of site which will receive
stormwater. The SWPPP must identify if these are special or impaired waters. Lake
Hazeltine receives runoff from the site and is listed as a 303D impaired water.
i.The SWPPP must indicate who is responsible for the maintenance of the permanent
stormwater management practices on the site and a maintenance plan to assure
performance of the practice as listed in Part IIIA 5 k.
j.The plans must show all elements required under part IV.C of the permit.
11.The existing Storm Catch Basin identified as ST CB on sheet C5.01A shall either be
abandoned and have the conveyance eliminated or shall have inlet protection provided prior
Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 4, 2014
7
to disturbance within the area tributary to the CB. This shall be shown on the plan sheet and
included within the Sequence of Construction.
12.The bioretention area must be designed and constructed following the guidelines set forth in
the on-line Minnesota Stormwater Manual.
13.Because the site connects to city infrastructure, the City and/or their representatives shall be
represented at the pre-construction meeting and shall approve the installation of BMPs. The
Sequence of Construction shall be changed to reflect this.
14.Bioretention areas cannot be brought on-line until all tributary areas are stabilized. The
Sequence of Construction shall reflect this.
15.Inlet protection shall be called out at all curb cut areas and the practice shall be included in
the details. The Sequence of Construction shall reflect this need.
16.The swale areas must be stabilized with ditch checks, erosion control blanket or other
approved best management practice.
17.Silt fence or other acceptable perimeter control practices shall be extended to protect all
down gradient areas including the entire frontage along Galpin Court and shall be shown on
both C5.01A and C5.02A.
18.The Sequence of Construction found on Sheet C5.02 A shall have “if required by contract ”
removed.
19.On sheet C5.03A, the city does not allow for the use of wooden posts for silt fence. The silt
fence detail must be modified to reflect this.
20.On sheet C5.03A, change Maintenance Note 7 to include compaction and sediment
protection from all construction related activities.
21.The plans must meet all requirements set forth by other agencies with authority over the site.
The applicant is responsible to procure all necessary approvals and permissions. This
includes, among others, the MN Pollution Control Agency and the Carver County
Watershed Management Organization.
22.The developer must submit a soils report to the City.
23.The engineer shall revise the proposed grading plan to show the existing and proposed
elevation at the corners of the proposed building.
24.The plan shall be revised to show locations of proposed stockpile areas.
25.The plan shall be revised to show the top and bottom wall elevations at points along the
wall.
Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 4, 2014
8
26.The engineer shall show the truck turning movements in the loading area on the plan.
27.The plan must follow all applicable State and Federal guidelines, including ADA standards
for the sidewalk reconstruction.
28.Sanitary sewer and water main to be installed for this project shall be privately owned and
maintained.
29.The applicant shall work with staff to develop a revised landscaping plan, which shall
be submitted for review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit.
Additional landscaping shall be installed along the north property line. Suitable
species for the area next to the building include arborvitae, such as Tech n y, and
columnar trees such as Apollo or Sugar Cone maple. To block views of the truck
loading docks, the applicant shall install a hedge along the property line north of the
loading docks. The shrub materials selected should provide year round coverage to a
mature height of at least 5 ’ – 6 ’.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0.
Mark Undestad joined the Planning Commission at this point.
PUBLIC HEARING:
LYMAN BOULEVARD WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT-PLANNING CASE 2014-05:
REQUEST FOR WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT FOR PROPOSED ROADWAY
RECONSTRUCTION AND IMPROVEMENT PROJECT OF THE SEGMENT OF CSAH 18
BETWEEN CSAH 15 (AUDUBON ROAD) AND CSAH 17 (POWERS BOULEVARD).
APPLICANT: CARVER COUNTY.
Jeffery: Thank you Chairman Aller, commissioners. Tonight we have before you the CSAH 18 Lyman
Boulevard wetland alteration permit and Wetland Conservation Act replacement plan permit. The
purpose of this permit is to insure that proper sequencing has occurred to minimize the wetland impacts to
the greatest e xtent practical and that we are in compliance with Chapter 8420 of Minnesota Rules that the
replacement is adequate to replace the impacts that were unavoidable for this project. Not sure how many
of you are familiar with the overall line of the project. In 2006 the County phased out, where ’d we go?
Phased out the project over 3 phases to go from Trunk Highway 41 in Chaska to Powers Boulevard.
Phase 1 was drive by the high school so they started in the middle. I don ’t want it to be confusing. This
gets referred to as Phase 3 even though it ’s the second phase of the project and that is the area to the right.
Excuse me, on this photo. This is the project location . It extends from Audubon. From Audubon to
Powers Boulevard with some pertinent areas as well. This has been a long time coming, as we talked
about in, okay. (Having technical difficulties with computer) In 2007 the entire corridor was delineated
from Trunk Highway 41 to Powers Boulevard. In 2008 , close to 9 months they were able to permit the
wetland replacement for phase 1 of the project, which is by the high school. That was two authorities.
That was Chaska and Chanhassen and then the other players that we have. In December of 2012 the
County came forward with a new wetland replacement plan and i n January the Technical Evaluation
Panel (TEP) met to discuss their proposed replacement plan. And at that time it was determined that
because of the age of the delineation that they should go back. Update the data sheets for the delineated
wetlands and field verify the location, just to make certain that conditions hadn ’t changed sufficiently to
require a different wetland alteration permit and different mitigation. At that same TEP the applicant was
Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 4, 2014
9
told that they needed to provide additional information about safety needs for this project, and we ’ll talk
about that in a little more detail later but with linear projects is the Board of Water and Soil Resources
feels that there ’s a safety need they will replace that portion which is directly related to safety through the
Minnesota wetland bank program. Anything pertinent to that, storm sewer, trails that wouldn ’t be
considered safety, that has to be mitigated for on site or through purchase of wetland bank credits. So we
had asked them to update that safety criteria. They updated the delineations. We noticed, we approved
the delineation but that was since negated the County sent a letter in April requesting that we withdraw
the approval for this project that we had submitted due to some concerns about access to Mr. Dorsey ’s
property, who is here tonight. So that was withdrawn. In August of that same year they came in just with
a DNR permit alone fearing that they were starting to fall behind in schedule so the DNR permit was for
the culvert crossing for Bluff Creek underneath Lyman Boulevard. That was approved a month and a half
later. In 2013, October of 2013 Houston Engineering was retained to separately delineate those basins
that were on Mr. Dorsey ’s property and the remainder was submitted then by SRF. All wetlands
exclusive an area those, what was W-15, W-16 and W-17. Houston also submitted a memorandum
requesting a no loss determination for one of the wetlands on the property. The boundaries for both
delineations, the SRF and the Houston were approved. The no loss request was denied. That no loss
request was appealed in January by MFRA on behalf of Mr. Dorsey. Excuse me, in February but after the
decisions were made the County came forward with their application. The TEP met to discuss the appeal
and at that time Mr. Dorsey brought it to our attention that his driveway is being cut approximately 5 feet
adjacent to a wetland that was in question with the appeal. BWSR looked at it, we looked at it and
decided that it was very likely that secondary impacts would result in draining of that wetland and that is
that, the email you have in front of you. When it was decided BWSR sent out a memorandum. The
County revised their impact and mitigation schedule accordingly. That arrived to us 2 hours after the
packet went out to the Planning Commission. Therefore that ’s why this has been presented to you so we
will, I ’ll show it up later for everyone to see but W-2 which was W-17, the impact changed from two
hundredths of an acre to fourteen hundredths of an acre and then replacement would have to change
concurrent, or commensurate with that. At this time we ’re here to address the amended application.
Today, behind the first page, the second page of your document is a letter that was sent by MFRA that
they would like to be considered with this. I believe MFRA is here and they ’ll probably speak to the
letter at that time. So March 24 th I hope to have this before council to approve this plan so we can move
forward on this project. We ’re looking to let it, they want to let it be in construction when the road
restrictions come off. Here ’s the area we are talking about. The area in red, the outline in red is the
construction limits for this project. The blue lines. Excuse me, the purple lines were the original 2007
delineation. The blue lines were the 2013 update. I want to point out one thing. If you look, you can ’t
read the numbers but if you look at 70 to 71, there ’s a line connecting them. That is not in fact the limits
of the wetland. It is the limits of the access we had to the property so no wetland delineation has been
approved beyond that area. This wetland, so this is W-15, 16, and 17. In the Houston report, which I ’ll
show you the figure next, they become Wetland 2 and then Wetland 17 is divided into Wetland 1A, which
is the larger basin here, and Wetland 1B. So again the point of the application process and the point of
the WCA replacement plan is to assure that sequencing is met. That they have one avoided. That ’s not
possible. Then they have minimized and replaced impacts that occurred. There are State standards for
safety of roads so for instance what you ’re seeing are just the typical profiles. I took 205, 2055 and 206.
The side slopes are 3 to 1, which is the minimum. The maximum allowed slope. There ’s clear zone there.
There are other considerations so they have satisfied BWSR safety requirements for the road replacement
and they are meeting State guidelines for safety reasons. Now I talked earlier about the difference
between a safety and a non-safety. We have BWSR will replace or the ones that they have to either
replace through mitigation on site, which is difficult with linear corridor where there ’s a lot of wetlands
already. Very little opportunity for replacement wetlands. The areas that are cross hatched or checkered,
that is the areas that are considered so they ’re just the narrower strips along the edge. They ’re the ones
that are considered necessary for the project and they meet the safety requirements. BWSR will replace
for those. The ones that are just the diagonal hatching are non-safety and therefore the County will need
Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 4, 2014
10
to mitigate for those. So Wetland 1A. This was the original submittal prior to, prior to the Technical
Evaluation Panel reviewing the appeal, and at that time they were just going to impact this corner and
they felt that two hundredths of that would be permanent and there ’d be one hundredths of temporary
while they worked in it and then they would restore that but given the profile. The cutting down to the
road here and the driveway here, it seems pretty evident that, that it will likely drain so we asked SRF to
either provide evidence that it would not drain or to include it in the mitigation plan. So this was the
revised figure that they have provided and the calculations for mitigation has been revised accordingly,
which we ’ll see on the next slide. So back again so over here we have Bluff Creek alignment coming
through and that was permitted separately through the DNR. Through the design of that there ’s been
several iterations of this to improve the flow hydraulics through that area. It was a sharp hairpin turn. To
minimize wetland impacts. To provide self mitigation in that area and to improve downstream water
quality by eliminating the head cut and scour that might otherwise occur. They also, this is looking at it,
looking down it from the outfall on the south side. They have submerged the box culvert so that they can
have a rock substrate so they can mimic natural stream conditions. So they went from just a regular
culvert to, they did take great pains to do what I feel is a very good design and minimize impacts there.
So the original submittal, the one that is in your packet is in the Table to the left. Before Wetland 1A
impact and really the difference is in column 3. So what we have here, we have the total impacts that are
safety related. That adds up to be thirty three hundredths of an acre and that remains the same after we
deal with 1A, because that ’s non-safety related. Everything has to be mitigated for in this case at a 2 to 1
ratio so BWSR will replace sixty six hundredths of an acre under both scenarios but we ’re approving the
scenario on the right. With the new twelve hundredths of an acre impact the total non-safety related
impacts increase from 1.55 acres to 1.67 acres meaning the mitigation required at 2 to 1 is three and thirty
four hundredths acres of mitigation and that is to be purchased from a private wetland so there really is
limited opportunity for on site mitigation. So with that is all I have on this. There is, happy to answer
more questions. I have changed the motion to reflect what we have going on and to reflect, we are
actually talking about the replacement amount and not the impact amount. Those were the numbers that
were in ther e so this is a public hearing and I am, staff is recommending that we approve as submitted in
the February revision.
Aller: Comments or questions at this point. Okay once again, it ’s a great report and I appreciate your
updates and for those that are watching or are here present, that information which we have received
today will be made part of the packet. Obviously it ’s not in the packet on the website yet but it will be
and it will certainly be out before the City Council when they meet on this as well. With that I will open
the, or I ’ll listen to, is there an applicant here that wants to present?
Jeffery: No, there ’s no one from the County here.
Aller: No. No one from the County. So we will open the public hearing at this point and then anyone
wishing to speak for or against or make comment on the motion before us can do so at this time should
they desire to do so. Welcome. If you could state your name and address for the record, that ’d be great.
Mark Anderson: Certainly. Mr. Commissioner, or Mr. Chair and Planning Commission. I ’m Mark
Anderson. The civil engineer with MFRA representing P P B Holding s property at 1501 Lyman Boulevard.
We had provided a comment letter to Mr. Jeffery today and I understand it ’s part of your packet and we
had identified three comments in that letter relative to the proposed wetland mitigation plan. The first one,
as Mr. Jeffery has pointed out has been addressed now with the revised information and so we appreciate
their willingness to make that adjustment per the comments that were brought forward at the TEP meeting
earlier this month. Or later in February actually. The second and third items in our comment letter relate
to a culvert that ’s proposed as part of the Lyman Boulevard plan. I ’ve got the County plan set here on the
table here. Maybe it can be shown on the overhead just to give you a sense of where this is at. 1501
Lyman Boulevard, owned by PPB Holdings is located here and there ’s a 24 inch culvert proposed to cross
Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 4, 2014
11
and drain water from the north side of Lyman Boulevard to the south where PPB Holdings property is
located. It ’s currently an 18 inch culvert being upsized to a 24 inch and historically it was 15 inch prior to
the road improvements that have been made in the past. So the pipe size has increased over time and is
now proposed as a 24 inch as part of this plan. The concern we have, along with the pipe size being
increased is that there ’s no easement in the area of this orange arrow. Approximately 250 feet from the
point of discharge for that 24 inch culvert to the west property line of PPB Holdings and we brought that
to the County ’s attention a few weeks ago. Both in person and in a letter. In the letter they addressed to
us February 25 th , I ’ve got copies if you ’re interested but under their item number 2 it says we ’re
reviewing the need for additional permanent drainage easement and that ’s for this 24 inch pipe. So they
are aware of it. The reason we wanted to comment today is that as we work through that with the
applicant it could quite likely change the wetland mitigation plan depending on whether they convey that
water in a ditch or pipe or some other method such that public water isn ’t being discharged onto our
client ’s property and so I guess what we ’re interested in this evening is for the Planning Commission to
add a condition to the approval, because we ’re not looking to hold this project up but we know this is
something that needs to be addressed and that condition might be such that the applicant work with PPB
Holdings to resolve the drainage easement and drainage needs for the public water that ’s being conveyed
on their private land. So with that said, that ’s our intent would be to see if Planning Commission would
consider adding that condition. Yeah I guess depending on, again how it ’s resolved it could mean
additional wetland impact. Right now the wetland impact is limited to the toe of slope that ’s shown on
the County drawings and downstream to the west of PPB property there is a ditch shown here. I think
Ryland Homes is developing some of this and so they ’ve shown a ditch in the cross section. That ditch
may need to continue onto our client ’s property to that 24 inch pipe. If that were the case there could
quite likely be additional impacts that haven ’t currently been identified in that report that you ’re
considering this evening. As well, as we review these grades the area is very flat and it ’s also higher than
the existing toe of slope and so it ’s pushing this water further into our client ’s property as well the toe of
slope is at a higher elevation than the existing condition so we ’ll have additional impacts on the
hydrology of their property so that ’s what we ’re looking to resolve with further consideration with the
County so we don ’t have those negative impacts on the property and they also obtain the necessary
permanent easement that they need to convey that water. So those items along with the potential change
to the wetland impact report is why we ’re asking for an additional condition be considered tonight.
Aller: Thank you.
Mark Anderson: Thank you.
Aller: Anyone else wishing to speak for or against the items before us? Seeing no one I ’m going to close
the public hearing and I guess I ’ll redirect some questions to Mr. Jeffery. In response, I know that the
County is taking a look at these. They ’re continuing to take a look at these. What would the City ’s
position be with regard to any potential modifications?
Jeffery: Chairman Aller, your response. You do have the response letter with the packet and that will
also be made available. Any additional wetland impacts regardless of the reason for those wetland
impacts would have to come back to this body for review and approval. It would be up to this body ’s
discretion if they wanted to add some specific language in it but the County is aware that if they had
additional impacts they would have to mitigate for those impacts and get approval and show that they are
unavoidable.
Aller: Okay.
Aanenson: I just need a point of clarification. This is going to the City Council on March 24 th .
Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 4, 2014
12
Jeffery: 24 th , correct.
Aanenson: Could they or could they not modify it if it has not been noticed for additional impact?
Jeffery: This, they would not have, through our wetland alteration permit process they would not have
time to get notice. It would have to come in as a separate application at that time. It could not be part of
this application and still meet the deadlines that are set. So I guess I could get a clarification from BWSR
if a memorandum of change would be sufficient in this case. You know they have specific stipulations
for when and when you cannot but either way it would have to be reviewed and council is the ultimate
deciding body.
Aller: Sure.
Jeffery: Certainly could go directly there. I guess the question for me is, does this body want to make a
recommendation to the County to direct them to do something.
Aanenson: That ’s my point of clarification too because they ’re directing you to do something I ’m not
sure that ’s in your purview to do that so that ’s why I was trying to track, it ’s going to be the County
reviewing the easement for the pipe and what the additional impacts are.
Jeffery: Correct.
Aanenson: That ’s why I ’m seeing if you could, if that could just be funneled through to the City Council
if we have that information before that meeting. Otherwise I ’m not sure that you would have enough
information to make a decision at this point.
Aller: Right.
Aanenson: That ’s what it seems like.
Aller: Any impact of a motion as before us would be to put it before the City Council if they don ’t come
up with a good resolution at City Council. Obviously it could be denied at City Council or it could be put
back.
Jeffery: Chair Aller what is before you right now is the impact and replacement plan that has been
presented that staff feels meets sequencing under Chapter 8420 of Minnesota Statute or Minnesota Rules
as well as our wetland alteration permit process. That does not preclude additional impacts from coming
at that time. They would need to be addressed as their own, on their own merits.
Aller: On their own merits. Well it sounds like to me it would put more pressure on individuals to move
it forward if we go ahead, if there is no objection or other objection as is. That still puts the pressure on
the County to resolve the issue one way or another for City Council and then deal with any of those issues
as they come up. Any comments? Discussion.
Undestad: No I agree.
Aller: Otherwise I ’ll entertain a motion.
Undestad: I ’ll make a motion here. I make a motion that Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends
the City Council approve Wetland Alteration Permit #2014-05 and WCA Permit #2013-01 to impact 1.88
acres of wetland and the replacement plan under Minnesota Rules Chapter 8420 which utilizes the
Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 4, 2014
13
purchase of 3.34 acres of wetland credit from Bank #1392 and 0.66 acres from the BWSR Road
Replacement Program for the purpose of the reconstruction of the County State Aid Highway 18 (Lyman
Boulevard) roadway improvements Project Phase 3, and authorize the Water Resources Coordinator to
sign the joint notification application for approval of wetland replacement as shown on plans dated
February 11, 2014, subject to conditions within the staff report and adoption of the attached Findings of
Fact and Recommendation.
Aller: Motion by Commissioner Undestad. Do I have a second?
Yusuf: Second.
Aller: Seconded by Commissioner Yusuf. Any other comments? Discussion regarding the motion.
Undestad moved, Yusuf seconded that the Planning Commission recommends the C i t y C o u n c i l
approve Wetland Alteration Permit #2014-05 and WCA Permit Number 2013-01 to impact
1.88 acres of wetland and the replacement plan under MN Rules Chapter 8420 which
utilizes the purchase of 3.34 acres of wetland credit from bank #1392 and 0.66 acres from
the BWSR Road Replacement Program for the purpose of the reconstruction of the
proposed County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 18 (Lyman Boulevard) Roadway
Improvements Project, Phase 3; and authorize the Water Resources Coordinator to sign
the joint notification application for approval of wetland replacement a s s h o w n i n p l a n s
d a t e d F e b r u a r y 1 1 , 2 0 1 4 s u b j e c t t o t h e following conditions :
1 .Wetland replacement shall occur in a manner consistent with the Minnesota Wetland
Conservation Act (MR 8420). The applicant shall receive the City ’s approval of a wetland
replacement plan prior to any wetland impact occurring.
2 .A n a p p e a l h a s b e e n f i l e d o n b e h a l f o f M r . R i c k D o r s e y . T h i s i s a n a p p e a l o f s t a f f
d e c i s i o n t o d e n y a r e q u e s t f o r a N o -L o s s d e t e r m i n a t i o n f o r W e t l a n d 1 A . A n y a p p r o v a l o f
m i t i g a t i o n q u a n t i t i e s s h a l l b e c o n t i n g e n t u p o n t h e o u t c o m e o f t h i s a p p e a l . T h e c o u n t y m a y
h o l d a n y a d d i t i o n a l c r e d i t s a n d a p p l y t h o s e c r e d i t s t o f u t u r e p h a s e s o f t h e L y m a n (C S A H 1 8 )
r e c o n s t r u c t i o n p r o j e c t .
3 .I f i t i s d e t e r m i n e d t h a t s e c o n d a r y i m p a c t s w i l l o c c u r t o w e t l a n d 1 A a s a r e s u l t o f t h e
p r o p o s e d i m p r o v e m e n t s , t h e s e i m p a c t s w i l l n e e d t o b e m i t i g a t e d f o r a t a 2 :1 r a t i o .
4 .W e t l a n d b u f f e r a r e a s s h a l l b e p r e s e r v e d , m a i n t a i n e d , a n d /o r c r e a t e d around all existing
wetlands in compliance with Sections 20-401 – 20-421 of Chanhassen City Code.
5 .T h e a p p l i c a n t s h a l l a p p l y f o r a n d o b t a i n p e r m i t s f r o m t h e a p p r o p r i a t e r e g u l a t o r y a g e n c i e s ,
e .g . M i n n e s o t a P o l l u t i o n C o n t r o l A g e n c y , M i n n e s o t a D e p a r t m e n t o f N a t u r a l R e s o u r c e s ,
M i n n e s o t a D e p a r t m e n t o f T r a n s p o r t a t i o n , M i n n e s o t a B o a r d o f S o i l a n d W a t e r R e s o u r c e s a n d
A r m y C o r p s o f E n g i n e e r s a n d c o m p l y w i t h t h e i r c o n d i t i o n s o f a p p r o v a l .
6 .T h e a p p l i c a n t m u s t s u b m i t a B i l l o f S a l e f o r W e t l a n d B a n k i n g C r e d i t s t o t h e M i n n e s o t a
B o a r d o f W a t e r a n d S o i l R e s o u r c e s s i g n e d b y b o t h t h e b u y e r a n d s e l l e r o f d e s i g n a t e d w e t l a n d
c r e d i t s .
Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 4, 2014
14
7 .T h e a p p l i c a n t m u s t o b t a i n , a n d t h e c i t y m u s t h a v e r e c e i v e d c o p y o f , a n A p p l i c a t i o n f o r
W i t h d r a w a l o f W e t l a n d C r e d i t s f r o m t h e M i n n e s o t a W e t l a n d B a n k s i g n e d a n d a p p r o v e d b y
t h e M i n n e s o t a B o a r d o f W a t e r a n d S o i l R e s o u r c e s p r i o r t o a n y w e t l a n d i m p a c t s .
8 .A s i g n e d L a n d o w n e r S t a t e m e n t a n d C o n t r a c t o r R e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r m s h a l l b e p r o v i d e d t o
c i t y p r i o r t o c o m m e n c e m e n t o f a c t i v i t y .
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
Aller: With that we ’ll move on to item 3 on the agenda.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Tennyson noted the verbatim and summary Minutes
of the Planning Commission meeting dated February 18, 2014 as presented.
COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS. None.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: CITY COUNCIL ACTION UPDATE AND FUTURE
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA ITEMS.
Aanenson: We had none of the last council meeting. There was no planning items so we will have some
on the next one. Your last meeting that you did the two minor amendments on subdivisions so those will
be going forward. I ’ll just move into future Planning Commissions if I may Mr. Chair. So at our next
meeting on March 18 th we will have a subdivision, Boulder Cove which is on the north side of Highway 7.
We met with Shorewood today just to make sure we ’ve addressed some of their issues as it borders the
two cities so I think we ’ve got all those issues resolved. And in addition what ’s not on here but we will
have a wetland alteration permit for County Road, excuse me. CSAH 61 and 101. That wetland permit
will also be on so. And then we are set for the work session on April 1 st so we will be talking about that
corridor study on 101/61. We ’ll also do a year end review on the projects that we did and then talk about,
Terry will be talking about the new regulations for stormwater managements and there ’s a couple other
code amendments that we ’ll probably talk about too so. With that if anybody else wants to add something
I ’d be happy to entertain that. We are working through a couple other subdivisions. Kind of finding their
placeholders here but we do have some other projects in the pipeline so we anticipate we ’ll be filling up
here. And I did have one other item. Maybe you want to discuss after the, after you adjourn informally
but the Rotary Club is looking for a nomination for Distinguished Service Award so if you want to talk
about it after you adjourn for a few minutes if you have a recommendation and want to submit a name,
that would be great. So other than that, that ’s all I had Chair and commission members.
Aller: Wonderful. And then just before closing I ’ll remind everybody that these matters that were before
us today will be before the City Council on March 24 th . And with that I ’ll entertain a motion to adjourn.
Undestad moved, Tennyson seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion
carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. The Planning Commission meeting was adjourned at
7:45 p.m.
Submitted by Kate Aanenson
Community Development Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim
CHANHASSEN PARK AND
RECREATION COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
SUMMARY MINUTES
FEBRUARY 25, 2014
Prior to the meeting the commission interviewed the following applicants: Curt Kobilarcsik, Tyler
Kobilarcsik, David Wisniewski, Elizabeth Ahern, Jonathon Myers, and Tom Doll. Chairman Kelly
called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Cole Kelly, Steve Scharfenberg, Elise Ryan, Brent Carron, Jim Boettcher,
Rick Echternacht, Luke Thunberg, Jacob Stolar and Ryan Lynch
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman, Park and Rec Director; Jerry Ruegemer, Recreation
Superintendent; and Mitch Johnson, Recreation Supervisor
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Commissioner Ryan asked that number 3 . Closing of Ice Rinks be added
under Reports; and Chairman Kelly asked that number 3. Recommendation of Appointments to Park and
Recreation Commission be added under New Business.
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: None.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Carron moved, Boettcher seconded to approve the verbatim and
summary Minutes of the Park and Recreation Commission dated January 28, 2014 as presented.
PIONEER PASS PARK: RECOMMENDATION CONCERNING PROCESS FOR
PURCHASING PLAYGROUNDS AND PICNIC SHELTERS AND CIP BUDGET AMENDMENT.
Todd Hoffman presented an update on preparations at Pioneer Pass Park for it ’s final year of construction
and recommended a CIP budget amendment. Chairman Kelly asked for clarification on the property line
discrepancies. Commissioner Echternacht asked about the neighborhood installing the playground
equipment. Commissioners Thunberg and Ryan asked for clarification on budget numbers.
Scharfenberg moved, Carron seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommends the
City Council approve the purchase of playgrounds and park shelter for Pioneer Pass Park using a
competitive request for proposal (RFP); including supervised neighborhood installation of the
playgrounds and amend the overall Pioneer Pass Park project CIP budget from $350,000 to
$377,700 to accomplish these purchases. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously
with a vote of 9 to 0.
DISCUSSION CONCERNING FUTURE PROGRAM, EVENT AND RECREATION FACILITY
PROPOSALS.
Todd Hoffman explained that the City Council is asking the Park and Recreation Commission to come up
with new ideas for implementing new events, programming or facilities . Commissioner Ryan suggested
the installation of a splash pad, Art in the Park program which would bring art instructor s to park s to
teach kids how to paint landscapes, doing something in the winter along the line s of the Summer Concert
Series, skateboard clinic at the skate park, hosting a triathlon or half marathon in Chanhassen, and
Park and Recreation Commission Summary – February 25, 2014
2
working with the Environmental Commission to address environmental issues such as installing recycling
bins at city parks. In talking with neighbors and friends Commissioner Thunberg stated the splash pad
came up a number of times, city pool or working with Lifetime Fitness to let city residents use their pool,
community gardens, yoga in the park, photography classes possibly incorporated with the City ’s photo
contest, city golf course, continue to expand dining and retail options, garbage cans and waste bags along
walking trails for dogs, designation of trail routes, and better communication on programs already
available in the city. Commissioner Stolar suggested posting information on Twitter. Commissioner
Echternacht ’s heard about people wanting a swimming pool somewhere in the community, dome for
soccer and lacrosse, going more green (environmentally friendly), and having an a rts and craft show at
Lake Ann. Chairman Kelly suggested a Daddy/Son Get in Shape Walk, and giving away t-shirts to
people who walk a certain number of miles o n C hanhassen trails in the summer before directing staff to
prepare a list and associated costs for the next meeting. Commissioner Carron suggested looking at ways
to improve the Rec Center.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS.
Chairman Kelly announced the Park and Recreation Commission recommendation for senior
commissioners as follows: Brent Carron, Luke Thunberg and Steve Scharfenberg. Junior
commissioners as follows: Jacob Stolar and Tyler Kobilarcsik.
RECREATION PROGRAM REPORTS:
FEBRUARY FESTIVAL EVALUATION. Mitch Johnson presented highlights from Feb Fest that was
held on Saturday, February 1 st at Lake Ann Park. Commissioner Boettcher noted he heard comments that
people had a hard time hearing the PA system. Commissioner Scharfenberg suggesting having another
sheet for the door prizes and asked if there was a way to keep the raffle ticket sales open a little longer for
people who arrive late. Commissioner Ryan suggested better signage for the ticket sales table and
confusion over the sledding hill. Chairman Kelly explained that he and Todd Hoffman discussed ways of
improving the DJ set up.
DADDY/DAUGHTER SWEETHEART DANCE EVALUATION REPORT. Mitch Johnson
reviewed highlights from the Daddy/Daughter Sweetheart Dance held on Friday, February 7 th and
provided suggestions for next year.
ADMINISTRATIVE UPDATES: ANNUAL BLUFF CREEK/CHANHASSEN REC CENTER
JOINT POWERS MEETING.
Todd Hoffman presented a short synopsis on this subject to educate how the City operate s the
Chanhassen Recreation Center with School District 112 . Chairman Kelly asked for an update on how the
City ’s relationship with the School District is working.
CLOSING OF ICE SKATING RINKS. Commissioner Ryan asked staff to comment on closing of ice
skating rinks and because cold weather is forecasted for the next 2 weeks, whether staff had considered
keeping any rinks open longer. Commissioner Ryan explained that she understands historical data and
maintenance costs but does not agree with an all or nothing option and w ould like to see one rink,
possibly at City Center Park , stay open. Commissioner Carron agreed with Commissioner Ryan and
asked that this topic be put on the next agenda.
COMMISSION MEMBER COMMITTEE REPORTS. None.
COMMISSION MEMBER PRESENTATIONS. None.
Park and Recreation Commission Summary – February 25, 2014
3
CORRESPONDENCE PACKET. None.
Carron moved, Echternacht seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion
carried unanimously with a vote of 9 to 0. The Park and Recreation Commission meeting
adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
Submitted by Todd Hoffman
Park and Rec Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim
CHANHASSEN PARK AND
RECREATION COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
FEBRUARY 25, 2014
Prior to the meeting the commission interviewed the following applicants: Curt Kobilarcsik, Tyler
Kobilarcsik, David Wisniewski, Elizabeth Ahe r n , Jonathon Myers, and Tom Doll. Chairman Kelly
called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Cole Kelly, Steve Scharfenberg, Elise Ryan, Brent Carron, Jim Boettcher,
Rick Echternacht, Luke Thunberg, Jacob Stolar and Ryan Lynch
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman, Park and Rec Director; Jerry Ruegemer, Recreation
Superintendent; and Mitch Johnson, Recreation Supervisor
APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
Kelly: Anybody have anything to add to tonight ’s meeting?
Ryan: Could we add a quick discussion on the closing of the ice rinks?
Kelly: Yep. We ’ll put that under Reports. Number 2. Closing of ice rink.
Ryan: There ’s a 2 already so it needs to be number 3.
Kelly: Oh I ’m sorry. I didn ’t turn over the page. Yeah let ’s make it 3. Thank you for the correction
Elise. And under New Business, add number 3. Recommendations for appointments to the Park and Rec
Board.
Hoffman: Thank you.
Kelly: Anything else? Okay.
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: None.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Kelly: Anybody have any changes they want to make on the Minutes? Or go to the question.
Carron: I make a motion to approve the Minutes.
Kelly: Is there a second?
Boettcher: Second.
Carron moved, Boettcher seconded to approve the verbatim and summary Minutes of the Park and
Recreation Commission dated January 28, 2014 as presented.
Park and Recreation Commission – January 25, 2014
2
PIONEER PASS PARK: RECOMMENDATION CONCERNING PROCESS FOR
PURCHASING PLAYGROUNDS AND PICNIC SHELTERS AND CIP BUDGET AMENDMENT.
Hoffman: Thank you Chair Kelly, members of the commission. Tonight I ’d like to give you a short
update on what ’s been happening at Pioneer Pass Park to prepare it for it ’s final year of construction and
it ’s opening at the end of June this year and then talk about CIP, recommended CIP budget amendment
based off some cost overruns that we had experienced with the project. So load up the power point. So
that ’s an image in about September of Pioneer Pass Park. So we ’re going to talk about those two items.
So if you recall it ’s 8.7 acres of parkland. Very nice sized neighborhood park. It has a basketball court,
which was extended to include two hoops so it ’s a larger area. It ’s got that natural wooded area to the
south. The ballfield with the backstop and the player benches. The neighborhood trail connections to
really two neighborhoods and then farther to the north to the Preserve neighborhoods as well. Two
playgrounds. One for age 2 through 5 and one for age 5 through 12 children and then swings. Picnic
shelter. Large open playfield . It ’s got a one-third mile trail loop which is a nice amenity for the park.
And 24 stall parking lot. And that parking lot was upsized to accommodate teams so parents can schedule
practices on an impromptu schedule. Not on a really reservation basis but we allowed enough cars for
that to happen. There ’s the park plan. One of the items that we ’ll talk about in that was some of the extra
dollars, there was a property line on the south end and so there was a property line discrepancy so this
property line was not known to the contractor or the architect and the original grading limits, seeding
limits was farther up in here. So this area was added to the contract after the fact so that ’s one of the
additional items that we ’ll talk about. This is a line drawing of the future playground and picnic shelter so
you have a very nice sidewalk coming down the center to the, directly to the shelter. Two park benches
which face each playground. On the right hand side is the 5, or the 3 to 5 age playground. The smaller of
the two and then the larger playground. The 5 to 12. For children 5 to 12 and then the swing set. And
this structure is spec ’d for anywhere from 28 to 32 feet depending on the dollars that are left when the
different representatives are making proposals. So this is the RFP that ’s in your packet that is currently
out to 6 different manufacturer ’s representatives for their solicitation.
Scharfenberg: And when does the RFP close?
Hoffman: The date is in March.
Ruegemer: 12 th I think.
Hoffman: Yeah, March 12 th sounds about right.
Scharfenberg: Okay.
Ruegemer: March 14 th .
Hoffman: Okay, 14 th . Yep. And then there ’ll be a neighborhood meeting which commissioners will be
invited to. That ’s going to be at the Rec Center the following week and then it will go to City Council on
the 14 th for their authorization to purchase the equipment. So these items in detail, the original contract is
$185 ,000 . That was between the City and K.A. Witt. That was a very aggressive price on their part
which was to our benefit. The additional grading and excavation that we talked about, some of those
areas are in here. We added a section of trail back which I felt was important to the plan. This section of
trail was not in the original bid. Our Water Resources Coordinator thought it should be eliminated to try
to limit hard surface above, at the top of the slope. I talked to Mr. Jeffery as we neared the award of the
project and really wanted to add this back in for the benefit of all the community and I think it ’s a good
addition back and so it did raise the contract amount a little bit. Soil corrections. I ’ll show you some
images of that. So we have some poor soils. They were saturated. They were black organic material in
Park and Recreation Commission – January 25, 2014
3
both the parking lot and the basketball court. We made the call to export those soils and import some
compactable material just for the benefit of a long term sustainability of those two improvements and so
we could have tilled it up, which they did and dry it out and try to compact it but we just weren ’t meeting
the roll test so we wanted to take that material out and make those areas last. Three was, this we added in.
So this $14,000 really is in a change order that you know just happened because there was some soil
conditions. We were either going to do that last year or this year. We got very good prices from K.A.
Witt so we went ahead and added that in last year. We added two river birch trees because they were just
missing on the plan, and then that ’s the additional seed fertilizer and erosion control blanket that I talked
about so we just had the quantity. It was the quantity was low on the original bid because they had that
property line issue. So those dollars took the contract to $240,700 up from the $185,000 and we take out,
so our Water Resources Coordinator, their budget. The stormwater budget paid for $19,000 of the pipe
and the stormwater improvements and so that ’s, park funds are back at $221,700. We invest the planting
and landscape architecture at $18,000 and the engineering and surveying at $13,000. Material testing at
$5,000 so those are the professional services that went into that plan. I can tell you those are a real
bargain so we didn ’t go out and solicit this on an RFP basis to an architect or an engineering firm. We
did it on an ala carte basis. Said we just want to pay for what we need and that ’s a pretty good value for
all the work that we saw done out there. So that brings us at $257,700 and then these are the dollars we
really need to invest to make that park complete. It ’s $15,000 for the small playground. $55,000 for the
large. The picnic shelter $25,000 and that ’s installed. That ’s a price installed. Concrete surfacing so all
that concrete we saw in the borders and in the picnic shelter slab and in the sidewalk, that ’s $20,000. And
then the wood fiber resilient surfacing for the playground, $5,000. So that brings us to $377,700 which is
$27,700 over our budget of $350,000. You know the park commission ’s in a position, if you really
wanted to meet that budget you could cut one of these items off. You could you know for example put
the, take the shelter off but when we come this far in a park project of this significance I still believe it ’s a
very good value at $377,700 so staff ’s recommendation is that the commission recommend the City
Council amend that budget to add that $27,700 into the project.
Kelly: So Todd how did it come to pass that the architect didn ’t know where the boundaries were?
Hoffman: It was a deviation in the upfront information that was put out so the upfront.
Kelly: So it was information we put out?
Hoffman: Information that was gathered either from the developer. Information that the City put out.
I ’m not sure where they grabbed that land information from but yeah there was a change in the property
line.
Kelly: Okay. Other questions?
Echternacht: Has the community decided they ’re going to put the equipment together?
Hoffman: Yep. So we have a neighborhood with 500 homes. 100 single family on the one side and 400,
the multi-family on the other side and we ’re going to gather up enough volunteers to put this in as a true
neighborhood install so there will be no input from the City of Chanhassen. It ’s going to be all neighbors
and then the manufacturer ’s installer and it ’s a great way to build a playground.
Scharfenberg: Todd, the additional change order number 5 for the additional seed.
Hoffman: Yep.
Park and Recreation Commission – January 25, 2014
4
Scharfenberg: Fertilizer and erosion control blanket. Is that in any way associated with the issues that we
were having with that contractor? Okay.
Hoffman: No. I ’ll show you a couple of images that will answer the rest of your questions. So that ’s the
basketball area with the soil corrections underway. That ’s looking north from about the entry of the drive.
That ’s the parking lot soil corrections and so you see in the inset picture they ’re attempting to get the roll
test so we had aerated that and dried out those soils and then re-compacted them and then you drive a
dump truck, a loaded dump truck over them to get the roll test and you just couldn ’t meet that. And so
that material you guys see in that inset picture was then excavated and the material you see in the big
picture was imported so that can be compacted. There ’s draintile on the outside of this as well. This is
the $14,000 we invest in the backstop, the concrete for the player benches and then the inset photo shows
an example of the player benches are there. That ’s just an example photo. So that ’s ready to go. Then
these are the dollars that we ’re recommending that you invest in those playgrounds, the picnic shelter, the
concrete and the wood fiber surfacing. The RFP is for the top three items. It ’s the $95,000 and then the
City will contract the concrete and then they City will also purchase the wood fiber surfacing and bring
that in after the, when the playground ’s being constructed.
Thunberg: Have those amounts been adjusted at all or are those still the original amounts … So this
overage …
Hoffman: Close to the original numbers. These have gone up if anything. So then it, go ahead.
Ryan: When the RFP ’s come back and they have our budget, do most of the companies then say this is
going to be $15,000 or is there a possibility that the companies will come back you know under the
$15,000 for the small playground and under the $55,000 for the larger playground?
Hoffman: This is a contest to see who can provide the most equipment in the best configuration and so
they ’re going to max that budget out. So they ’re going to come back and say this is, your budget is
$95,000. Here are the two playgrounds and the shelter that we ’re willing to sell you for the $95,000.
Because the neighborhood ’s going to select what they think is the best proposal and so it ’s unlikely that
they would come back and say hey, here ’s our proposal for $85,000 because they ’re just leaving $10,000
on the table.
Ryan: Okay, thank you.
Hoffman: Again that ’s staff ’s recomm endation concerning the budget and the process to purchase and
then install the material and that ’s the schedule. That ’s all I have for you tonight. Be glad to answer
additional questions and then wait to hear from the commission.
Kelly: Any other questions for Todd?
Thunberg: I just have one. On the soil, going back to the soil corrections and, does that have anything to
do with, when Ryland was preparing right so there was some difficulties going back and forth between
the City and Ryland and the dirt, or the material they were putting in there?
Hoffman: No.
Thunberg: That doesn ’t have anything to do with that?
Hoffman: Those soils were all on top and these organic soils were underneath the original grades so these
were below. Anything that was ever disturbed and it just happened to be some organic pockets down
Park and Recreation Commission – January 25, 2014
5
there. It wasn ’t material that would support those asphalt improvements. So they were digging back
through the farm field. We actually could see the layers. They were digging back down through the top
of the farm field and then in sub-soils.
Kelly: Other questions or somebody want to put it to the ultimate question?
Scharfenberg: I make a motion to amend the overall Pioneer Pass project CIP budget from $350,000 to
$377,700 per staff ’s recommendations.
Kelly: Is there a second?
Carron: Second.
Kelly: There ’s a motion as proposed in front of us and a second on the board.
Scharfenberg moved, Carron seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommends the
City Council approve the purchase of playgrounds and park shelter for Pioneer Pass Park using a
competitive request for proposal (RFP); including supervised neighborhood installation of the
playgrounds and amend the overall Pioneer Pass Park project CIP budget from $350,000 to
$377,700 to accomplish these purchases. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously
with a vote of 9 to 0.
Hoffman: Thank you.
DISCUSSION CONCERNING FUTURE PROGRAM, EVENT AND RECREATION FACILITY
PROPOSALS.
Kelly: Todd, you want to speak on it a little bit?
Hoffman: I sure will. Chair Kelly, members of the commission. At our work session with the City
Council, which is annually held the first Saturday of January, some of the council members were talking
about how we, how are we going to continue to, you know they talk about competitiveness and livability
and quality of life and those type of things so they really just put a challenge or a job in front of the
commission to come up and see if there is the next facility program, event that can maintain Chanhassen ’s
reputation as a good place to live. Raise a family . Build a business and so things like skate park, disc
golf, you know some of the programs. Even as recent as this last Friday night. Mitch introduced a
luminary walk which was very popular on a very cold and windy night. There was about 75 people out
and I really see that growing over the next few years. You know that will probably be a 200, 300, 400
person event on a Friday night out at the Holiday Inn Express and it ’s a great event because it ’s using that
one mile trail or that half a mile trail that we have out at that 100 acre nature preserve so I think that ’s
going to be a hit. A program here that Mitch introduced a new program. So it ’s that kind of thinking.
And then we can have a conversation with the council at your joint meeting and see if they like more of
your ideas and then if they do, if you get that affirmation from the council then you can continue to work
with staff and direct us on how you would like to get going with that program. You know if it needs
budgetary money, that will have to be something that will be a conversation for the council and it ’s just a
matter of adjusting some staff time or getting volunteers to put on the program …as well.
Kelly: So any current ideas out there or questions for Todd expanding on new programs? Any thoughts
on where we want to go in the future? Do we need to have some off site commission meeting to talk
about bright ideas and feed off each other?
Park and Recreation Commission – January 25, 2014
6
Ryan: Well I ’ll throw some out there. I asked some neighbors and friends about different programming
or things that they thought could be brought based on different things that they ’ve done in other cities or
through schools. A couple years ago I had brought this up and I know Steve brought it up at our last
meeting about a splash pad. I know there was some concern from the City on how we would do that but a
great location at Lake Ann to provide a, you know we have the park there. The swimming facilities.
Baseball. You know there ’s a lot going on there but it ’s a great, it ’s a really fun activity for little kids and
right now most families go either to St. Louis Park or to the one in Eden Prairie so it ’d be nice to have
something like that for us in the city. Another thing that was mentioned was a, and I don ’t know if we do
this now but it ’s called something along the lines of Art in the Park and it would be for, well it could
really be for any ages. This would be more directed at the youth and you would bring an art instructor
and go to a park and teach kids how to paint landscape as best as they can on little canvases. And they
could go experience different parks and see different settings and learn how to paint so that ’s something
that my kids have done and have really enjoyed. Another thing that was brought up, we do the Klein
Bank Series in the summer but something at the Rec Center during the wintertime. I know some sc hools
do movie night but bring something along those lines to the Rec Center where you have family night at
the Rec Center and set up a big screen. You know big screen and play a movie and sell popcorn and
similar to what you do at the Klein Bank Series but do it in the wintertime because we all know that
winter gets very long around here. Two more. Or actually three more. I don ’t know how cool it is or if
kids would feel w eird about doing it but a skate board clinic. Learn, you know utilize, get more kids to the
skate park and learn new tricks or how to ride a skateboard. I ’ve heard other communities do that across
the country so that was another one. And then the last one that I mentioned earlier in the evening was
bringing a race to Chanhassen. So a triathlon or a half marathon. You know there ’s a lot of interest for
runners to get a, I know Excelsior has one. Minnetonka, I know there ’s a lot of them in the area but
there ’s the triathlon community is really growing and there ’s a lot of interest to have one here in
Chanhassen. So those are the, kind of the programming ideas. And then one other thought that has been
brought up to me a number of times is just what are we doing on an environmental level, and I know we
have an Environmental Commission but you know is there a better way that this commission can work
with the Environmental Commission in terms of recycling at parks and having recycling bins available.
When I go to the parks I see bottles all the time in the trash and make recycling more available at all of
our parks so just playing a bigger role as park and rec to be green I guess. So those are the ideas that I
have.
Kelly: Other ideas out there?
Thunberg: And also talking to neighbors and friends, one that did come up a lot was the splash pad. It
came up a few times. Also a city pool since I think a lot of folks see the Chaska one but knowing that that
takes significant resources an alternative to a pool, one idea was I guess Savage, they don ’t have a city
pool but they ’ve worked out a program with Lifetime where you can, if you ’re a resident you get a daily
pass so I don ’t know if the Lifetime here would be able to do something like that to, you don ’t have to
necessarily be a member to use their pool but it would be a daily fee. For the splash pad, I think Lake
Ann sounds like a good spot. One that was brought up was somewhere around City Center Park. I don ’t
know if we have the room here but if it did have room it would kind of add to the landscape where the
concert series could be and things like that. I did try looking online to see how much one of those things
cost and it said small commercial for one company is $30,000 so but if it ’s something that could be done
for under $100,000. Obviously there ’s maintenance cost but it may be something that would fit into
something if there was a discussion if it ’s a CIP item if it got that far. Some other ideas were community
gardens. Somebody said like a yoga in the park series which maybe could span through beyond that.
More like a healthy living so if you incorporate it with a race or running or walk group, you could do the
yoga in the park. If you had other kind of like art in the park as well, of like a photography for beginners
or something which then you could incorporate Chanhassen ’s photo contest. Somehow leading up to that.
Getting them to submit into that. And then I ’ll just throw out the rest of, some of them were city golf
Park and Recreation Commission – January 25, 2014
7
course. Continuing to expand dining and retail options. Garbage cans and waste bags along walking
trails for dogs. I know that ’d be possibly hard to maintain since we have 90 miles of trails but. And with
all of our trails if there ’s something with the trail map or routes that we could designate certain ones.
Kind of like in the city, in Minneapolis you have around the lakes. You have the grand rounds or
whatever that ’s called. If there ’s something where we had kind of specified trails that were based on
destinations or if there was a link or something to kind of call out some of the more main ones we have.
And then I think that is it. There was another, there were some people brought up just continue and more
support for schools and the programs that we have. If there ’s a way to better organize or bring to light the
areas that may need volunteers, just to continue to garner support for the community and the school. One
thing I did notice when hearing a lot of feedback from people, a good percentage of responses I got were,
I could reply to them and say it ’s something we already did. Have a summer concert series in the park.
Have some ice skating rinks for the city. Have a farmers market that we could all come to. It was
numero us so I think one of the things, and I know we have a Facebook page and things like that but could
we do something on the Facebook page that is a daily did you know and have it be, even if it ’s something
that ’s a couple months out but just a constant because I think part of it is just awareness of some of the
things we already have. Because then when I was able to reply to them and say here ’s the schedule of our
concert series or here ’s the place in the parks that we have the skating rinks and you know we can talk
about it in the fall if there ’s additional parks or something they, it was a welcomed surprise to hear that
we already have that so just anything we can do to continue to promote and get the awareness out for the
good stuff that we already have I think would be a benefit too. Thank you.
Ryan Lynch: …Chan has a Twitter page?
Hoffman: Got a Twitter account, yep.
Ryan Lynch: Yeah so like …a guy with Twitter is going to check Twitter more than Facebook …
Hoffman: Great. Wonderful.
Echternacht: My neighbors talked about the pool also somewhere in the community. Possibly by the
community Rec Center but perhaps elsewhere by the high school. Also soccer and lacrosse players and
so on talked about a dome. We ’ve talked about that before but also going more green, like has been
mentioned already. Having the containers in the parks and so on. Also possibility of having an arts and
craft actually show in like at Lake Ann like they do kind of like in Excelsior. Downtown in their park.
Bringing more traffic into the park and more people. And I think otherwise some of the other similar
ones.
Kelly: In my readings I came up with, I can ’t remember what city was doing this but they had a
Daddy/Son Get in Shape Walk. You read that?
Hoffman: No.
Kelly: No. And basically to get, I think to get dad ’s in shape and have their sons out walk with them but
it ’s something that you know the City ’s facilitating getting in shape. And another thought I had is you
know how you go down to the Chaska Rec Center and you can walk, what is it? 500 miles and you get a
shirt and I was thinking you know we have what? Almost 100 miles of trail but not quite and map it out
and have people sign up in the summer and at the end of it they can say you know whether it ’s 95, 100
miles, I walked all 100 miles of Chanhassen trail. You know something like that would get people out on
our trails and give them a purpose to do something and then you get a shirt at the end for doing it. You
know our costs would be you know setting it up and then giving out t-shirts.
Park and Recreation Commission – January 25, 2014
8
Hoffman: Great list.
Kelly: Any other thoughts at this time? And it ’s, you know we don ’t have to have all our thoughts now
because we have more time. When was our meeting with the City Council?
Hoffman: It ’s not currently scheduled.
Kelly: So we don ’t have a meeting scheduled so I think what we need to do is have some of, you know
these ideas we ’ll see in print and then try and figure out what some of the costs are of these and then
maybe next meeting have some more ideas but thank you everybody for the great ideas that you did
present. And then try to filter what we think are like the top 5 or 10 to pass along to the City, depending
upon how many we have and depending upon what we see the costs as and the likelihood of the City
saying yeah, it ’s a good idea. We want to move forward so I think that ’s what we have to come up with
so obviously we ’ll all see this in print because it will be in our Minutes and then I think at some point, and
Todd I don ’t know if that falls on you to try and figure out what the cost of these various things might be.
Hoffman: Sure. Yeah we ’ll put this list together and I ’ll include it in your next Admin packet and then
you can bring it up at a future meeting and discuss your ranking. Ryan or Jacob, anything else? This is a
good topic for you guys.
Kelly: And again if just you don ’t have ideas right now, you come up with an idea, send out an email to
everybody and say I ’ve got this. I want it on the agenda and I want Todd and Jerry to review it for next
time and, because we ’re looking at all ideas right now and that ’s what we ’re, this is the whole thing is just,
it ’s an idea. You know we ’re going to throw it up on the board and see what stays on the board and what
falls off the board.
Hoffman: Yep. I appreciate Commissioner Thunberg ’s, there ’s a couple of items on here that we, that
were mentioned that we also currently have. We have a community garden and we have skate board
clinics so Mitch, do you want to talk about those briefly? Just what they, they ’ve been going on for quite
some time.
Johnson: Yeah. Jerry probably knows more of the history on it.
Ruegemer: Yeah we ’ve done, Third Lair ’s provided skateboard camps for, oh probably going on 10 years.
Part of that kind of going on that we have added the summer series, skateboard series at the 4 th of July
celebration on July 3 rd so that ’s confirmed again this year. We ’re going to try something a little bit
different. We ’re going to go into the evening a little bit more. We ’re going to go 7:30 start this year and
then hopefully we can kind of go under the lights a little bit for that too to try to get some more interest in
that. Chan ’s always been a strong area for skateboarding with that. Third Lair loves coming out here
because our numbers are really good for that summer skateboard series so, and we ’ve done at least two
camps a summer for the past you know, quite a few number of years. We ’ve done skateboarding camps
over MEA breaks in the past. Those numbers are a little bit lower. Kind of getting into the fall but you
guys can kind of see our skateboard numbers are up there pretty good on a daily basis when we have
skateboard attendants. Skate park attendants on duty so yeah, those are certainly things that we ’ve tried
through the years and we ’ve had get out and kind of check out the parks with that. We gave away t-shirts
and photographed all the parks and stuff like that too so, so we ’re all ears for programming ideas and
certainly try to implement if some kind of percolate up to the top 5 and that sort of thing so we can kind
of take it and run with it.
Carron: I just have a couple thoughts here too. After reading the Chanhassen questionnaire that came out.
Survey. One of the things that really stuck out to me was the amount of attendants, on that survey at the
Park and Recreation Commission – January 25, 2014
9
Chanhassen Rec Center. It was a majority of maybe once a month or not at all and knowing all the
programs we put together and the quality of them and how it ’s run, that kind of surprised me. So getting
back on the whole thing of just maybe knowing but then also maybe looking at possibly, maybe a little bit
outside of this is, what do we do to improve the Rec Center? If we can. Maybe just an open idea. I ’ve
been thinking about that for a while after reading that. I haven ’t come up with an answer yet but
something to get some more awareness out there but not only that but maybe if there ’s something that we
can improve to get more people to the Rec Center because it is a big portion of what we do and we
oversee. And then Todd when you put the ideas together, can you also gi ve maybe if there ’s a little
history.
Hoffman: Sure.
Carron: Because a pool came up quite a bit . My next door neighbors are competitive swimmers at
Minnetonka. My other one ’s within Chanhassen so I hear pool all the time and I don ’t know the whole
history of why District 112 only has one pool in the whole entire district but I know that the people that
move to Chanhassen like myself who are schooling. Good school. Good place to live and activities for
your kids and I think a pool is pretty high priority. I know it was when I was in high school so, maybe
just a little bit of a background … Not saying that we can afford it but.
Hoffman: And those that mentioned a city pool, are you thinking an outdoor pool or an indoor pool?
Kelly: If they ’re talking competitive swimming they ’re talking indoor pool .
Hoffman: Correct but you ’re talking recreational …
Thunberg: I think from the folks I talked to were referring to indoor because then you could have
swimming lessons and different programs as well.
Carron: Just basis I think Minnetonka Aquatic Center was somewhere in the neighborhood of 6 1/2
million. Just to throw out. Looking up online so. Not saying that we can afford that.
Ryan: …for their swim community center, and didn ’t Eden Prairie just do that?
Hoffman: 10 or 12 million yeah.
Ruegemer: And there were short courses and long courses too in their pools. Rochester has at least …so
there ’s a lot of activity for swimming.
Hoffman: Great list. Keep your ideas coming and we ’ll put it together. That ’s how these things start.
Start right here. I ’ve seen many, many crazy ideas. They ’re right up there and then pull it in and then
now they ’re out in the community. Everything from dog park to disc golf to referendums to trail
referendum. We ’ve had community center referendum. We ’ve had a history of golf course initiatives so
there ’s a lot they haven ’t even mentioned. Probably the most mentioned recently is the splash pad
concept and I think it ’s very similar to some of the other conversations that you ’ve had is that, it ’s going
to take that great location so that great location will be what will make the splash pad so you study City
Center Park. You study Lake Ann. You know what configuration is going to make that great location for
that facility …but we have to take that first step of having the Park Commission and the Council say yeah,
let ’s take a look.
Ryan: Todd just from a number …back when a friend was talking to me at the Rec Center, the space right
now that has the fitness equipment, is that utilized? How has the number, how have the numbers been
Park and Recreation Commission – January 25, 2014
10
with all the Fitness 19 ’s and the, you know the …expense of equipment only type facilities, how has that
impacted user?
Hoffman: That ’s one of the biggest revenue producers in the facility is the fitness area and it ’s small.
People would like to have it larger. A number of years ago there was a push to eliminate all the meeting
rooms and make that one big fitness area. Then we would be running a fitness facility, not a community
Rec Center so that didn ’t pan out. Keeping up with the, all the new machines is a challenge because you
have to reinvest so we ’ve done that. We keep it somewhat fresh but it is affordable. There ’s a certain
sector of the community that likes it and really appreciates that facility but there ’s a limited, you know the
time that you can be busy are limited and so …there ’s many hours when there ’s nobody there because
they ’re just, those are our low usage times at any club so there ’s lots of competition obviously in town.
We ’re the world headquarters for Lifetime Fitness. We ’re the world headquarters for Snap Fitness and
we ’re the world headquarters of the Chan Rec Center so we ’ve got three of them right here. Our world
headquarters in the fitness business and then we ’ve got all of the others as well so, but that Jodi does a
great job of managing that … Keeping it clean. Keeping it programmed in. People that run the programs.
Private programs out of there for weightlifting and strength training and they purchase those punch cards
for their clients and they train there. So it ’s well used. The dance facility also is well used. The Rec
Center was actually originally built for the meeting space so, we didn ’t have large enough meeting space
for public meetings in our community. Often times the City Council would have to vacate these
chambers and go to the Chanhassen Elementary School so they were meeting in the school facility and
the community said you know we need a larger meeting space and so that ’s really what that started at and
we added a gym and we added a fitness area and a dance room and so you know it ’s somewhat limited in
what it can offer but we give away $90,000 to $100,000 worth of space to the community …every year so
if you add those dollars in the facility does cash flow which is a challenge when you ’re operating that
kind of a facility so. But without that, if you don ’t add in that free space you know there ’s that subsidy …
Kelly: Thank you Todd. One second here. The Gophers won 95-89 just in case you ’re curious.
Hoffman: Thank you for that. Really enjoyed listening to those and there ’s a lot of history there and
we ’ll get them written down and get them priced out. One that, some additional comments on recycling.
That is one of Adam Beers new charges and so we ’ve asked Adam to work with our existing refuse
haulers and providers to see what we can bring in just on a, you know so will they give us recycling
containers and will they pick that up as a part of our garbage program. Refuse program. Do we have to
add onto that and so that ’s an area we want to improve on. It ’s not always easy. In Three Rivers Park
District they spend, they invest a lot of dollars to get recycling back out. The biggest p roblem is cross
contamination when you have recycling in park settings. Public park settings so that can be a challenge
but it ’s an area we want to improve on so we agree with that as well.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS.
Kelly: Okay, moving onto item number 3. The recommendations we made for Park and Rec
appointments for the next 3 year term. Since we have junior commissioners I ’m going to call those other
commissioners senior commissioners. I hope Luke doesn ’t have any problem with that. So our
recommendation is as follows. For senior commissioners, number one Brent Carron. Number two, Luke
Thunberg. Number three, Steve Scharfenberg. For junior commissioners our recommendations are
number one. J acob Stolar. Number two, Tyler. Would you say the name for me Todd?
Hoffman: I will. Tyler Kobilarcsik.
Kelly: Kobilarcsik, thank you. And that ’s all I have to say on that.
Park and Recreation Commission – January 25, 2014
11
Hoffman: Thank you.
RECREATION PROGRAM REPORTS:
FEBRUARY FESTIVAL EVALUATION.
Kelly: Mitch I think you ’re up.
Johnson: Yes I am. Good evening Chair Kelly and Commissioners. The City hosted our 21 st Annual Feb
Fest back on Saturday, February 1 st out at Lake Ann. Staff estimates about 1,200 people probably
showed up that whole day. Kind of partake in the different activities and obviously the ice fishing contest
is kind of the centerpiece of that activity. In your report there I kind of broke down the event by the
different aspects of the event so we ’ll just kind of go through those and I ’d be happy to answer any
questions at the end. As far as the food and drink concessions with the Chanhassen Rotary Club and
Culver ’s out again. They continue to do an awesome job and kind of provide that service to people
looking for you know a lunch break or snack break. The Rotary Club does an awesome job doing all the
beverages. Y ou know then Culver ’s does the food tent so we certainly appreciate the service that they
have. You know they had a long line out there all day and they do a great job for that. Had a couple
bonfires this year. Of course they were a popular place on a cold day like it was this year. The wind was
pretty crisp coming off the lake but we all survived the polar vortex. No negative 40 windchills or
anything so that was good on that date. Moving down the list. The S ’more cookouts and the bait sale, the
local boy scout Troop 330, they were out again this year. They ’ve been out there for several years now
selling the little S ’more kits out of Ziploc bags and then a variety of bait that they had out there as well so
we appreciate their participation. They look forward to it every year and do a great job with that. For the
skating rink we plowed a rink out there through all that heavy, wet snow and slush. That was a big
challenge this year. In my couple years in this position, either we didn ’t have enough ice. We had too
much ice. This year we had too much snow you know so winters in Minnesota. Always something that
we complain about I guess but we were able to get a nice skating rink plowed out there and we also
brought the loop back this year so that was great. You know a lot of people out there skating and stuff is
always fun. With the thick ice we also were able to plow a track for the sleigh rides. We brought those
back on the lake this year with the amount of ice. I believe our operator said that every trip was full
except two of them so he brought the horses on the lake and there was a line of people already waiting for
them looking. I believe Chair Kelly, I think he took a first ride on them.
Kelly: Yes I took a ride. It was wonderful. What a hoot.
Johnson: So you know I heard people say, you know the sleigh is so much different than if you ’ve ridden
in the wagon so kind of a fun experience you know for people to come down, for that so we certainly
appreciate that and hope to have them back in the future as well. Moving to the next page, we brought the
ice fishing demonstrations back again this year. The Tips Outdoor Foundation came out. You probably
saw their gear they had out there. The fishing houses. The ice augers. All the you know different rods
and reels and stuff like that. Tip up ’s. You know it ’s great. Kind of an informational thing you know for
people who maybe have never been fishing before or just want to learn more about it. Maybe get a few
pointers before the contest starts so you know it ’s great to have them out and we look forward to bringing
them in the future. The medallion hunt was a ton of fun this year. I worked with Linda Landsman of the
Friends of the Chan Library and we came up with the clues so we had a real good hoot putting all those
together and it ’s kind of a great way to build excitement I think for the event. You know they go in the
Villager every day of the week leading up. We put them on the City ’s website and Facebook and Twitter
and stuff but also at the library, right at the entrance. They post the clues there. Byerly ’s had the clues
posted too so you think of all the people that come in and out of the doors. They see that and maybe think,
what is Feb Fest? You know and then they ’ve got the link there that they can check it out. They bring
Park and Recreation Commission – January 25, 2014
12
more people out so the Friends of the Library did a great job. They put a little basket together valued at
over $500 for the winners. We got a little nervous. They found it on Friday so after 5 clues you know
typically it seems like you spend all the time on the clues and after day one they find it but we lucked out
and got them, strung them along a little bit but we had a ton of fun driving through town. You ’d see
people out here out the window with shovels digging through all the snow you know and I ’m like aw I
wish I could tell them that it ’s on that side of town. You know they ’re about 12 miles away but, so it ’s a
ton of fun and then I talked to the people who won it too and you know just their excitement is just, you
know they ’re out of this world and kind of talk them what was there, what clues gave it away and stuff
but it ’s a great, fun event and glad to have the Friends of the Library involved again. The ice fishing
contest, this year we sold 518 ice fishing tickets for the contest which is up from last year. We had 73
tickets were sold in advance here at City Hall, Ivan ’s Food and Tackle and Cabin Fever in Victoria and
then you can see 445 were sold on the ice at the event. I thought we did a great job with the crowds you
know coming in. There never seemed to be a long line of people trying to buy tickets. You know we had
enough volunteers I think that worked out good to kind of separate that out. We had over $6,400 in prizes
this year. You know just through the sponsorship program, people contribute that or they contribute cash
that we can purchase some prizes with. This year we caught 33 fish . Only 30 made the board because
you can only have one fish up there. We had 50 prizes to give away so at the end of the contest we drew
names out of the fishing contest participants to get rid of those last 20 prizes so, so it ’s fun you know to,
one thing we did this year. We shrunk the contest area down a little bit and we continue to kind of move
it closer to shore to kind of get the fish numbers up there but you know some years are good. Some years
are slow so continues to kind of be the marquee event of Feb Fest so that ’s fun. With that we also did the
door prize drawings. We had over $3,000 in door prizes that were contributed. You know and people
still come looking for their tickets. It ’s fun and you know thanks to all the commissioners. You helped
giving away the prizes and stuff, it ’s fun. You ’ll see in the bottom there we have a couple kind of just
general comments and suggestions. Got to give a big shout out to the Chanhassen Rotary Club. Not only
do they do the concessions on the ice, they also came out and drilled over 1,200 holes in the ice that
morning so I don ’t know if they had to use extensions this year but there ’s a lot of ice and snow to dig
through and yeah they worked hard and we certainly appreciate that and all their service to the
community. I also put the smaller contest area on there. I think we ’re going to continue to do that in the
future. And then another kind of common suggestion we put on our to do list for the summer is to rebuild
our bonfire pits. They ’re pretty seasoned. Pretty weathered. See what we can do to maybe if we ’ve got
to make them bigger or just kind of a different design element to them. I think that ’s something we can
do but also we ’ve got to, you know obviously thanks to you guys, also the Chanhassen High School Key
Club. They provided volunteers for the event which is great. And then also members from last summer ’s
teen volunteer program that we had. A couple of them came out for this event too so just kind of our goal
with the program you know, work them hard in the summer and then once school starts as events come up
we can just email them and I think we had 4 of them that came out for that so that ’s always fun to get
them involved again. So that ’s kind of my general recap. Does anybody have any questions? Be happy
to answer.
Kelly: Questions?
Carron: I have a couple of comments. Next time …right on the front door of the medallion.
Hoffman: It was close to home wasn ’t it?
Carron: Yeah it was and then I had a great idea, I was going to take a picture of my son ’s pound 5 ounce
winner and send it to you but my wife was playing Candy Crush … I had it all planned out all day I was
going to send in that picture …but great job. Wish we could have been there.
Johnson: Great.
Park and Recreation Commission – January 25, 2014
13
Hoffman: So that was the delivery day?
Carron: Yep. Noon. 12:38. It was during the time too.
Hoffman: Congratulations.
Kelly: Congratulations is right.
Boettcher: The only thing I did hear from some people they said they couldn ’t hear the PA system.
Johnson: Okay.
Boettcher: They were out from the tent where we were doing the weigh in out to the left. Southwest or
whatever. That corner. They said they were sitting out there and they see people getting up to go, to get
door prizes or their name ’s getting called in the raffle or something, they couldn ’t hear anything so I don ’t
know just wind or whatever. One more speaker out there or something. I think the best part of the whole
ice fishing contest, Rick was, we were both doing the weigh in. Was a little girl, what was she 3 1/2?
Echternacht: Yes.
Boettcher: I think and she came up with her mom and she had this little sunny. She had this pink
snowmobile suit on. Had the big over sized sunglasses are cocked on her head. Never said a word. She
just came walking up to me and had this sunfish like it ’s just mashing it. The fish is looking like, and she
came in fourth place. Well her dad got a fish finder but that was the best one. We were trying to find the
photographer for the paper. Couldn ’t find. I think Jerry you got a picture. Yeah there she is. Her name
was Claire wasn ’t it?
Ruegemer: Rodenz.
Boettcher: Rodenz, yeah.
Ruegemer: Yep, there ’s the picture right there.
Boettcher: It was just hilarious. She never said a word. Her mom ’s going on and on saying you know
her grandpa helped her do this and all. The little girl never said, and then Jerry comes up to take her
picture and he says now hold the fish up so she ’s holding the thing this way instead of sideways. Upside
down and they ’re like, no turn the fish. Turn the fish and she ’s like, so she deserved two prizes for that.
It was hilarious.
Ruegemer: That would be Al Klingelhutz ’ great grand-daughter.
Boettcher: Great grand daughter, yeah.
Johnson: I think the winning fish was .32 pounds so yeah, it didn ’t take much to get on the prize board
this year so.
Kelly: Mitch it was a fantastic event again and you did a great job with everything that you did and it was,
for me it ’s fun to be a part of that deal. It ’s just a great outdoor event. Thank you.
Park and Recreation Commission – January 25, 2014
14
Scharfenberg: Mitch just a couple things. With the prizes, if we could keep that other sheet because it
was difficult having people come in for prizes and then having them out trying to write them down so if
we could have that for next year.
Johnson: Okay.
Scharfenberg: And then I know, I don ’t know if it ’s because it ’s considered a raffle but I know some
people came in that were late comers and were asking about getting tickets and being disappointed that
they couldn ’t get their ticket for the raffle and that so I don ’t know if there ’s a way to do that for keep it
open for an extra 15 minutes for people, for the la te comers that are running in but I know that you have
to, if there ’s rules you have to shut it down by a certain period of time if it ’s considered a raffle so, I ’ll
leave that up to you guys but just to know that there were people in asking about getting, being able to get
a raffle ticket.
Johnson: Yeah it ’s tough and we ’ve tossed it around too you know but unfortunately we try to people
when they come to the ice, because then you have people come up, oh I didn ’t get a ticket. Next thing
you know they ’re in there 10 times or you know what I mean. I think the volunteers can certainly do a
better job of initiating that, hey did you get your ticket and kind of gathering the crowds because I do
think a lot of people do kind of just walk by but.
Ruegemer: We can take a look at it next year to see if we can, you know you can put it back 15 minutes
and go to 1:15-1:20 and that will allow more people to get in so.
Ryan: Or just signage to make it a little bit clearer of timing and the different table …people kind of come
and look around and they ’re unsure of the tables …communicate the time that it closes that would be
helpful too. Then another question about the sledding hill. People couldn ’t seem to find the sledding hill.
They were asking me was there, and people said …where the sledding hill. I was asked a number of times
where the sledding hill was and was it open and could they go and all that so …
Kelly: Mitch one other comment is the DJ and I, and I brought Todd over. We talked about ways to
make it better set up in the DJ tent so they can hear better from where it is and so you can talk with Todd
about that but address what Jim mentioned because we did have a few people come up to us and say, we
can ’t hear a thing and of course once everything ’s set up you can ’t really readjust it and especially in that
weather so he had some ideas and I brought Todd over so Todd could see what the ideas were.
Johnson: Okay, sounds good.
Kelly: Okay.
DADDY/DAUGHTER SWEETHEART DANCE EVALUATION REPORT.
Johnson: Thank you Chair Kelly. So the weekend before Valentine ’s Day it ’s become an annual
tradition that we have the Daddy/Daughter Sweetheart Dance over at the Rec Center. We had it on a
Friday night, February 7 th . We had a total of 70 dads and daughters in attendance. It ’s a really fun event.
You know I just get a kick out of it and I think all of the families really come to expect it. Talked to one
dad, he said this was the 12 th year he ’s been there so he ’s had a couple different daughters kind of go
through the program. His latest daughter is like 6 years old so he ’s got you know a few more years left of
it so they have a ton of fun. So with that you know I do my best to try to keep things fresh for the
returners like that and you know to make sure everybody ’s having a good time. Same kind of thing, I
broke down the event by different aspects so I ’ll just kind of go through those. The event is two hours
long. Kind of the first hour of the event we serve dinner and do games. Things like that and then the
Park and Recreation Commission – January 25, 2014
15
second hour we do the dance so during dinner we cater through Chuckwagon Charlie ’s. The barbeque pit
here in Chanhassen. It ’s always great to buy local. We try to do as much as we can here in town so they
had pulled pork sandwiches, macaroni and cheese for the kiddos. Coleslaw, carrot sticks and then dessert
as well. To save on some costs we just went to Cub Food and the City purchased the beverages and the
dessert separately so it was a good way to kind of save and kind of keep the fees low for that. For the
dance portion, the second hour we went through DJ John Vavrin. First time we ’ve had him here. Came
on a recommendation. Did a great job. Very reasonable. You know brought all the lights and things like
that. Played kind of the soft dinner music during the first hour and then kind of kicked it up a notch for
the second hour so …did a great job. For the different activities, we continue to do the heart count. I
think this year I only had about maybe 150 hearts I hung up. In the past I think the most I had was 600 so
took it back a notch to save on time but continue the heart count and the candy guess continue to be
popular. We also set up different craft tables where the girls could make little crafts to bring home to
their mothers or anybody else. Did kind of different coloring and carnival games and stuff too for them.
Another thing we do is for the door prize drawings. We do two separate ones. One for the kids and then
one for the dads as well so the daughters, they receive this great big gift basket from ABC Toy Zone here
in Chanhassen who donated this real nice prize for them. Then we put another package together from a
gift card to Byerly ’s and dinner and show for two to the Dinner Theater so the dads can take out another
Valentine if they wanted so. Turning over the page, we also had a face painter again this year. We used a
new face painter, Lynda. She ’s from here in town so great to have her. We do that first hour during the
dinner aspect of it and then on a recommendation from Commissioner Carron from last year we brought a
photo booth in this year so, and rather than doing the formal photos in the lobby, we brought in a photo
booth where they could take unlimited photos throughout the event. They brought their little basket of
props and the boa ’s and hats and the sunglasses. It was a ton of fun and then they were printed right on
scene there within seconds and they could take them all home. Some girls you know had a fan of them
that they could take home and you know wore every single prop in the basket so it was a ton of fun. The
company then puts them on their website and it ’s password protected so all the families can then go home
and log in and see some of their pictures. They can see their friends on there. They can order prints if
they want. You know great big 5 by 7 so it ’s real fun and it was a local photo booth company out of Eden
Prairie so that was nice to bring them back. And yeah so on the bottom, just some more general kind of
comments, suggestions. One thing I thought would be fun maybe for next year is do like a mother/son
kind of Valentine ’s theme party. Maybe that Saturday night. So do like a Friday-Saturday. You know so
maybe a family, a couple kids. Can kind of split it up to everybody can come out and have a good time.
Then just continue to make the event fresh every year. Add something new and keep things on track so.
And then on the last page you ’ll see the kind of breakdown of the expense report. So the Daddy/Daughter
Sweetheart Dance is one of our revenue generating programs so you ’ll see the registration and the
expenses and then the ending balance. So any questions for the Daddy/Daughter Sweetheart Dance?
Thunberg: Just wanted to pass, a couple of neighbors said to pass along the compliments that it was,
they called it a wonderful and a special event so good job.
Johnson: Oh, thanks.
Kelly: Any other questions, comments? So Mitch I like that idea of a Mother-Son dance. I think that
should go over well you would think.
Johnson: Yeah.
Kelly: Thank you. Nice job Mitch. Moving right along here.
ADMINISTRATIVE UPDATES: ANNUAL BLUFF CREEK/CHANHASSEN R EC CENTER
JOINT POWERS MEETING.
Park and Recreation Commission – January 25, 2014
16
Hoffman: Thank you Chair Kelly, members of the commission. Just want to give you a short synopsis of
what this is about so the commission is educated on how we operate the Chanhassen Recreation Center.
We have a lease agreement with the District to operate that building and the basis of that is that we own
20%. 24% or operate 24% of the footprint and they operate 76% so that ’s how all our bills are separated
and so heating, cooling, air conditioning and then any major improvements. For example this summer
we ’ll replace both boilers and so the School District will replace both boilers. Take out a wall. Replace
those. We ’ll pay 24% of that cost and the School District will pay 76%. The second part of that
agreement is that the inside maintenance of the Chanhassen Recreation Center, so janitorial, cleaning,
they perform those services without charge or without a separate agreement with the City of Chanhassen.
In return for the School District doing that, performing those services, we perform all exterior
maintenance. Snowplowing, grass mowing on the facility so it works very well. We do meet annually as
a group, joint facilities commission group and talk about what went well. What needs improvement.
What ’s on the radar screen for upcoming large improvements. Capital improvement programs so like the
roof is coming up in a few years and so then we can get budgeted dollars in our CIP for those type of
improvements. So just wanted to bring you, make you aware of that ’s how it operates and answer any
questions of the commission.
Kelly: So I know in the past the City ’s had to push the School District a little bit to live up to their full
potential and how is that working these days?
Hoffman: It ’s always, that ’s a two way street and so they often feel that there are things that we can
improve on and vice versa. That ’s part of this meeting is to have that conversation in a formal setting and
so I encourage Jodi to build those relationships that will really benefit the City ’s side of the equation
because you know there ’s a couple ways to get things done. You can kill them with kindness or you can
try to hit them over the head with a stick so I encourage her to kill them with kindness if she can and then
when we have to we ’ll talk to the superintendent or others about some of the larger issues that we have
out there.
Kelly: So the relationship ’s working quite well at this point?
Hoffman: Working very well. At least once a year state, cities and school districts from across the state
come and visit that facility because it has worked so well.
Kelly: Any other questions for Todd? Thank you Todd. Moving onto item number 3.
CLOSING OF ICE SKATING RINKS.
Kelly: Mitch, can you comment on the closing of the ice rinks please.
Hoffman: Do you have any specific questions or just want to go over?
Ryan: Well more of a comment.
Hoffman: Sure.
Ryan: Questions and comments, or we all got the email about the closing of the rinks and just was
wondering if there was, and I understand the expense and the time to do it but with the weather, you know
over the course of the next 2 weeks, was there any consideration or could there be consideration of
keeping one rink open like the City Center because these kids use these rinks all the time and ice time is
valuable, especially outdoor rinks.
Park and Recreation Commission – January 25, 2014
17
Hoffman: I ’d be glad to go over it. There ’s quite a history in the rinks. How long they stay open.
Should they be closed or should they, or should we keep them open? We always advocate to try to keep
them open and in operation as long as we can. So many cities go to where it ’s just February 15 th and
they ’re done. They just name a date. It doesn ’t really matter what the weather is. In this situation with
the extensive snow we had on Thursday and so everything ’s snowed in. All of our facilities. Parks, trails,
parking lots, ice rinks and so we met on Friday morning and first call was we ’re not going to start clearing
anything on rinks until Monday at the earliest and so we have public facilities to get open. Really life and
safety type things at that point over the weekend that we were trying to open up. Then as we thought
about it in more detail, we ’re really getting, anytime you get past February 15 th you get to where the sun
angles starts to really increase and we have a challenging time just maintaining those rinks in any kind of,
even with the cold weather that we have today, and so it ’s a point of limiting returns and so I can give you
some history. Since ’82 we ’ve been open 5 times later than we closed this year on February 19 th . And
we ’ve been closed 18 times earlier than that so the dates are, we closed on February 19 th this year. In
history we ’ve stayed open to the 21 st . The 20 th once. The 21 st . The 27 th of February and then even
recently one of those March dates, March 1 st or March 8 th . And so we have extended it farther but when
you get all that snow and you have to get in there, it takes, that would have taken two days and so we,
Adam and I met. We talked about it so we would have to call everybody off the trails. Stop the trail
cleaning on Monday, Tuesday and dedicate all 7 of our forces to those ice rinks for Monday and Tuesday,
get them clean and then continue to maintain them after that and continue to staff them. So our
conclusion was that it was not worth the investment. Was not worth the return on that investment and so
then I met with City Manager Gerhardt and his first opinion was he would like to give it another go and
see if we could open them back up. Keep them running but as we reviewed all of the historical data he
again agreed so, after March 1 st it ’s really a challenge to keep them open so we were you know just a
week from March 1 st by the time we hit this past Monday so that was the decision. That ’s certainly
something this body can talk about. You already, probably about 15 years ago the commission set some
parameters on the front side so how late are we going to go before we just abandon the rinks, and you
could do that on the opposite side because it ’s really, where do you want to put your resources. And so
do you want to pull everybody off of trails and open up rinks and then have trails that are not open?
That ’s another thing that people appreciate is our trail system as well so, it ’s just where do you put your
resources to get the most return on the investment. Once you get these rinks open you have to re-flood
them and you have to do that on a daily basis. Some numbers, the ice rinks in aggregate are about a
$10,000 to $40,000 business annually, depending on how long they ’re open. And then the per day cost is
anywhere between $350 and $700 per day to keep them open, and that ’s just for maintenance. Then you
add on the cost of the rink attendants.
Ryan: …I get the historical numbers and I understand maintenance. What I don ’t understand or
necessarily agree with is that it has to be an all or nothing proposition.
Hoffman: Sure.
Ryan: And I get that taking 7 rinks is a lot and I ’m not suggesting, there would be the people that I talked
to, to pull them off the trails because at the last meeting I brought up the importance of clearing trails so,
I ’m not trying to …with that but at the same time to maintain the rink at City Center. Let the 6 other rinks
go and then maintain you know the City Center rink for the next week or two considering and having the
flexibility to look at the weather and see that you know over the course of the next 2 weeks, I mean we ’re
lucky to hit the teens and so I get the sun during the day melts the ice but with the refreeze and maybe not
the rinks aren ’t perfect but at least give, instead of having the rink closed sign and have it as an option for
one rink in our city to be open.
Hoffman: Sure, I understand.
Park and Recreation Commission – January 25, 2014
18
Carron: I agree with Elise. I like the idea. Maybe we should, Chair Kelly bring that up next month for a
topic.
Kelly: Yeah, let ’s add it onto our agenda for next month. And part of the question would be, you know
which is the best rink to keep open? Which one gets the most use, and I think you have those figures.
Hoffman: The Chan Rec Center right?
Johnson: Yeah.
Kelly: And so we ’d look at that and say you know we ’re closing down because of the cost, the expense
and we don ’t want to, I don ’t think any of us want to see the trails get short changed and so maybe it takes
an extra day or two but if we can keep one rink open, I think as you told me, there ’s kids out shoveling
over here in City Park.
Hoffman: And I talked to Adam today. I said if you have time, if you can get out and at least push the
snow off to the edges and so people could, they could still go play pick up hockey, then we ’ll do th at.
The maintenance process is, it ’s more involved than most would realize to get those cleared and re-
flooded on a daily basis and so it ’s a significant investment in time. And then at some point where staff is,
we don ’t like to make arbitrary decisions based on okay, let ’s just. It ’s kind of an equity thing. When we
stop things we, we ’re just like okay it ’s over for everybody because the people on this side of town would
say well why did you keep that one open. You didn ’t keep our ’s open and so there ’s some of that so that
should be a policy set. If you want to ratchet them down. You know we have done that over the years.
There ’s a lot less rinks than there used to be and so, and do we want to set a March 1 st date? Right now
it ’s kind of a February 15 th date. After February, up until February 15 th we ’re going to give it everything
we ’ve got to have those open but after that we really start seeing where we ’re going to start to lose them.
Kelly: Yeah I think making a hard and fast date is hard because you know, well 2 years ago I think we
couldn ’t even flood the rinks practically because it was so warm all winter.
Hoffman: Correct.
Kelly: So to have a hard and fast rule doesn ’t make sense because you ’ve got to really react to the
weather and it ’s, and I know my son before he went to college, he ’s a hockey player. He was out
shoveling over at the Rec Center once the City was done and that ’s what, and you know there ’s nothing
wrong with that either if the kids want to play but I think if you can bring up to us what you think the cost,
the time and the effort are to keep one rink open at the Rec Center since that ’s the most heavily used, at
this point that ’s something we might want to look at, and obviously not every year is going to be like this
year but when we do have years like this, and we ’re going to be zero for another 7 days according to my
Weather Bug on my phone. The kids could skate and at some point maybe we just say we ’re going to let
it re-freeze and we ’re not going to make it perfect because we ’re not going to put that effort into it. Then
if the ice gets really bad we just close it down you know so we work with it and see how it works. So I
think it might work better in a year like this, obviously if we ’re hovering at 15-20 degrees and the sun is
out, that ’s not going to work and it ’s probably not even smart to keep it open but you might as well take
advantage in years like this, which we hope are rare but we do have them and so why not make it
available to the community in the rare years that we have. So yes I ’d like to see it on the agenda and the
costs associated with it and then we can talk about it next meeting.
Hoffman: Great be glad to. Yeah 2 years ago we were open 28 days. This year 61. And then last year
59. And last year was a similar winter and we closed on March 1 st last year so, a few days longer than
this.
Park and Recreation Commission – January 25, 2014
19
Scharfenberg: Can you just confirm that up until the snow storm this past weekend, were we flooding up
until that time?
Hoffman: Yes.
Scharfenberg: Okay.
Kelly: Any other comments or thoughts? It will be on our next agenda. Thanks for bringing that up
Elise.
Ryan: Thank you.
COMMISSION MEMBER COMMITTEE REPORTS. None.
COMMISSION MEMBER PRESENTATIONS. None.
CORRESPONDENCE PACKET. None.
Carron moved, Echternacht seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion
carried unanimously with a vote of 9 to 0. The Park and Recreation Commission meeting
adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
Submitted by Todd Hoffman
Park and Rec Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim
CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION
WORK SESSION SUMMARY MINUTES
MARCH 11, 2014
MEMBERS PRESENT: Cole Kelly, Elise Ryan, Jim Boettcher, Rick Echternacht, Luke Thunberg, & Jacob Stolar
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman, Park & Rec Director ; Rich Koechlein, Sr. Landscape Architec t, WSB & Assoc.
B A N D I M E R E P A R K E X P A N S I O N : Introductions were made. The assembled group r eview ed the e xisting
B andimere P ark facilities. Todd Hoffman reviewed the history of land acquisitions and development of the current
Bandimere Park improvements. The following potential new improvements were discussed for addition to the park
as a part of the expansion plan :
Tennis Court with Lighting
Hockey Rink with Lighting
Small Breed Dog Park (Inside Hockey Boards)
Free Skating/Green Space Area
Warming House with R estrooms and Storage Space
Lighting Soccer Field #1
Lighting Baseball/Softball Fields #1, #2 & #3
Concession /Changing Building with Restrooms
Baseball/Softball Field Spectator Shelter
Parking Lot Addition for Hockey and Tennis
Splash Pad Installation with Patio Seating Area
Playground Additions/Improvements
Parking and Pathway Lighting
Entrance Monument Sign
Wetland/Water Quality Improvements
Use of LED Lighting Technology Throughout Project
Additional ly, p otential f uture i mprovements for Lake Ann Park w ere discussed:
Seasonal Soccer Field House Installation
Upgraded Ball Field Concession Stand with Restrooms
Parking Lot Expansion at Proposed Field House Location
Parking and Pathway Lighting
Mr. Koechlein will update the Bandimere Community Park Expansion planning g raphic to depict the additions and
modifications identified by the Park and Recreation Commission. No schematic drawing for the potential future
improvements identified at Lake Ann Park will be developed at this time.
The following meeting schedule was established to continue the planning process for the proposed Ban dimere
Community Park expansion:
Public Open House to Display Concept Plans and Solicit Feedback - April 22 at 6:00 p.m. (prior to regular
meeting)
Park and Recreation Commission Public Hearing and Action - May 28th at 7:30 p.m. (Regular Meeting)
City Council Consideration of Proposed Master Plan Approv al - June 9th or 23rd (Dependent on Scheduling)
T h e w o r k s e s s i o n w a s a d j o u r n e d a t 8 :5 0 p .m .
Prepared by Todd Hoffman, Park & Recreation Director